40 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I shall check PFPX tomorrow and see if it’s there.

http://www.airnav.com/airspace/fix/ZZYZX

Edited May 29, 20206 yr by Orlaam

The ATC is just terrible, reminds me of an old game called FSX, and the clouds omg they are bad really bad, seems clear skies will the option to choose.

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

If you’re referring to waypoints they are always pronounceable in the real world. Always five letters and often chosen by AT controllers. For example, the position at which Concorde started supersonic climb from Heathrow to JFK was named UPGAS.

They have to be pronounceable as ATC will often command an aircraft to proceed direct to one.

I'm a former US ATC and a software engineer 🙂

I was referring to the ability of software to properly mimic what is easy for humans.

1 minute ago, Gulfstream said:

I'm a former US ATC and a software engineer 🙂

I was referring to the ability of software to properly mimic what is easy for humans.

We used to be called programmers. 😁 Software is getting better but still a long way from the human voice.

9 hours ago, KenG said:

Did they say G3000 and G5000! Only thing they seemed to have not discussed is advanced RNAV (RNP) procedures and SBAS. 

There is going to be very little to improve on by add-on developers. 

Yeah and 430 and 530. I wonder if these can open in a 2D window and be used with hardware? That would be awesome.

27 minutes ago, Orlaam said:

http://www.airnav.com/airspace/fix/ZZYZX

The town has an interesting history...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zzyzx,_California

19 hours ago, romandesign said:

The only thing that's missing is Voice Recognition ATC. I fly with Pilot2ATC now (in X-Plane) and it's amazing. And in VR it's a life saver. ATC window is a huge immersion killer. Isntead, I just hild a button on my yoke, and say "Delta 737, ready for departure, runway 19R", or "request descent to flight level 140" and ATC approves or denies etc. And I can read back their clearances  - but that's too difficult, reading back SIDs and STARs and multiple taxyways is hard, because it's difficult to understand how they pronouns abbreviations, so I let "copilot" do readbacks and switch radios. While he does a readback I hear it again. Funny thing is that speech recognition is done by Microsoft and is a default Windows thing - it's built-in in Windows 10. So they won't have to do much to implement it. And it's so much better to have conversations with ATC.

I totally agree with you. I also expected to see new professional ATC in FS2020. I am a litle bit disapointed. But we should keep in mind that new sim oriented to different customers and mostly for non professional pilots. Difficult ATC procedures will scare off them.

In Episode 8 I can see almost the same FSX ATC, but with some improvements, such as SID and STARS. Personally, I only hope for external professional ATC program. In my view it should consist of (at least):

1. Voice control

The interaction between NEW ATC and customer should be by voice. The ATC engine should recognize different variations of pilot phrases (According standard phraseology principle). For example: “Paris Ground, Air France 123, Request start up”, or “Paris Ground, Air France 123, Request start the engines please”. Or another example: “Paris Ground, Air France 123, Request taxi”, “Paris Ground, Air France 123, ready for taxi”, “Paris Ground, Air France 123, taxi please”. Of course, for unexperienced pilots text instructions and answer option should be provided. Also, would be awesome to have voice control feature for “key assignment” in MSFS options. For example, we just record phrase “gear down” and assign it for gear down EVENT. Voice control for everything!

I also hoped for new TTS technology in MSFS2020. Just imagine, it could provide different controllers accents with real pronunciation, so many different ATC phrases.

2. ATC engine

The ATC engine should be able for flexible management of customer aircraft and traffic aircraft basing on ICAO standards, rules of flight, country regulations, FIR restrictions, weather and actual / predictive situation.

3. Databases (DB)

The management should be based on different databases such as:

Navigation database (ND) - airways, SIDs, STARs,  APPs, Go-Arounds, MEA (minimum enroute altitudes) and other related data.  These data are required to control position of customer aircraft and traffic in the air;

FIR database (FD) – this DB should include data of vertical/lateral boundaries for related airspace and it’s sectors, radio frequencies with their callsigns, time operation/vertical and lateral boundaries, class of airspace, restricted areas (boundaries), minimum altitudes (MORA), flight levels regulation, vertical and lateral separation limitations;

Airport data (AD)  - this DB should include the information of RWs data,  taxiways routes, controllers boundaries, callsigns and frequencies. In other words very similar as afcad files, but with enhanced capabilities.

User Data (UD) – customer flightplan, callsign, flightlevel (altitude), flight rules (IFR/VFR), departure time. The flightplan required for ATC engine to lead customer aircraft on route, monitor the deviation (for example weather avoidance), provide shortcuts to waypoints. Departure time might be used for delay regulation (traffic sequence).

All DB’s should be able to update and edit.

