FSX-MS What's with FSX ATC?

[Ed Kammerman 2]

Hi,

 I'm doing a flight KLAX-RJTT, I was between waypoints when FSX's ATC tells me to basically turn around and reverse course. That ends up taking me back to my last waypoint. When I reach that waypoint it sends me back in the general direction of the original waypoint I was headed toward. What's with that ? 

[charliearon 3,024]

Pretty much the same as this: 

 

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

42 minutes ago, Ed Kammerman said:

Hi,

 I'm doing a flight KLAX-RJTT, I was between waypoints when FSX's ATC tells me to basically turn around and reverse course. That ends up taking me back to my last waypoint. When I reach that waypoint it sends me back in the general direction of the original waypoint I was headed toward. What's with that ? 

It's far worse than that my friend.  There is nothing in the default ATC that is correct.  May I tell you a short story my friend (really for everyone)?

I've spent a great deal of time over the past 14 years introducing people to flying in an realism based online environment such as VATSIM or IVAO, and I've lost count of the number of people I worked with who became completely lost from the onset because they had incorrectly assumed the ATC would be at least similar to default ATC. In fact, I've lost count of the number of people who reached out to learn how to fly online but then said they first wanted to practice more with [default] ATC in the sim before they felt comfortable enough to venture online (even though I always did this via Shared Cockpit).

My point is that default ATC is so completely wrong and unrealistic that it actually hurts people, or at least sets them back considerably when they later decide to venture online.

Online flight simulation has continued to grow and over the past few years that growth has been substantial.  I'm currently working on something that will enable people to learn how to do everything necessary and be fully prepared to enjoy the many incredible benefits of flying online in a realism based environment - and tremendously reduce the time necessary for them to accomplish this (often reduced by up to 75%). Better yet, this is only a part of what I'm working on, and there is no cost whatsoever to people.  I've had this in the works privately and testing over the past several years.

I'll be announcing this in the weeks to come, but the best way to ensure you receive notification is to sign up for the our Newsletter.

 

Best wishes!

 

 

[tamsini 278]

4 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

I'm currently working on something that will enable people to learn how to do everything necessary and be fully prepared to enjoy the many incredible benefits of flying online in a realism based environment - and tremendously reduce the time necessary for them to accomplish this (often reduced by up to 75%). Better yet, this is only a part of what I'm working on, and there is no cost whatsoever to people.  I've had this in the works privately and testing over the past several years.

Dave, not sure what it is you're working on but whatever it is, I am certainly looking forward to it!

 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

4 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

There is nothing in the default ATC that is correct.

While I agree that the default ATC is somewhat of a joke, that statement is an overreach. First of all, for VFR flight, the default ATC is perfectly fine. Most flight simmers are not that serious about ATC communication and just like to sight see in a small prop GA aircraft. For IFR flight, the default ATC wanders into fantasy land. But compensating for that is that both the AI aircraft communicate with the ATC and are controlled by the sim. Next, dump the default ATC and use an add-on product. Now you've got legitimate communications that mimic real world behavior, but unfortunately, except for VOXATC, the AI aircraft around you are oblivious to everything and just do their own thing. Lastly, as Dave points out, there is online flying, which is great if your flightplan is in an area which is actively staffed. So it will be interesting to see what he proposes.

And then there's XP11's default ATC which makes the default ATC in P3d4 look realistic. Aerofly FS/2 has the best idea of all. Who needs ATC?

[overspeed3 410]

Yes, flying FSX via IFR is sometimes an adventure:  ATC seems to take me on an unnecessary detour of the airport rather than a more direct route.  On more than occasion, it too advised me to turn back in the opposite direction.  One special memory flying into Zurich, ATC kept taking me on a grand tour of the Alps, turning me in every which way:  I got so frustrated that I totally ended the flight...

Hope the FS2020 ATC is a little closer to reality.  

[Ed Kammerman 2]

AgreedI 

[stans 703]

The ATC in FSX is bad when it comes to IFR flying, but it's fine with VFR and VFR flight following.  The IFR instructions are sometimes bizarre and make no sense.

