fsx-ms ATC addons

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

As it should be. As long as it doesn't give you a heart attack! :smile:

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

Is there any brave soul who owns both PF3 and ProATCX that can give a fair assessment of both side-by-side? 

[Jaroberts 10]

It has now been well documented that ProATC has only 4 pilot voices whereas PF3 has a few more. The other thing that annoyed me  about ProATC is the failure rate to handle FSC flightplans, about one in three. It fails to recognise some waypoints. All AIRACS being the latest.

[DrumsArt 270]

Question : is ProAtc can just "radar vector" you ?

 

Thanks,

 

Regards,

 

Richard Portier

[ZKOKQ 984]

It has now been well documented that ProATC has only 4 pilot voices whereas PF3 has a few more. The other thing that annoyed me  about ProATC is the failure rate to handle FSC flightplans, about one in three. It fails to recognise some waypoints. All AIRACS being the latest.

115 more is more than a few lol

[Jarkko 59]

Gregg_Seipp, on 02 Jun 2016 - 10:58 PM, said:

 

Is there any brave soul who owns both PF3 and ProATCX that can give a fair assessment of both side-by-side?

This is one of the reasons, I wished that the Avsim ATC challenge thread would have received more video submissions. Would have made comparing a bit easier.

 

I have been planning for a very long time to do a side by side comparison video of the ATC add-ons that I own (same weather, same flight plan, and so on), but haven't had the time to do so yet as it would require many hours to fly and couple more to edit all the videos together.

 

 

Jaroberts, on 02 Jun 2016 - 11:27 PM, said:

ProATC is the failure rate to handle FSC flightplans, about one in three.

 

ProATC and FSC are 100% compatible together, when you know what to do (Both programs must have the same AIRAC cycle imported. If AIRAC doesn't match, nothing works. Same goes for any other add-on that uses AIRAC).

 

Options to use FSC with ProATC:

 

1) Export fsx flight plan format out FSC and import it to ProATC

 

or

 

2) Take copy of the FSC route string. Add DCT between any route waypoints that are not connected by airways in the route. Then import it using the ProATC copy/paste import.

 

So for example FSC route:

 

ESSA ARS N623 TEKVA ESEBA ENGM

 

would have to be modified like to a format found below. Notice the add DCT between TEKVA and ESEBA. For ProATC, you need to add DCT between any waypoints that are not connected with an airway.

 

ESSA ARS N623 TEKVA DCT ESEBA ENGM

 

The above also happens the be the format eurofpl.eu uses for real world flight plans. There aren't many ATC products, where you can take a real world flight plan string (from flightaware for example) and paste it in. Flight plan importing doesn't get much faster than that. ProATC is one of them. To see it in action, here is my (very) old video (if you have time to watch the whole video, you will see me also use FSC):

 

Flight plan importing starts at 20min 36s:

 

 

EDIT: I may need to do a 2016 version of the video. The old one is way too long and lacks structure.

Edited June 2, 2016 by Jarkko

[Jarkko 59]

 

 

Question : is ProAtc can just "radar vector" you ?

 

It's the other way around. ProATC rarely vectors you.

 

ProATC reads all the SIDs/STARs, approaches and transitions from the AIRAC data (provided by Navigraph and Aerosoft). Not all ATC add-ons have this level of support and this is why these products mostly do vectoring. To be honest, I know ProATC users that have requested, that ProATC would do more vectoring than it does currently.

 

If you prefer vectoring, RC4 is hard to beat in my book.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

ProATC reads all the SIDs/STARs, approaches and transitions from the AIRAC data (provided by Navigraph and Aerosoft). Not all ATC add-ons have this level of support and this is why these products mostly do vectoring. To be honest, I know ProATC users that have requested, that ProATC would do more vectoring than it does currently.

 

But at large airports RW you almost always get vectors and often speed adjustments for sequencing.  It doesn't do that??

[Jarkko 59]

But at large airports RW you almost always get vectors and often speed adjustments for sequencing.  It doesn't do that??

 

It depends where you operate.

 

ProATC normally vectors you from STAR exit to the approach, which works fine in Europe (you can also force ProATC to assign approach transitions to stay safe when flying to airports with high terrain, which is a real life saver). So to answer the question, yes, ProATC does vectoring and speed adjustment, but...

 

The US STAR structure is somewhat problematic for ProATC. This is because the AIRAC data provided for ProATC doesn't contain info such as "expect vectors after xxx" (even though this info can be found on the plates). So flying the full STAR gives excellent to OK results in Europe, but not equally good results in the US.

 

AFAIK this has been listed as a known issue and hopefully resolved in one of the future releases. In short, ProATC would start vectoring you sooner off the STAR. Then again, the early vectoring would cause problems if there is high terrain around the airport and this is why it's not a fast fix to do right. 

Edited June 2, 2016 by Jarkko

[DrumsArt 270]

It's the other way around. ProATC rarely vectors you.

 

ProATC reads all the SIDs/STARs, approaches and transitions from the AIRAC data (provided by Navigraph and Aerosoft). Not all ATC add-ons have this level of support and this is why these products mostly do vectoring. To be honest, I know ProATC users that have requested, that ProATC would do more vectoring than it does currently.