 

4. MSFS2020 should provide the ability for third-party programs to manage traffic on the ground and in the air. This is the main problem that did not allow the developers of third-party programs to implement full AI control.

 

Regards

Edited May 29, 20206 yr by artair

I'm hoping they at least incorporate deviations for weather ( i.e., asking for certain degree off course and getting approval to return to route when asking), allowing waypoint altitude assignments, letting a descent or climb happen when asking (as opposed to FSX and prior, whereby the ATC would make you wait).  Also letting the user pick a waypoint on the route to fly directly to, thus cutting a certain leg out of the route entirely.  I see where it lets you fly direct to the next waypoint, but often times ATC will give you a direct-to that bypasses more than one point in your FP.  Some of those pre-flight and in-flight requests would allow for a slightly better experience without having to cut ATC out of the picture entirely.  People do need to be realistic and understand that perfect ATC is not possible in a game.  However, letting a user insert the plan they want, with the fixes they want; Letting the user assign altitudes to each waypoint that gives better energy management for faster aircraft (e.g., FS9/FSX had those restrictions in the DB but they wouldn't allow the user to descend early enough to capture them without really diving).  Also, giving the ability to deviate (e.g., Wx) without penalty and perhaps even enter a hold would be nice.

2 hours ago, KillerKlient said:

Just watching the IFR episode now and is it me or does it seem laggy at times? I guess they are using 2080 Ti's but seems like they still are not powerful enough to handle this sim?

This was mentioned a few pages back. It appeared choppy due to the time compression being used, at one time 5X. FSX does the same thing, gets choppy with time compression is used.

21 hours ago, MatthewS said:

 

The update is nice BUT trees size still need work.... I drive past this often and I don't remember Sydney being transplanted to the Amazon.

Is this still an old alpha? Seems like Asobo is making no progress on tree size.

Asobo, fix your "AI" logic and stop defaulting tree size for the "tropics" to massive old-growth rain forest.

In fact tree sizes everywhere are just too large for all tree varieties. Look at the conifers in the previous shot by SVG1780, they have the perfect shape of small Christmas trees that are scaled up 10x.  Big trees don't have the same perfect "cute" shape as small trees, it looks weird.

Of course the Sydney Harbour Bridge is missing too, and no doubt they will add that custom art asset later, but I like the look of that AI generated bridge.

Hopefully Asobo are still ironing out these issues.

You'll also note that Anzac bridge is missing, as is Sydney Tower. 

Again, presumably these will be incorporated soon.

But I'm loving what I'm seeing and the trajectory Asobo is on.

15 hours ago, MatthewS said:

Do they? Great...  Asobo should give non-alpha testers access to the forums IMO... what's the harm?

Well I can think of one however I don't want to be unkind.

Along with atc, we surely need an addon for clouds aswell.

9 hours ago, andyjohnston.net said:

How many waypoints are in the word?  Do you expect them to have recorded audio for each?

As we have the intelligence to try pronounce these 5-letter 'words', maybe they find a way in the future to have the 'artificial intelligence' (AI) work out how to pronounce them too. Don't know whether the TTS only allows one to use regular letters as input, if it also allowed the International Phonetic Alphabet (that you find in dictionaries), the TTS system could then also pronounce these somehow.

14 hours ago, Elwyn said:

We got awesome screenshots update after update, credits to Alpha testers and I enjoy it a lot.... but I got to the point that starts to bother me how shots are taken, here for example, use of depth of field is overkill, no offense it's a great screenshot, but in real world photography you don't simply get those bokeh effect unless you use macro lens and get very close to subject like less than a foot to achieve the same depth of field like on the first screenshot below, that the subjects looks tiny and not life like size and it looks like a toy and the tow truck shouldn't be out of focus and so unrealistic.

 

another example:

 

the subject looks tiny in this depth..

I guess on my own opinion MS/ASOBO should consider real world cameras on FS2020 to achieve realistic photos, using real world lenses, apertures should be consider, shutter speed as well, ISO value EV etc... that will create good immersive experience. current camera effects today is like we have on a smartphones bokeh overkill and to much cosmetics.

 

Yes I think you are absolutely right, I've been wondering what is unsettling with this depth of field / blur effect style and now I see that it indeed gives the impression of macro shots... In fact few screenshots (of the A320) look as if they are reduced models or indoor mockups because of this effect I suppose...

Edited May 30, 20206 yr by Claviateur

15 hours ago, KenG said:

Did they say G3000 and G5000! Only thing they seemed to have not discussed is advanced RNAV (RNP) procedures and SBAS. 

There is going to be very little to improve on by add-on developers. 

Hehe, I wouldn't go that far (referring to your last sentence)