Sign in to follow this  
Mephic

PF3 vs ProATCX for NGX - final "battle"

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

I read a lot on this forum about both programs, I also know that ProATCX was an ATC tool which was recommended a lot in the past, but this has changed with release of PF3. I also saw a lot of comments in the beginning that PF3 is better for VFR and ProATCX is better for IFR, but lately this trend seem to change. I never saw one definite answer to question which of those programs is ultimately better, but I guess this might be related to fact that different people need ATC tool for different reasons.

 

So I'd like to share more about my SIM and ask you (community/experts) what would be best pick for me.

 

Aircraft: 737 NGX (sometimes 777 but in general - large jets)

Co-Pilot: FS2Crew

Failures: always ON :)

AI Traffic: MyTraffic 6.0a

Regions I fly in: Mostly North America and Europe, but sometimes I do hops to Asia or South America

Way I fly: I want to stay compliant with charts, SIDs, STARs, Noise Abatement procedures, approach types, holds etc. - I use my aircrafts to full extent (offcourse my knowledge is limiting factor here but I learn every day). I don't want to always be vectored, but I also don't want to always fly published procedures - I'd like it random (would be best if it would be matched with current traffic density but I'm not sure if any of those programs allows it).

 

What do I expect from my ATC software?

 

I'm not RW pilot so I don't know much about ATC itself. I am familiar with idea of vectoring and flying according to charts but I don't know real world ATC procedures. I read part of PF3 manual and it seems a very straightforward tool, manual seems to be more accessible than ProATCX one.

 

My perfect ATC software would:

 

1. Control AI Traffic in air and on the ground (it's enough that it does not smash into my aircraft on the ground).

2. Assign SIDs and STARs dynamically

3. Have a built-in profile for 737 NGX with regards to descent rate (or at least programmable)

4. Have ability to assign hotkeys or use command menu built-in sim - I use my sim only in FullScreen.

5. Have ability to control ATC frequency by Co-Pilot but also without a need for him to talk (I have FS2Crew so 2 different copilot voices would destroy immersion).

6. Have not too robotic voice sets available by default

7. Emergency descent and landing options built in including vectors to final in such case

8. Rejected takeoff communication option/Go around communication

9. Communicate with AI Traffic around me

10. Not direct me into mountains like default ATC does when vectoring :)

11. Accept flight plans from SimBrief

12. Assign departure/landing runways based on weather injected by AS16.

13. Ability to accept visual approaches

14. Easy to use hard to master :)

15. Transition altitudes matching particular countries requirements (or at least ability to edit that by country or by airport)

 

I'm sorry if some of those features I would like to see are not described in professional manner or seem obvious. Anything extra is offcourse welcomed. 90% of my flights are IFR, but I sometimes like to take Cessna 172 out for a spin and 1 in 5 flights will actually be VFR, so as long as the software will support VFR flights, it would be nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

1. Control AI Traffic in air and on the ground (it's enough that it does not smash into my aircraft on the ground).

If you are hoping for total control of AI traffic then that can be done by AI Controller for example. It's and PF3's developer have been in contact.

 

2. Assign SIDs and STARs dynamically. Actually ATC when giving you clearance delivery don't assign SIDs on the fly. The SID is an already known part of your flightplan. Because it is the published route from a runway to your flightplan. As pilot in command you are required by aviation law to know what SIDs and STARs are in use and why. You can and should specify what SID you want to use as part of your fpl. Obviously if you are flying a scheduled route then ATC know where you intend to go and will always give you the SID of your choice automatically. In other words it is never plucked out of thin air. STARs of course can vary especially on long haul flights. But as PIC you know that and should be prepared.

 

3. Have a built-in profile for 737 NGX with regards to descent rate (or at least programmable)

It is extremely easy in PF3 to set up your a/c preset. Having said that you example is of a jet transport so ATC will always treat them with the same broad brush as they don't know individual speeds as calculated in the a/c flight manuel. So in PF3 you would set up a wet runway length, average climb of 2,000fpm, avg descent of 2,500fpm and approach speed of 160kts. (this would be your minimum speed up to 6DME from the runway unless you are Concorde or having to land at max auw).