 

If you prefer vectoring, RC4 is hard to beat in my book.

Thank you for these clarifications. For vectoring I use VoxAtc (very good), PF3 (does the job) or Pilot2Atc (I have it but I don't use it too much)

 

But at large airports RW you almost always get vectors and often speed adjustments for sequencing.  It doesn't do that??

I had the same question in mind :smile:

 

 

It depends where you operate.

 

ProATC normally vectors you from STAR exit to the approach, which works fine in Europe (you can also force ProATC to assign approach transitions to stay safe when flying to airports with high terrain, which is a real life saver). So to answer the question, yes, ProATC does vectoring and speed adjustment, but...

 

The US STAR structure is somewhat problematic for ProATC. This is because the AIRAC data provided for ProATC doesn't contain info such as "expect vectors after xxx" (even though this info can be found on the plates). So flying the full STAR gives excellent to OK results in Europe, but not equally good results in the US.

 

AFAIK this has been listed as a known issue and hopefully resolved in one of the future releases. In short, ProATC would start vectoring you sooner off the STAR. Then again, the early vectoring would cause problems if there is high terrain around the airport and this is why it's not a fast fix to do right. 

Interesting to know. In fact I use Sid or Star only in mountainous areas for the reasons that you explained, otherwise I prefer vectoring. Thank you again.

 

Regards,

 

Richard Portier

[beechcaptain 105]

I am attempting just the opposite - comparing RC4 and PF3. Have owned RC4 for a long time, and just purchased PF3 the other day. Really like RC4 but it has shortcomings with SID and STAR vectoring depending on how close.the first waypoint is from dep rwy. Thought I'd give PF3 a try since it seems similar in ways but more flexible. Time will tell.

[Jaroberts 10]

Sorry I was joking. I know, I had PFE and I have PF3 where many of the voices are the same.

[Orlaam 306]

I've used RC and it had too many short-comings.  Bottom line, there aren't any real good alternatives IMO. 

 

I even tried to tell JD how to enhance RC so it would work better, but he wasn't having it.  In all reality, ATC in a sim is just providing the immersion and interaction.  I'm not a developer or coder, however, it seems that plenty could be done to make things more realistic.  For one, allow one to import a flight plan and enter altitude/speed constraints in the plan to meet STAR/DP crossing restrictions.  Also, allow the pilot to descend to whatever altitude they want when requested to meet performance characteristics of particular planes.  Allow an IAP to be entered, perhaps more than one for a menu option to fly one as you see fit.  Allow better weather deviations and diversions.  Allow a flight plan change (e.g., Wx, emergency)

 

Only circumvent your preprogrammed FP when traffic is a factor.  Better voices.  Default ACT when sped up with EVP is great.  Others are too robotic.

[vololiberista 205]

 

Jarkko

There aren't many ATC products, where you can take a real world flight plan string (from flightaware for example) and paste it in. Flight plan importing doesn't get much faster than that.

 

What about http://onlineflightplanner.org/

That gets its data from routefinder which always has an up to date airac and it's free. No subscription or anything and I can generate a fpl in 14 different formats.

 

.fgfp (FlightGear)

.flp (Airbus X)

.fltplan (iFly)

.fms (X-Plane)

.kml (Google Earth)

.pdf

.pln (FS 2004)

.pln (FS X)

.route (iFly 747 V2)

.rte (PMDG)

.rte (Level-D)

.rte (QualityWings)

.txt (JarDesign A320)

.fmc (VasFMC)

 

Fpls generated through routefinder are generally more accurate than pfpl

And in PF3 it takes on average less than 5 seconds to generate stuff from the input fpl.

[Jarkko 59]

Fpls generated through routefinder are generally more accurate than pfpl

And in PF3 it takes on average less than 5 seconds to generate stuff from the input fpl.

As for 5 seconds to great a flight plan, let's compare steps required to import for example the following real world route ESSA ARS N623 TEKVA DCT ESEBA ENGM

 

1) ProATC

 

1. Copy the route string

2. Open new flight plan window

3. Paste in the copied route string

4. Enter flight level

5. Enter primary alternate

 

DONE

 

2) PF3

 

1. Copy the route string

2. Paste the route string into simbrief/vroute/PFPX/FSC

3. Convert the route string to one of the fpl formats that PF3 supports

4. Save the flight plan to your computer.

5. Open new flight plan by browsing your computer for the exported flight plan you created in the previous step

6. Enter flight level

7. Set transition altitudes for your origin and destination airports

8. Find SID plates for your origin and enter in (or verify) the SIDs available for each runway (and altitude restrictions)

9. Find STAR plates for your destination and enter in (or verify) the STARs available for each runway (and altitude restrictions)

10. Find approach plates for your destination airport and come up with a Minimum FAF altitude for your destination airport

11. Enter alternate airport

 

DONE

 

---

 

So what are the main differences for me?

 

- With ProATC, you do not need external tools to convert real word routes to a format that the ATC program understands.

- You need to input far less data into ProATC => much faster to get into air.