Atc in Microsoft Filght Simulator 2020

[kevinfirth 1,417]

3 hours ago, 3d102 said:

Please, for the love of Christ Microsoft, if you are launching an ATC system (plus built in nav planning) with the product then look outside the bubble of the United States and do it properly and ACCURATELY i.a.w. ICAO doc 4444/annex 11/doc 8168. 

Agree completely

There's an old maxim that every pilot learns from day one, "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate"

RT is such an important part of flying realistically, please get it right 🙂 

It should have the option of voice control, don't worry about voices there are plenty on the market, but correct phraseology, accurate to the region as much as possible would be very welcome.  You have rw pilots offering services for free to get it correct, why wouldn't you take advantage of this?

[kevinfirth 1,417]

1 hour ago, Ops Normal said:

Otherwise they should hire someone with in-dept knowledge on ATC (Doc4444/ 8168) to develop the ATC component of the flight sim.

Get in touch with Tegwyn, Dev of Voxatc....

[Dominique_K 10,151]

15 hours ago, bonchie said:

FSX's ATC system was perfectly fine for what it was and still way ahead of its time. They just need to add SIDs/STARs, do RNAV approaches right, and stop the yo-yoing you'd sometimes see (turn left 240, turn right 270, turn left 240, etc.).

But most of the features of it covered enough ground to give you the atmosphere you'd want. 

Other things like regional voices would be easy to implement. 

I agree with that. I would settle for an improved ATC not necessarily the whole shebang. Besides getting rid of the aggravating yoyo, I ‘d love to see ATC putting us on hold and regulating airspeed.

[HighTowers 1,436]

I will put my 2cents in here.  ATC is so incredibly dynamic with changes, without human ATC is quite linear and so robotic like (not necessarily in the voices) buy just by hard and set rules whereas real world ATC is always dynamic.   

Very little traffic at time of evening? Dont need the star. Fly direct to XXXXX, disregard STAR restrictions.   Programmed ATC will also look at the data for approach charts and will send you out on a 25nm downwind because thats where the chart says the IAF is, when you could turn to base at 12nm and intercept ILS.  Those are just 2 examples among many.

Which brings it to the other aspect I havnt seen mentioned.  We do have some ATC now, with Vatsim and rudimentary offline, but I think what is a priority is to have some much better control over the stupid AI.  In fact just a totally revamped AI logic, that doesnt cross the runway when your rolling on TO, or figures out that low winds does not mean the active runway low wind heading but a default of the airport.   Taxiing that is more intelligent. Controlled properly behaving AI goes a very long way to airport immersion for me anyway.  If all this could be integrated somehow with offline and online ATC that would be great. Sounds like an impossible monumental task, but look at what they have accomplished so far in all the previews.  I believe it can be done but dont expect something like that at release. 

 

 

[Holdit 551]

20 hours ago, guenseli said:

I really, really hoper they're aiming to have offline ATC ... but better as currently.

And I really, really hope that they provide such a good online (multiplayer) solution for ATC, that we could get rid of IVAO and VATSIM. It isn't that I do not like the both, but I can't see the reason to split the little community into two online systems, therefore have both understaffed.

At the risk of channeling Meg Ryan...yes yes yes YESSS YESSSSSSSS!!!!

[3d102 60]

6 hours ago, Noodle said:

As passionate as you feel about your dislike for American-centric content

Don't be so touchy. It's a passionate dislike for a lazily implemented system in FSX/P3D that was grossly inaccurate for the other 93.1% of the worlds landmass. 

6 hours ago, Noodle said:

I feel the same way about Euro-centric content. I just have the good grace not to call the way you guys do things, "ridiculous".

 

When a member state has differences from the international law/standards ratified in ICAO annexes they have to publish them in the national AIP. The USA probably needs a library to publish all the differences from standard. Are you getting the message here? Standard? Not Eurocentric. WORLD centric. 

550m to be legal for a cat1 or 549m to be busting minima..but let's measure something as precise as visibility in increments of a mile. Brilliant. Pressure settings in inches of mercury and temperature in fahrenheit. We're so definitely so much cleverer than every other country with their stupid logical SI units that are standardised worldwide and help reduce confusion in non-native English speakers and prevent accidents, that's why we and by extension Canada are the only ones that do it.

6 hours ago, Noodle said:

 your beloved ICAO

I belove being able to communicate somewhat safely and in a predictable format with the new, on the job training Turkish or Spanish non native English speaking controller and consequently not being radar vectored into a mountain. They still try.

6 hours ago, Noodle said:

or my equally correct FAA standards. 

Hmm.

6 hours ago, Noodle said:

Or better yet, each FIR simply uses a configuration file to determine which set of rules to use.

I'll happily write them.

 

Edited October 3, 2019 by 3d102

[Pastaiolo 1,688]

Personally i think an improved version of FSX default atc is enough to get things going, especially considering the fact that not everyone using the "simulator" will be interested in it or as familar as some here on the forum are with procedures and what not.