 

8. Rejected takeoff communication option/Go around communication.

PF3's developer has been wishlisted on this as it certainly would be a good feature.

 

10. Not direct me into mountains like default ATC does when vectoring :)

This is extremely difficult as ATC add-ons don't know the terrain. That said PF3 allows you to navigate a STAR by yourself. Flying into Los Rodeos Tenerife from the North requires you to do the flying around the island.

 

11. Accept flight plans from SimBrief

Of this I am not certain but PF3 will accept most fpls. I do mine through Routfinder which always has an up to date airac cycle.

 

12. Assign departure/landing runways based on weather injected by AS16.

Usually the weather comes via FSUIPC

 

For the rest of your points see PF3.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for your comments!

 

Regarding last point: does it mean that FSUIPC payware version is needed or I can get away with freeware one which I already use?

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for your comments!

 

Regarding last point: does it mean that FSUIPC payware version is needed or I can get away with freeware one which I already use?

PF3 will use the freeware version.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for your comments!

 

Regarding last point: does it mean that FSUIPC payware version is needed or I can get away with freeware one which I already use?

 

Freeware works fine for the function  you are asking about. Payware version to me is a must have for a simmer. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Bobsk8 - thank you! I am not sure what do you mean by "must have". As PMDG recommends to set up controls via sim itself (besides it works very well for me on my Yoke/throttles) I did not see any benefit from using FSUIPC payware version to me. Would it be needed for ATC to function properly or it doesn't have impact at all?

Share this post


Link to post

Bobsk8 - thank you! I am not sure what do you mean by "must have". As PMDG recommends to set up controls via sim itself (besides it works very well for me on my Yoke/throttles) I did not see any benefit from using FSUIPC payware version to me. Would it be needed for ATC to function properly or it doesn't have impact at all?

The payware FSUIPC has many other functions besides weather. So it is extremely useful to have. But for PF3 it matters not which version you use.

Share this post


Link to post

Understood. To me FSUIPC was mainly focused on improving controls assignments. One function I found useful reading its features is ability to assign steering tiller but it didn't justify the price tag for me and freeware version gives me everything I need. Thanks for the tip though!

Share this post


Link to post

This is extremely difficult as ATC add-ons don't know the terrain.

 

ProATC/X Does

 

As per the ProATC/X documentation

 

Request Elevation online: ProATC/X will check the waypoint elevation to make sure that no controller descends the aircraft below this.

All approach altitude restriction are met as per AIRAC data.

 

PF3 really need to use updatable navdata and have a database of MSA's, ProATC/X is ahead at this point and really if the OP's main interest is flying the NGX then it's the better choice, it pains me to say this as a long time PFE/PF3 user

Share this post


Link to post

So as I understand PF3 gets the navaids directly from the sim and ProATC X is using whatever AIRAC you install to it? It's not an issue to me with regards to frequencies/headings as I keep my in-sim Airac up to date thanks to aero.sors.fr tool, yet it seems that  if Pro-ATC "knows" the elevation, it's a big advantage.

Share this post


Link to post

ProATC/X Does

 

As per the ProATC/X documentation

 

Request Elevation online: ProATC/X will check the waypoint elevation to make sure that no controller descends the aircraft below this.

All approach altitude restriction are met as per AIRAC data.

 

PF3 really need to use updatable navdata and have a database of MSA's, ProATC/X is ahead at this point and really if the OP's main interest is flying the NGX then it's the better choice, it pains me to say this as a long time PFE/PF3 user

 

My personal experience with PATC is that terrain clearance was not the best  in mountainous areas. Been flown into mountains more than once. 

Share this post


Link to post

So as I understand PF3 gets the navaids directly from the sim and ProATC X is using whatever AIRAC you install to it? It's not an issue to me with regards to frequencies/headings as I keep my in-sim Airac up to date thanks to aero.sors.fr tool, yet it seems that  if Pro-ATC "knows" the elevation, it's a big advantage.

