I'm trying to file a flight plan in a DHC-6 Twin Otter at Vancouver Harbor, but when I enter the correct ICAO of CYHC  in the "File Flight Plan" window, I get the error message "You do not appear to be at that departure airport." I'm making sure that when I create a new flight I'm choosing CYHC Vancouver Harbor. I've tried starting in sealanes and at a ramp (in this case a dock), but it makes no difference.  As well, when I click the Flight Configuration Window Icon, the "Flight in Progress" dialog box always lists "CYHC, custom sealane or ramp that was selected."

I've noted that when I first display ATC, all of the frequencies listed on the right are for Vancouver International (CYVR), with the exception of Vancouver Area Control Center. That's wrong because Vancouver Harbor has its own control tower - only 1 of its kind in Canada. Selecting that area control frequency doesn't make a difference though, I still get the do not appear at that departure airport message. When the "File Flight Plan" window displays, CYVR is always listed as the default departure ICAO regardless of which frequency I select in the initial ATC window. It's as if XP11 thinks CYHC is CYVR, despite my twin otter floating on the drink of Vancouver harbor.

If anyone has any ideas why this is occurring or knows of a way to resolve this, I'd really appreciate hearing about them.

Edited October 6, 20196 yr by Kronovan

I'd be surprised if the default ATC supported water runways at all.

If it does, you'll need to check the CYHC section in the apt.dat of the "Global Airports" scenery for any entries numbered 1050 to 1054. That's the available comm frequencies for a given airport. If it doesn't have any listed, it's time for learning World Editor.

Thanks for the info. Well I can file a flight plan for the waterlane at CYPK (Pitt Meadows), which is only about 10 nm away. That's aiport also has runways and helipads too, so maybe that's why.  I tried a test plan where I entered CYHC as the destination on a flight departing from CYPK, and got a warning along the lines of; entering a seaplane port for a destination is not allowed. I could have sworn I'd done that before, but I might be confusing that with a flight plan I created in PlanG and then opened in my DHC-6's GPS.

At this point, with so many hits and misses I'm wondering if RC4toXplane or another ATC solution might be a better option. l'm not sure if another ATC plugin/solution would be permitted from using seaplane aerodromes too?

I see several entries for commfrequencies in 11.40's apt.dat.

1051 126800 ATIS

1051 118400 ATF
1054 118400 TWR
1054 123150 RCO
1052 125350 Clearance Delivery

So it's a bug in default ATC.

 

At present, there's no good ATC solution for X-Plane.

Maybe 124th ATC can handle seaplane bases. I've never tried it though.

Check Radar Contact's manual to see if it can handle seaplane bases. I know from experience that it handles uncontrolled land airfields, so there might just be a chance.

3 hours ago, Bjoern said:

Check Radar Contact's manual to see if it can handle seaplane bases. I know from experience that it handles uncontrolled land airfields, so there might just be a chance.

Is your experience there using RC with X-Plane 11, or another flight sim like FSX or Prepar3D? I ask, because I know my nephew was able to use RC with FSX for seaplane aerodromes, by contacting a control center. I was under the impression though, that RC4 + RC4toXplane snapin would only interact with XP11's internal ATC, with the snapin translating that into FSX equivalent ATC commands?

So if that is indeed how the snapin works, wouldn't it still be bound by XP11 limitations for ATC?

[Edit] I just created a XP11 flight plan with a departure from the uncontrolled airfield of LFNQ (Mounlouis la Quillane) with a destination of the uncontrolled airfield of LFYS (Sainte Leocadie.) It worked and I got a frequency for an area control centre in southern France. So it looks like XP11's built-in/stock ATC can handle such airfields and I imagine the RC4toXplane snapin would correctly translate that into FSX ATC commands.

I saw the blog posting made in February, where the XP11 team was calling for testers with real-world flight experience with seaplanes. So with such changes and testing now likely on the boiler, I'm thinking I really need to report that bug with CYHC. 

BTW thank you Bjoern for checking into that seaplane aerodrome.

Edited October 8, 20196 yr by Kronovan

20 hours ago, Kronovan said:

Is your experience there using RC with X-Plane 11, or another flight sim like FSX or Prepar3D? I ask, because I know my nephew was able to use RC with FSX for seaplane aerodromes, by contacting a control center. I was under the impression though, that RC4 + RC4toXplane snapin would only interact with XP11's internal ATC, with the snapin translating that into FSX equivalent ATC commands?