Plausible but not realistic. I want to have fun, not have a second job 😛 

[Kilo60 660]

22 hours ago, overspeed3 said:

I think the ATC in VATSIM may be a little too sophisticated for many in flight sim, especially those just starting out in this little hobby.  I believe with Microsoft also gearing-up for inclusion in XBOX, they would want to attract a larger crowd who never used FS with a PC, but who might "play" it on XBOX.  

So I believe a brand new ATC is required here for all levels of flyers...     

Agreed!

Or you can go online with MSFS2020 and have all those Xbox kiddies on Vatsim marking fart sounds and playing crash up derby on the runways!

[ckyliu 1,749]

10 hours ago, Noodle said:

As passionate as you feel about your dislike for American-centric content, I feel the same way about Euro-centric content. I just have the good grace not to call the way you guys do things, "ridiculous".

In this way, the exact phraseology is easily editable to conform either to your beloved ICAO, or my equally correct FAA standards. Or better yet, each FIR simply uses a configuration file to determine which set of rules to use.

It's not "euro-centric" it's global; the I in ICAO standards for International! The US FAA ignorantly decided to ignore the rest of the world despite aviation being an international business dependent on co-operation, although they are slowly converging with global standards for measurement units and phraseology.

It was incredibly annoying for 150+ countries having stuff used in just 3-4 countries foisted upon them, like @3d102 said. It makes perfect sense for any ATC implementation in the new sim to be based on ICAO rules used by the vast majority and that the US FAA is slowly moving towards, then deviations from that standard can be applied on a per country basis if there's resources available to implement (such as metres altitude in Russia and China, USA pressure in inHg etc)

It definitely needs SID/STAR procedure support adding, and the VFR stuff seemed very messed up in FSX. If they can get ATC closer to the standard of an addon like ProATC I think that should be sufficiently realistic, it would certainly ease people in to real life ATC (or VATSIM/IVAO) much better. Obviously they won't be able to encompass all the minutiae of individual airports with preferred vectors and runway selection and local restrictions, but they would have something that's "generically correct".

Edited October 3, 2019 by ckyliu

[Noodle 626]

4 hours ago, 3d102 said:

Don't be so touchy.

 

Says the guy who goes on to write an insulting diatribe.

Your smarmy attitude is noted, and I deeply apologize for the butthurt America has caused you. We're all collectively, very, very sorry for our awesomeness. It must be very awkward for you.

If you want to be taken seriously, dont make dumb arguments and try to get them past unknowing sim pilots. If visibility is a factor on an instrument approach, RVR is controlling and its measured in FEET, not Statute Miles.

I wont bother with the rest of your argument, since all of your point are equally "word almost certainly not allowed".

 

 

Edited October 3, 2019 by Noodle

[SimPlaneDriver 173]

1 hour ago, Kilo60 said:

Agreed!

Or you can go online with MSFS2020 and have all those Xbox kiddies on Vatsim marking fart sounds and playing crash up derby on the runways!

I agree. You should hear me on the mic. 

[SimPlaneDriver 173]

4 hours ago, france89 said:

Personally i think an improved version of FSX default atc is enough to get things going, especially considering the fact that not everyone using the "simulator" will be interested in it or as familar as some here on the forum are with procedures and what not.

Plausible but not realistic. I want to have fun, not have a second job 😛 

Maybe an easy and realistic mode.  I know ATC can be hard, that’s why I only sim. 

[vortex681 806]

I think the bottom line is that if ICAO terminology and procedures were used, it would be much closer to what most of the world uses than FAA terminology and procedures - hectopascals instead of inches of mercury instantly springs to mind!. This is not going to be a North American sim, it's going to be a world sim and the ATC should reflect that as much as possible.

[bonchie 2,305]

5 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

I think the bottom line is that if ICAO terminology and procedures were used, it would be much closer to what most of the world uses than FAA terminology and procedures - hectopascals instead of inches of mercury instantly springs to mind!. This is not going to be a North American sim, it's going to be a world sim and the ATC should reflect that as much as possible.

Perhaps they'll have both (shouldn't be hard to do at all), but I think you guys are all going to be disappointed if you think they are going to not have ATC that reports inches of mercury and feet. 

This is still MS, an American company, and the US is still the largest market and most of the aircraft are going to have instrumentation that uses those two units. 

Edited October 3, 2019 by bonchie

[vortex681 806]

1 minute ago, bonchie said:

but I think you guys are all going to be disappointed if you think they are going to not have ATC that reports inches of mercury and feet.

This is still MS, an American company, and the US is still the largest market. 

But Asobo is French! I'd love to know what makes you think that the US is the largest market. It may be the largest for a single country, but do you really think that the rest of the world has less flight simmers in total than the US? Most countries use feet for altitude but only 3 countries in the entire world use inches of mercury as the pressure reference - United States, Canada and Japan. Time to become truly international.