PF3 doesn't need airac cycles. If your flight planning process uses them then that is all that is necessary. As for elevation, If two adjacent waypoints are at sea level but there is a mountain in between then no ATC programme will see it and most likely you'll be flown into the mountain.

It really is no trouble to look at the real approach plates and check the STARs and thereafter any vectoring. Easily programmed into an FMC or to any navigation system. And I am safe in the knowledge that both the FAP altitude and minmum appraoch altitude have been set. So PF3 will not descend me below those points.

Share this post


Link to post
I'm in exactly the same position as you Tomasz, and i cant decide either...Glad to see i'm not the only one ;)

 

I have pretty much the same requirement profile, mainly flying tubeliners over US and Europe and looking for realistic procedures and immersion. 

 

I was a VoxATC user for a long time and it served me well (kind of a hate/love-relationship), but VoxATC is the EzDok of ATC tools....its a pain to setup, buggy as hell, the UI looks hideous, requires a panel to be installed seperately for every aircraft, its far from being easy to use and gets updated once every leap year....thats why i stopped using it a few years ago. 

The 'new' version is now in beta and even though i didnt test it yet, it looks to me like its just a compatibility update for P3D, i didnt spot any new exciting features for the new version.

 

 

Now in regards to the "perfect" ATC program, it would call it Default Vox Pro ATC Flight Emulator™ ;) It would have the voices of default ATC, controlling AI traffic like VOXATC, uses AIRAC data like Pro-ATC and offers the flexibility and ICAO compliance of PE3

 

Now we just need to get those devs to work together ;)

 

I've added some bits and pieces to your requirement list, based on my experience and knowledge i gathered over time:

 

 

1. Control AI Traffic in air and on the ground (it's enough that it does not smash into my aircraft on the ground). 

 

AFAIK, VoxATC is still the only tool that can actually control ground traffic (not just "react" to it), as it injects its own traffic. It can even use MT6 models, however i'm not sure if it uses MT6 flightplans as well or has its own, basic flightplan DB. At least the traffic looked realistic and in correlation with airport location, so no Ryanairs at a KJFK gate...

PF3 can get AI traffic to hold to prevent crashing into you, but thats about all as far as i know. ProATC/X doesnt influence AI traffic at all, you better switch off collisions when using ProATC. 

 

 

2. Assign SIDs and STARs dynamically

 

That would be Pro-ATC/X territory. However, it doesnt always assign the correct procedure based on Aircraft type, traffic, weather and default procedures for this airport. But that would be a bit too much to ask i'm afraid. It allows to request a different RWY/SID/STAR mid-flight since one of the recent updates, but appearantly this option is only available after a procedure has been assigned to you already, which is a bit annyoing. If i recall correctly you can force it to use a certain procedure if you include the procedure ID in the flightplan during import, but this will disable dynamic assignement. 

VoxATC has optional AIRAC support but its SID/STAR implementation is very basic. And PF3 requires you to supply the SID/STAR with the flightplan

 

 

3. Have a built-in profile for 737 NGX with regards to descent rate (or at least programmable)

 

Offered by both, Pro ATC/X and PE3, including manual descent initiation. I honestly cant remember how VoxATC handles Aircraft performance data. I believe it takes some information from the aircraft config file, but not sure about that. I'm also pretty sure you have to initiate descent yourself, at least in the version i was using. 

 

 

4. Have ability to assign hotkeys or use command menu built-in sim - I use my sim only in FullScreen.

 

All 3 offer at least one method

 

5. Have ability to control ATC frequency by Co-Pilot but also without a need for him to talk (I have FS2Crew so 2 different copilot voices would destroy immersion).

 

Should be possible as long as a separate volume control is offered for FO audio. 

 

 

6. Have not too robotic voice sets available by default

 

The holy grail of ATC tools....

