There’s really no perfect ATC solution right now.  I find default ATC mostly fine for basic VFR, flight following type flights.  I use it for that.

Pilot2ATC is very good for IFR flights.  I have a second monitor arriving tomorrow so I can use the interface without alt-tabbing out.

Pilotedge is great (I’ve done the demo) but expensive and with limited coverage.

Vatsim I haven’t  really used, but I do check to see what ATC coverage looks like when I’m flying and it’s typically pretty thin to nonexistent for the places I want to fly.  I wouldn’t bother logging on just to take to myself on a Unicom, that’s less realistic than using default ATC IMHO.

A few general issues I have with online ATC:

- can be intimidating and sometimes feel like work.  I use flightsim to relax...I appreciate this would likely go away with more use and better understanding of airspace etc.

- can’t use time acceleration.  More of a P3D issue when I’m flying airliners but I have no interest or time to sit in front of my computer for hours on end when flying longer airline routes.

- can’t leave your computer for more than a minute or two.  I get why this is, but one of the great things about flightsim for me is that I can start a flight, get to cruise, go do some chores, then comes back and fly the descent approach.

- need to talk.  I get that speaking I to a microphone is realistic, but it can be annoying for others in the room (ie my wife).

In the end it’s all about options and what works best for you.  Hopefully Asobo will continue to develop the default ATC so that it is a better option.

It’s a cross between awful and laughable for sure.

Getting told to switch to frequency “OH-EN-EE-two-two-decimal-seven,” there they spell out “one” phonetically.

Wind 270 at 30 knots and they give you runway 09. No ATC option to request a runway change if you’re VFR.

Some pretty laughable altitude assignments (“continue at your current altitude” - straight into the side of a mountain).

Phraseology is literally entirely wrong. “Continue for west departure”. Nope. Never heard it. “I will contact you next when leaving my airspace”. Say what?

Getting handed off to another center frequency when IFR and getting the ATIS from the airport 28,000 feet below you instead. 

Getting the wrong runway assignment when IFR. Request a different approach: no answer. 

A lot of the stuff I could live with, as it can be fixed. But the phraseology really irks me. There is literally a glossary with the correct phraseology, and any private pilot could correct 90% of the errors in the sim off the top of their head. I could literally have taken one flight in the alpha and said, “nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. This is wrong, that’s wrong, that’s wrong” and made it umpteen times better in an hour. But quite obviously they never asked or never listened to an actual pilot. Or they thought they knew better, one of the two.

How they managed to create an ATC system that is not appreciably better than the one from 20-year old MS flight simulators is beyond me. But they did. 

5 hours ago, flyinion said:

Now, I've come down that arrival before for Burbank so not sure what happened but ATC kept changing the descent altitude between 5500-7100 feet with multiple spots in between over and over for like 5 minutes straight.

This happens any time you're low and aren't flying over dead-level ground. Someone programmed the ATC to keep you at least X feet AGL, and didn't bother to say "it's ok to keep the plane higher if there's a mountain right in front of it." So because it doesn't think about the terrain in front of you, it keeps climbing and descending you to keep you at the minimum height over the terrain while trying to get you down to the altitude it thinks you should be for the approach.

 

1 hour ago, mtr75 said:

A lot of the stuff I could live with, as it can be fixed. But the phraseology really irks me.

I’m with you there, I don’t understand how the phraseology actually got worse over FSX/P3D.

4 hours ago, jbdbow1970 said:

You wan't ATC use Vatsim, Ivao or pilotedge.

or Pilot2ATC (which is great)

I have to stand up and (weakly) defend the MSFS default ATC. It does something that everything else mentioned in this thread doesn't. It communicates with and controls the AI aircraft. I'd say it's a pretty good guess, that like a lot of features in MSFS, the ATC is just a cleaned up version of the FSX ATC. My defense of the ATC is all relative though. The default navigation database needs work. The weather is often incorrect. The autopilot fails sporadically. Given that those key features really need replacing with third party equivalents, I'd say that the ATC gets a passing mark. But  I'm grading that on a curve because everyone else's grades are so low, .

It's the default ATC in a $70 game. Work around and with its limitations, or wait for third party alternatives. Meanwhile: Come fly the slient skies. 

1 hour ago, jabloomf1230 said:

It communicates with and controls the AI aircraft.

But not the other-player traffic. If it can't control all of them (or at least talk to all of them so you know where planes are in the pattern) then it's not all that effective. 

I'm very close to the point of permanently disabling other player traffic because it gets old flying an approach only to find out that some other player is landing in the opposite direction. It'd be at least nice if we (real players) could talk to each other so we could announce our movements.

 

 

 

Multiplayer can be a lot of fun, but it can also be annoying.

Isn't there an MSFS discord channel?

1 hour ago, eslader said:

But not the other-player traffic. If it can't control all of them (or at least talk to all of them so you know where planes are in the pattern) then it's not all that effective. 

I'm very close to the point of permanently disabling other player traffic because it gets old flying an approach only to find out that some other player is landing in the opposite direction. It'd be at least nice if we (real players) could talk to each other so we could announce our movements.

 

 

 

At least they are not taking off from taxiways like in some combat sims 😄

If you want real ATC, learn to fly.🤪

6 hours ago, regis9 said:

- can’t use time acceleration.  More of a P3D issue when I’m flying airliners but I have no interest or time to sit in front of my computer for hours on end when flying longer airline routes.

 

Apparently pilotedge ATC will let you accelerate time in the cruise parts of a long flight. No idea about vatsim.

6 hours ago, mtr75 said:

It’s a cross between awful and laughable for sure.

Getting told to switch to frequency “OH-EN-EE-two-two-decimal-seven,” there they spell out “one” phonetically.

Wind 270 at 30 knots and they give you runway 09. No ATC option to request a runway change if you’re VFR.

Some pretty laughable altitude assignments (“continue at your current altitude” - straight into the side of a mountain).

Phraseology is literally entirely wrong. “Continue for west departure”. Nope. Never heard it. “I will contact you next when leaving my airspace”. Say what?

Getting handed off to another center frequency when IFR and getting the ATIS from the airport 28,000 feet below you instead. 

Getting the wrong runway assignment when IFR. Request a different approach: no answer. 

A lot of the stuff I could live with, as it can be fixed. But the phraseology really irks me. There is literally a glossary with the correct phraseology, and any private pilot could correct 90% of the errors in the sim off the top of their head. I could literally have taken one flight in the alpha and said, “nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. This is wrong, that’s wrong, that’s wrong” and made it umpteen times better in an hour. But quite obviously they never asked or never listened to an actual pilot. Or they thought they knew better, one of the two.

How they managed to create an ATC system that is not appreciably better than the one from 20-year old MS flight simulators is beyond me. But they did. 

I've experienced all of this.  And it's also frustrating when you're making an approach and they are telling you to expedite your climb to 9600'.  

The system is also terrible if you want to do something like pop-up IFR.  

I think this guy's meme is priceless...

 

Edited October 26, 20205 yr by Virtual-Chris

1 hour ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

At least they are not taking off from taxiways like in some combat sims

Though I did see an Airbus going offroading, taxiing through the grass in Innsbruck the other day. 😉

Thing is, I have labels turned off, so while I assume it was some human goofing around, for all I know it was an AI plane.

 

 

On Phraseology, I heard "Position and Hold" recently.  Is that still used anywhere in the world?  In the US it's been "Line up and wait" for years.

Also, you pretty much have to ignore any altitude commands once on approach and use the approach plate altitudes (which should be in the FMS legs page if aircraft is equipped with FMS).