Reggie is right.I use this (procedures built-in to the FS GPS) all the time. If a RWY has a 'waypoint' to a procedural approach via GPS/ATC, ATC will give you clearance directly to that waypoint; Thus no more (back and forth) vectoring.When I come accross an airport that does not give me options via the GPS/ATC, I terminate IFR, accept 'flight following' (VFR), and fly the approach per STAR/ILS/GPS approach and contact the airport when closing on final. I then announce my 'intention' to land, and am almost always cleared to the base leg which matches my intended approach....There are ways around this. After discovering how to take control of the ATC you will not accept flying any other way.The other night I was to 'caught up' with something else, accepted the 'vectoring', and my head almost exploded in frustration... ;)

What I usually do (not a fix but just a workaround) is to simply change the flight to VFR once the ATC tells me what runway to land at. The only problem is that if the airport is socked in with weather, they will yell at you when you land. Between the long approaches for GA aircraft, and the sometimes crazy vectoring ("turn left heading 060", "turn right heading 090", "turn left...) turning the ATC off completely is sometimes the best therapy. Of course, you better know where you are going yourself :)I don't fly online, due to time constrains and other issues, so sometimes I just listen to real life ATC in the background. Of course it doesn't talk to you directly, but it does give a nice realistic feel to it, even if you aren't listening to the proper frequency for your flight. Check out: http://www.liveatc.net/

>One way to solve the AI clumping is to use the freeware>AISmooth 1.12. It places AI aircraft into holding patterns and>lets you define their seperation on final to allow you to>merge.>>Since I do not use FS9 ATC so I do not know how AIS affects>its sequencing and pattern calls to the user aircraft. I use>it with RC4 which offers some closer in AI protection as>well.>>You don't have to use AI separation when using RC4, in fact I believe RC4 recommends that you don't because it does something to the FSUIPC ( not certain about that, but I can say after numerous flights that I have had zero trafic conflicts with 100% AI and Ultimate Traffic) . I deleted my AI Separation when I installed RC4 and I find no need for it anymore....

Hi Bob,I haven't tried it but I think AI separation will work okay with RC as does AI Smooth. The issue you may be thinking of was ai smooth setting the tcas range limit in fsuipc to 40 miles which reduced the amount of chatter heard in RC.All the best,John

>Hi Bob,>>I haven't tried it but I think AI separation will work okay>with RC as does AI Smooth. The issue you may be thinking of>was ai smooth setting the tcas range limit in fsuipc to 40>miles which reduced the amount of chatter heard in RC.>>All the best,>>JohnThat's what it was... Thanks. I am still happy with the separation that RC4 provides and couldn't imagine it being any better. :)

Very interesting read. I cant wait to receive my copy of RC. Thanks.

The down side is you have to>ignore all those annoying "please expedite your turn...." >calls.>> MikeOr you can use Edit Voice Pack to remove those annoying "Please expedite...." calls. I did, and haven't heard them for a long time!Simply rename the identifier for those phrases and enter a blank sound. You see nothing...hear nothing.I also removed that unrealistic annoying squeal. You don't hear squeals when you double on a radio, you're keying up!

Question regarding radar contact....Are the transmissions really like the videos? The voices may be real, but they sound fake because of how they are recorded....Delta....19...25.....taxi to....runway....2...5....LeftIs it that noticiable while flying? The default FS ATC sounds way better than the demo videos. This is the only thing that is keeping me from buying it. Is it really that bad?

no it does not sound that badjd

"Radar Contact is the only way Im aware of"That's sad.RC is a good product - but not the only way to fly realistically with reliable, relevant ATC.That capability exists in the out of the box default version of FS2004 - if only more people would try to learn how to use the revolutionary features of FS2004 rather than rushing off to buy something else.

>"Radar Contact is the only way Im aware of">>That's sad.>>RC is a good product - but not the only way to fly>realistically with reliable, relevant ATC.>>That capability exists in the out of the box default version>of FS2004 - if only more people would try to learn how to use>the revolutionary features of FS2004 rather than rushing off>to buy something else.You are joking, aren't you? ;) While the ATC that FS9 has was revolutionary when it was released, it is not realistic if you have every flown in the real ATC system. Heading changes , one per every few miles in opposite directions to the preceding one, people constantly being yelled at because they are 300 feet too high, then 300 feet to low, no way to declare an emergency or fly a Sid or Star, no way to change runways on departur or approach, the list goes on and on. For someone that is not really interested in learning what real ATC is like, it is a good beginning. Once you get past that level, it becomes very boring and irritating.

I got a 26 mile.. "cleared for the approach" using RCv4 the other day.Hmmmmmm.....

what was the msa of the arrival airport? in rc's controller's page?jd

No I'm not joking"Heading changes , one per every few miles in opposite directions to the preceding one"Only when flying as a novice and only when you cannot hold your course by correcting for wind / drift."people constantly being yelled at because they are 300 feet too high, then 300 feet to low"Yes an issue"no way to declare an emergency"True - but is that a VITAL component?"no way to ... or fly a Sid or Star"Very easy to setup - just like other programs - the SID or STAR has to be entered in the flight plan - then the FS2004 ATC flies it."no way to change runways on departur or approach"I can do this all the time - it's one of the easiest things to change in FS.You are definitely right that RC4 being the best - but your statement of the inadequacies of FS2004 ATC shows that you have apparently not taken the time to learned the capabilities of Flight Simulator 2004 beyond the introductory novice level.That's one of the problems which is frequent with new programs like FS2004 - we love our addons - and spend more time trying to make them work than discovering that much of that capability has been built into the new version.I use FSNav - have for a very long time - but frankly - the FS2004 default GPS is more capable in most areas. It is not as easy to update the Approach DB.The default flight planner has some limits.But the MAIN reason I continue to use FSNav is that I can have the moving map up on my second monitor at less of a performance hit than the GPS. But when I want to program in and fly an Offset LDA or RNAV/GPS approach - I do it with the default GPS.

Hi Reggie,Interesting comments on the default ATC. I'm waiting for my copy of RC4 to arrive, but I wonder- have you considered writing a simple tutorial that illustrates the advanced features of the FS9 ATC? Sounds like some of us (me included :) ) just haven't gotten to try out some of this stuff. You could do a real short flight plan, maybe.....just a thought.Bruce.