PF3 and ProATC are both based on pre-recorded, real voice snippets. Some voice packs are quite good and do not sound too robotic, others are just awful. Also, quality control is virtually non existant for user created voice sets in ProATC. Some of them are missing dozens of major airline callsigns which is quite disappointing

VoxATC uses syntetic, text2speech voices and provides a few voicesets even with static noise. Since its using the text2speech standard, you can add any T2S voice available. While the default windows T2S voices sound terribly robotic, there are some really nice, natural sounding voices available from other suppliers. But some of them are sold for 10-15 quid per voice, which is way too expensive for my taste. However i tested those voices in trial mode and i was blown away.  

IMHO, the best, natural sounding voices are still provided by builtin ATC

 

 

7. Emergency descent and landing options built in including vectors to final in such case

 

I usually fly with failures disabled, so cant tell for sure

 

 

8. Rejected takeoff communication option/Go around communication

 

Offered by all 3 but mostly basic functionality

 

 

9. Communicate with AI Traffic around me

 

Offered by all 3, but only VoxATC actually controls AI traffic, others just react (even though i believe that PF3 is able to hold AI ground traffic to ensure it doesnt crash into you)

 

 

10. Not direct me into mountains like default ATC does when vectoring :)

 

Thats the other holy grail, unfortunately, no ATC tool offers full terrain awarness as far as i know. VOX-ATC ignores terrain completely and will happily guide you into any mountain of your choice. ProATC/X respects waypoint ALT restrictions based on AIRAC data, but it doesnt seem have a MSA DB. You should be safe as long as you follow a STAR, but you could request a 'direct to' shortcut that would lead right through a mountain at your present altitude and ProATC wouldnt complain at all. PF3 relies purely on your preflight planning

 

 

11. Accept flight plans from SimBrief

 

I dont use SimBrief (PFPX here) but as long as SimBrief can output the common flightplan formats it shouldnt be a problem to import

 

 

12. Assign departure/landing runways based on weather injected by AS16.

 

Done by all 3 but unreliable sometimes. ProATC offers some nice features like assigning preferred runway for tailwind up to 5kts

 

 

13. Ability to accept visual approaches

 

Possible with all 3 tools

 

 

14. Easy to use hard to master :)

 

With ATC tools its usually the other way around ;)

 

 

15. Transition altitudes matching particular countries requirements (or at least ability to edit that by country or by airport)

 

ProATC has its own TA DB which seems to be quite accurate, it also offers manual override per Airport. VoxATC only allows one TA per Region. The TA can be changed by editing a config file, but you can only have one TA per flight. Not that great for any non US flights. PE3 offers TA to be set for departure and destination but i'm not sure if it has its own DB. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't want to always be vectored, but I also don't want to always fly published procedures - I'd like it random (would be best if it would be matched with current traffic density but I'm not sure if any of those programs allows it).

 

 

There is a very nice addon for PF3 called PF3-Randomizer. It sets some of the options relevant for being vectored or being cleared for a procedure prior to running PF3 and thus creates a random variety. And it can be set up as you like. So for example a higher chance for vectors at a busy airport.

 

Overall my sim characterization and expectations towards ATC software are very close to yours. I am very happy now with PF3 after using PATC in the past. I don't know the current version of PATC though so I cannot compare the two as of today. But using PF3 now I don't feel the need to look at PATC again (as you said that is very subjective and I'm not saying that the current version of PATC isn't good).

Share this post


Link to post

There is a very nice addon for PF3 called PF3-Randomizer. It sets some of the options relevant for being vectored or being cleared for a procedure prior to running PF3 and thus creates a random variety. And it can be set up as you like. So for example a higher chance for vectors at a busy airport.

 

Overall my sim characterization and expectations towards ATC software are very close to yours. I am very happy now with PF3 after using PATC in the past. I don't know the current version of PATC though so I cannot compare the two as of today. But using PF3 now I don't feel the need to look at PATC again (as you said that is very subjective and I'm not saying that the current version of PATC isn't good).

