On 06/05/2017 at 4:07 PM, vololiberista said:

RC4 works true, but is is so so out of date now. Most of the ATC instructions are wrong.

Six days ago I asked you to name what is wrong with RC4's ATC instructions. You haven't answered my question.

So please, either list what's wrong or retract your statement.

8 hours ago, Drumcode said:

kYou don't know me, don't assume too much. My wife happens to be a speech therapist and clearly knows "a little" about her profession. Based on what I presented to her, from the standpoint of realism of speech, RC4 steals the show. Carry on.

err  I  think  different  since  I own  rc4  and  pf3   and  imo  p3  has  the better  speech realism anyways   each  to their  own  to  what  they  like

Quote

 

  9 hours ago, Drumcode said:

kYou don't know me, don't assume too much. My wife happens to be a speech therapist and clearly knows "a little" about her profession. Based on what I presented to her, from the standpoint of realism of speech, RC4 steals the show. Carry on.

 

 

1 hour ago, pete_auau said:

err  I  think  different  since  I own  rc4  and  pf3   and  imo  p3  has  the better  speech realism anyways   each  to their  own  to  what  they  like

The first quote has come up before and is totally irrelevant. Unless that person's wife has a deep knowledge and understanding of how to digitise and cut and paste then well.....

PF3 has 119 voices some are not as good as others but on the whole the voices are more realistic especially as they are attenuated by default. You can change them to sitting room hifi if you want but that isn't even on the scale of realism. Coupled with background interference and fading so that some transmissions are indistinct makes for even more realism and thus makes it more difficult for users in that they have to learn to maintain a listening watch as in real life!

Speech therapy is irrelevant. The PF3 voices have the correct inflection for their accents and that is all that is needed. Indeed you can even identify a controller from Singapore as against a controller from Hong Kong!

 

3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Six days ago I asked you to name what is wrong with RC4's ATC instructions. You haven't answered my question.

So please, either list what's wrong or retract your statement.

Ray,

PF3 speaks for itself. Download it and give it a try. Another update 3.4.0 has been released with yet another 3.4.2 being tested as I speak. RC4 cannot compete I'm sorry to say.

1 minute ago, vololiberista said:

Ray,

PF3 speaks for itself. Download and give it a try.

No. Point out RC4's incorrect ATC instructions or retract. You should be a politician. They don't answer the question either.

Just now, Ray Proudfoot said:

No. Point out RC4's incorrect ATC instructions or retract. You should be a politician. They don't answer the question either.

PF3 answers all your questions Ray.

5 minutes ago, vololiberista said:

PF3 answers all your questions Ray.

NO!!! This is nothing to do with PF3 and you know it. Stop dodging the question. You've made a derogatory remark about an alternative product with no evidence to back it up. In a court of law you'd be taken to the cleaners.

Again... put up or retract.

I have both and am currently undecided...

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

In a court of law you'd be taken to the cleaners.

trouble  is  we not  in a court 

4 hours ago, pete_auau said:

err  I  think  different  since  I own  rc4  and  pf3   and  imo  p3  has  the better  speech realism anyways   each  to their  own  to  what  they  like

RC4 was good back in the day, and so was Windows 95.. Not so much anymore, PF3, to me , is like what I hear when I fly in the real world with current ATC.  

Just now, Bobsk8 said:

RC4 was good back in the day, and so was Windows 95.. Not so much anymore, PF3, to me , is like what I hear when I fly in the real world with current ATC.  

yea  i  tend  to agree  with you bob  as  i said  before  each has  his  opinion   which  in no doubt  in a forum will be  different  to another,  you will never win in this  situation

1 hour ago, pete_auau said:

trouble  is  we not  in a court 

Not a court of law but certainly one where people can be judged on their comments.

@vololiberista still hasn't expanded on this comment... "Most of the ATC instructions are wrong."

My argument isn't whether PF3 is better than RC4. That's subjective. It was the fact that he stated many instructions in RC4 are wrong but then failed to say what they are.

People may reasonably come to the conclusion that if he couldn't back that statement up with hard facts then his own judgement is open to doubt.

20 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Not a court of law but certainly one where people can be judged on their comments.

@vololiberista still hasn't expanded on this comment... "Most of the ATC instructions are wrong."

My argument isn't whether PF3 is better than RC4. That's subjective. It was the fact that he stated many instructions in RC4 are wrong but then failed to say what they are.

People may reasonably come to the conclusion that if he couldn't back that statement up with hard facts then his own judgement is open to doubt.

Ray,

I don't need to expand on my comments. The programme is out there with a huge manual which explains everything and answers all your questions. To expand on my comments therefore would exceed the number of characters I am allowed to write on the forum. With two recent upgrades plus another in the wings PF3 is out of sight of RC4 now.

2 minutes ago, vololiberista said:

Ray,

I don't need to expand on my comments. The programme is out there with a huge manual which explains everything and answers all your questions. To expand on my comments therefore would exceed the number of characters I am allowed to write on the forum. With two recent upgrades plus another in the wings PF3 is out of sight of RC4 now.

You're doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "la la la la.".

Dont make accusations if your not prepared to back them up with hard facts. It makes someone who does that look like an idiot and I doubt you are that.

I have already asked the question about turning off the vertical watchdog in PF3 and it's not possible so in that regard RC4 is clearly superior.

Ray,

I rather think it is the opposite case! you need to read up on CAP413 and CAP694 to bring yourself up to date.

Quote

vertical watchdog in PF3

You mean ATC checking on your altitude I presume. You can adjust by how much, when or if PF3 nags you or not on a host of options.

"Heavy" will always get a "no speed" subject to conditions.

In ICAO "heavy" is only used on initial contact. Whereas in FAA it's used all the time

Same with "IFR" used only for clearance delivery.

"Radar Contact" rarely used and only when an SRA is initiated.

"line-up and wait" not necessary if you are the only aircraft taking-off and nothing is landing. You will get take-off clearance at the hold. Normal practice in real life.

Correct RT terminology for published holds

And so on and so on. We are still culling and changing many of the incorrect or superfluous commands transferred over from PFE that RC 4 still and will always make.

I'm sorry Ray but the list is soooooooo long I can't put everything here.

In my opinion PFE was better than RC4. PF3 v.1 however was a huge step forward and now that we are testing v 3.4.3 means that it is more of a giant leap. PF3's version history is at least 16 pages and a great deal of that is not bugs but wish list items.