[TextRich 88]

Get a third party ATC for IFR flights.  Even so if you are not careful those software aren't any more helpful than the default ATC.  Make sure to follow all instructions and maintenance necessary for those software and you'll be fine and able to enjoy IFR flights in peace.  🙂

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

17 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

While I agree that the default ATC is somewhat of a joke, that statement is an overreach. First of all, for VFR flight, the default ATC is perfectly fine. Most flight simmers are not that serious about ATC communication and just like to sight see in a small prop GA aircraft. For IFR flight, the default ATC wanders into fantasy land. But compensating for that is that both the AI aircraft communicate with the ATC and are controlled by the sim. Next, dump the default ATC and use an add-on product. Now you've got legitimate communications that mimic real world behavior, but unfortunately, except for VOXATC, the AI aircraft around you are oblivious to everything and just do their own thing. Lastly, as Dave points out, there is online flying, which is great if your flightplan is in an area which is actively staffed. So it will be interesting to see what he proposes.

And then there's XP11's default ATC which makes the default ATC in P3d4 look realistic. Aerofly FS/2 has the best idea of all. Who needs ATC?

Agreed Jay, I don't fly GA, only airliners... and all the people i usually work or deal with do the same, so I often forget about GA.

Thanks for the reminder!

 

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

17 hours ago, tamsini said:

Dave, not sure what it is you're working on but whatever it is, I am certainly looking forward to it!

 

 

Thanks my friend!  I can't say more at the moment, accept we're close to an announcement (just a few weeks).

 

 

[Ed Kammerman 2]

Hmmmm

[Ed Kammerman 2]

23 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

It's far worse than that my friend.  There is nothing in the default ATC that is correct.  May I tell you a short story my friend (really for everyone)?

I've spent a great deal of time over the past 14 years introducing people to flying in an realism based online environment such as VATSIM or IVAO, and I've lost count of the number of people I worked with who became completely lost from the onset because they had incorrectly assumed the ATC would be at least similar to default ATC. In fact, I've lost count of the number of people who reached out to learn how to fly online but then said they first wanted to practice more with [default] ATC in the sim before they felt comfortable enough to venture online (even though I always did this via Shared Cockpit).

My point is that default ATC is so completely wrong and unrealistic that it actually hurts people, or at least sets them back considerably when they later decide to venture online.

Online flight simulation has continued to grow and over the past few years that growth has been substantial.  I'm currently working on something that will enable people to learn how to do everything necessary and be fully prepared to enjoy the many incredible benefits of flying online in a realism based environment - and tremendously reduce the time necessary for them to accomplish this (often reduced by up to 75%). Better yet, this is only a part of what I'm working on, and there is no cost whatsoever to people.  I've had this in the works privately and testing over the past several years.

I'll be announcing this in the weeks to come, but the best way to ensure you receive notification is to sign up for the our Newsletter.

 

Best wishes!

 

 

Hi, Dave

 I have made a couple of attempts at using VATSIM, unfortunately, to quote your post here 'I've gotten lost'. As I said in my post 'What's up with FSX ATC?'. Most of my flying is IFR, primarily commercial. At my age (70), with my poor eyesight (thank god for auto-land) lol, I also can't sit in a chair for 6-12 hours. So I've been using Radar Contact 4. However recently I've been having an issue between Radar Contact and Flight Sim. Please see 'Launching Radar Contact while in flight' in the Radar Contact Forum. That will show you the issue I've been having including error message. Any thoughts?

 

Thanks, Ed

[charliearon 3,024]

In my experience, I find that the default ATC is about 95-97% accurate.  It will usually get me from Point A to Point B, into the ILS glideslope approach and a good landing.  On a couple of rare occasions, It forgot about me or had me at 10,000 feet about 3 miles from touchdown.  Those are very rare occurrences.

[Ed Kammerman 2]

Well Charlie on this particular flight FSX ATC has been a bloody disaster. At the moment though after a couple of days it seems to be functioning decently. So we shall see