 

I was a Beta tester for PATC, and they did make many improvements in this latest release, but after trying and then purchasing PF3, I have only flown PATC once. As a real world pilot that learned to fly in one of the busiest ATC areas in the world, I just like the immersion I get with PF3. If PF3 did not exist, I would then use PATC. I think they are the two best ATC programs that are available, and both are kept up to date. 

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


Actually ATC when giving you clearance delivery don't assign SIDs on the fly. The SID is an already known part of your flightplan. Because it is the published route from a runway to your flightplan. As pilot in command you are required by aviation law to know what SIDs and STARs are in use and why. You can and should specify what SID you want to use as part of your fpl. Obviously if you are flying a scheduled route then ATC know where you intend to go and will always give you the SID of your choice automatically.

 

I'm sorry - but that is just blatantly false.  While a pilot/dispatcher may certainly include a SID (or even a STAR) in the filed flightplan, ATC is the final authority for determining what procedure must be flown.  In reality, ATC can and will assign new or alternate SIDS and STARS on the fly.  This just looks to me like an attempt to "sugar coat" the fact that PF3 doesn't do it while ProATC does.

 

Here's an example.  In my testing of ProATC last night, I was assigned runway 36 at SAEZ and told to expect vectors on-course after departure.  Since I didn't feel like waiting behind the AI traffic lining up for that runway, I requested runway 29 for takeoff.  ProATC approved my request and amended my clearance to include the TORUL1 SID with the URINO transition to join my flightplanned route.   That kind of functionality is only available in ProATC. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'm sorry - but that is just blatantly false.  While a pilot/dispatcher may certainly include a SID (or even a STAR) in the filed flightplan, ATC is the final authority for determining what procedure must be flown.  In reality, ATC can and will assign new or alternate SIDS and STARS on the fly.  This just looks to me like an attempt to "sugar coat" the fact that PF3 doesn't do it while ProATC does.

 

Here's an example.  In my testing of ProATC last night, I was assigned runway 36 at SAEZ and told to expect vectors on-course after departure.  Since I didn't feel like waiting behind the AI traffic lining up for that runway, I requested runway 29 for takeoff.  ProATC approved my request and amended my clearance to include the TORUL1 SID with the URINO transition to join my flightplanned route.   That kind of functionality is only available in ProATC. 

The flightplan does not belong to ATC it is yours. ATC validate it i.e. accept it if it follows their requirements. And you can write SIDs and STARs into it. Bear in mind when you do that you would already know the departure/arrival runway. Even if you did not write a SID you would still know which SID would be given. So it is not plucked out of the air. If two SIDs end at the same fix then you need to know which one would be valid for your flight.

 

Suppose I am to take-off from rwy27. My flightplan is to the South East and only one SID takes me to the start of my fpl. You can write it in to your fpl. You don't need to wait to be told.

 

UL615 PZ493 UT939 C/45N012WF140F240 ROKIB UZ468 GIKEB EKPEB/N250F200 BRENO/F140 INN/F120 RTT/F95

 

Taking-off from rwy 04R there are two SIDs that route to ROKIB. But I want to cross the Alps. So in this fpl I am instructing ATC that I want to use the ROKIB 6J and not ROKIB 6S. And then end at the BRENO 2A STAR.

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


The flightplan does not belong to ATC it is yours. ATC validate it i.e. accept it if it follows their requirements.

 

You can try to justify it all you want; but you're wrong.  What happens if the wind shifts at the last minute and ATC designates a new runway that's incompatible with your filed SID?  Do you re-file? No.  ATC issues a new SID based on the current operation.

 

What if you're perfectly-planned departure toward the Alps become unusable because of a thunderstorm?

 

The flightplan may belong to you... but the clearance belongs to ATC.  In the real world, ATC will not hesitate to change the route in your flightplan to suit their needs... you're not always cleared as filed!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

I own both and like ProATC/X better. The way it dynamically  assign SID's with a transition point is really cool. With PF3 your SID's and STAR's are part of the plan and you have to tell it where the SID ends and where the STAR starts. ProATC/X don't accept the procedure as part of the flight because it will get assign.