So if that is indeed how the snapin works, wouldn't it still be bound by XP11 limitations for ATC?

[Edit] I just created a XP11 flight plan with a departure from the uncontrolled airfield of LFNQ (Mounlouis la Quillane) with a destination of the uncontrolled airfield of LFYS (Sainte Leocadie.) It worked and I got a frequency for an area control centre in southern France. So it looks like XP11's built-in/stock ATC can handle such airfields and I imagine the RC4toXplane snapin would correctly translate that into FSX ATC commands.

I saw the blog posting made in February, where the XP11 team was calling for testers with real-world flight experience with seaplanes. So with such changes and testing now likely on the boiler, I'm thinking I really need to report that bug with CYHC. 

BTW thank you Bjoern for checking into that seaplane aerodrome.

RC4 for FSX and XP is exactly the same external program, only the means of communication between program and simulator is different (FSUIPC vs RC4toXP).

Radar Contact does not interact with the sim ATC at all as it only fetches positioning and some airport data from the simulator and displays its menu and that's about it. Processing and speech output happens externally.

Laminar's call for seaplane rated pilots was more intended to fix seaplane behavior. They might tackle ATC issues someday, but I figure not before they've finished the transition to Vulkan.

No problem, that was about two minutes of work. Apt.dat files can be read in any good text editor (not Notepad) after all.

On 10/9/2019 at 6:48 AM, Bjoern said:

Laminar's call for seaplane rated pilots was more intended to fix seaplane behavior. They might tackle ATC issues someday, but I figure not before they've finished the transition to Vulkan.

Well I hope their efforts extend to water physics and visuals. I've only owned XP11 for a few weeks, but If there's one disappointment I could list, it would be the status quo for the floatplane and amphib experience. I can't even tell when I'm moving on water and when I've landed on it and water often looks as smooth as glass and creates no audible sounds. As much as I'm amazed to say it, my float and amphib experience in FSX:SE with the aid of the Accu-feel plugin was superior. There's really no comparison between the 2 experiences.

[Edit] I do applaud LR's move to Vulkan. I helped my son get the F1 2017 (used Vulkan) installed on his Linux PC and the games look and performance was impressive; especially considering that PC wasn't well spec'd. Sadly, Codemasters didn't continue with support for that in recent releases.

Edited October 10, 20196 yr by Kronovan

On 10/9/2019 at 6:48 AM, Bjoern said:

RC4 for FSX and XP is exactly the same external program, only the means of communication between program and simulator is different (FSUIPC vs RC4toXP).

Radar Contact does not interact with the sim ATC at all as it only fetches positioning and some airport data from the simulator and displays its menu and that's about it. Processing and speech output happens externally.

OK that makes sense and I can see why some folks don't favor it as an ATC solution, due to it running externally and not being able to control AI aircraft. For me though, where I'm often flying bush planes in rural locations, that wouldn't be such an immersion breaker.

4 hours ago, Kronovan said:

As much as I'm amazed to say it, my float and amphib experience in FSX:SE with the aid of the Accu-feel plugin was superior. There's really no comparison between the 2 experiences.

[Edit] I do applaud LR's move to Vulkan. I helped my son get the F1 2017 (used Vulkan) installed on his Linux PC and the games look and performance was impressive; especially considering that PC wasn't well spec'd. Sadly, Codemasters didn't continue with support for that in recent releases.

No shame in admitting that FSX did some things better than other simulators.

I love XP's multiplatform approach. And lack of Linux compatibility for some add-ons is a great money saver.

 

4 hours ago, Kronovan said:

OK that makes sense and I can see why some folks don't favor it as an ATC solution, due to it running externally and not being able to control AI aircraft. For me though, where I'm often flying bush planes in rural locations, that wouldn't be such an immersion breaker.

Well, RC4 does have limited AI control capability in MSFS by ensuring that planes keep off the runway while you're taking off or landing. For spacing on approach, I've used AISmooth and the background chatter was provided by default ATC. All in all not much of an immersion breaker at all.

XP's equivalent would be World Traffic 3 for AI, X-ATC Chatter for background noise on the airwaves and 124th ATC/RC4 for user aircraft guidance.

An ATC module roughly equivalent to FSX' (minus AI control and background chatter) is a pet project of mine, but I'm still in the tech development stage.