 

Another think that I like is the menu that you bring up by pressing 1. PF3 does not have that and you have to memorize all the commands available which are a lot. Last night for example PF3 clearance gave a departure runway which was totally opposite from the prevailing winds (using AS2016 here) and it took me awhile to request a change. It will ask you one by one which runway you want and you tell them yes or no. Of course there were 10 runways available and it took for ever. Really frustrating. I wish the author could add Navigraph support and an in sim menu.

 

I find myself using ProATC/X more but both are fun.

Share this post


Link to post

ProATC X..........................................................

 

1. Control AI Traffic in air and on the ground (it's enough that it does not smash into my aircraft on the ground). YES
2. Assign SIDs and STARs dynamically YES
3. Have a built-in profile for 737 NGX with regards to descent rate (or at least programmable) YES
4. Have ability to assign hotkeys or use command menu built-in sim - I use my sim only in FullScreen. YES
5. Have ability to control ATC frequency by Co-Pilot but also without a need for him to talk (I have FS2Crew so 2 different copilot voices would destroy immersion). YES I also (always) use FS2Crew Reboot
6. Have not too robotic voice sets available by default YES
7. Emergency descent and landing options built in including vectors to final in such case YES
8. Rejected takeoff communication option/Go around communication YES
9. Communicate with AI Traffic around me YES
10. Not direct me into mountains like default ATC does when vectoring :)YES
11. Accept flight plans from SimBrief YES and every other flight planner
12. Assign departure/landing runways based on weather injected by AS16. YES
13. Ability to accept visual approaches YES
14. Easy to use hard to master :)YES
15. Transition altitudes matching particular countries requirements (or at least ability to edit that by country or by airport) and YES

 

PATC also has the option of assigning real ATC background via the DATA options menu i.e. ATC will change language according to the country you are overflying.

 

 

My landing (I blame the ILS) was, admittedly dodgy, but ProATC behaved perfectly all the way to the gate....;-) 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

I own both and like ProATC/X better. The way it dynamically  assign SID's with a transition point is really cool. With PF3 your SID's and STAR's are part of the plan and you have to tell it where the SID ends and where the STAR starts. ProATC/X don't accept the procedure as part of the flight because it will get assign.

 

Another think that I like is the menu that you bring up by pressing 1. PF3 does not have that and you have to memorize all the commands available which are a lot. Last night for example PF3 clearance gave a departure runway which was totally opposite from the prevailing winds (using AS2016 here) and it took me awhile to request a change. It will ask you one by one which runway you want and you tell them yes or no. Of course there were 10 runways available and it took for ever. Really frustrating. I wish the author could add Navigraph support and an in sim menu.

 

I find myself using ProATC/X more but both are fun.

 

A nice proof that it's about personal preference between these two.

To me the lack of a menu is in fact one of the advantages of PF3. I don't like in-sim menues because they spoil the immersion for me.

I use voice recognition via Multi Crew Experience to trigger the hotkeys so no need to memorize them. And Multi Crew Experience also simplifies the runway change request (You can just ask for e.g. "Ground, Delta 123 requesting runway 08L for takeoff").

 

Regarding the runway assignment by PF3 it is essential that the AI is refreshed (for example by setting the sim rate to 8 and back to 1) after the weather has completely loaded and only then connect PF3. Also "Force ATC wind lock" should be enabled in AS2016. That way the runway assignment is correct most of the time.

Share this post


Link to post

Well it seems to me that PF3 is really nice but it just needs too much input. Basically you need to preset all parametres to have them generated in sim in exactly same way that you have set them.

 

On one hand that's good because it will do what you want it to do on the other it is a bit of immersion killer to me that there is little to none randomness in ATC behavior. Also locking winds is another thing which kills it IMHO.

 

As I'll be buying software in January I same till have few weeks to think but AIRAC integration, SIDS and STARS assignments on the fly and in sim menu seem to be really nice features and I think I'll go with PRO ATC. Thanks all.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

You can try to justify it all you want; but you're wrong.  What happens if the wind shifts at the last minute and ATC designates a new runway that's incompatible with your filed SID?  Do you re-file? No.  ATC issues a new SID based on the current operation.

 

What if you're perfectly-planned departure toward the Alps become unusable because of a thunderstorm?

 

The flightplan may belong to you... but the clearance belongs to ATC.  In the real world, ATC will not hesitate to change the route in your flightplan to suit their needs... you're not always cleared as filed!

It is clear that you don't look at charts which is a legal requirement btw for real pilots. If you were to you would see that I am perfectly correct. Not only that perhaps you ought to contact Eurocontrol and tell them that they should never have authorised that flightplan seeing as it is used by Air Dolomiti. If a dispatcher makes a mistake and you follow that mistake even unknowingly then you are responsible, not the dispatcher.

 

The flightplan may belong to you... but the clearance belongs to ATC.  In the real world, ATC will not hesitate to change the route in your flightplan to suit their needs... you're not always cleared as filed!

AS PIC I can change my fpl en-route. ATC only advise. They cannot force me to do anything. The Captian has the ultimate say. As long as I have good reason I can defy ATC. ATC might ask me to divert but that is only a recommendation. I can reject it if I have good reason. Fuel, weather, out of hours to name a few.

 

What if you're perfectly-planned departure toward the Alps become unusable because of a thunderstorm?

Then the flight is delayed, cancelled or diverted. PIlots here are not in the habit of flying through storms. Enac follows the UK CAA doctrine and training recommendations which is why Italian pilots are better trained then the French!

 

What happens if the wind shifts at the last minute and ATC designates a new runway that's incompatible with your filed SID? Not a problem. It takes seconds to re file if there is likely to be a runway change (a rare event at LIPZ). And in fact the dispatcher would file an alternative fpl. if the weather suggested that that might happen.

 

UL615 PZ493 UT939 C/45N012WF140F240 ROKIB UZ468 GIKEB EKPEB/N250F200 BRENO/F140 INN/F120 RTT/F95

 

This fpl also gives one the opportunity to shoot for both rwy 08 and 26 at Innsbruck. There is only one entry point from Italian airspace. And although one could get BRENO 1A for rwy 08 the problem there is the fickle Alpine Valley wind. If one took that STAR and there was a a rwy change that would result in a 70nm diversion. So this routing is more commonly used instead.

Share this post


Link to post

Well it seems to me that PF3 is really nice but it just needs too much input. Basically you need to preset all parametres to have them generated in sim in exactly same way that you have set them.

On one hand that's good because it will do what you want it to do on the other it is a bit of immersion killer to me that there is little to none randomness in ATC behavior. Also locking winds is another thing which kills it IMHO.

As I'll be buying software in January I same till have few weeks to think but AIRAC integration, SIDS and STARS assignments on the fly and in sim menu seem to be really nice features and I think I'll go with PRO ATC. Thanks all.

There's already some randomness built in PF3 (holding probability, speed and altitude assignments). And with the addon PF3-Randomizer you can easily add a lot more randomness regarding probability of vectoring and procedures.

 

The ATC wind lock recommendation is nothing special to PF3. Without it you might have AI aircraft landing and taking off face to face in calm and light or variable winds.

Share this post


Link to post

A feature I like with ProatcX is the ability to create a flightplan, nominating the airline fltNo, Dep/Arr, pasting the realworld route(if you desire) otherwise it will create the plan for you with SID,STAR. (the STAR can change, depending on the en-route weather). You can then export to FSX/P3D(and others) for later import into AS2016. A number of user voice sets have just been made available, free, in English, but accented, to add to the immersion, in conjunction with the background ATC chatter files option, it can be made to sound very realistic. PF3 has much potential and worthy for consideration, but at the moment, after the recent upgrade from ProatcX I'm very happy with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this