I really enjoy the MCE interface and have mastered most of the ATC commands using NATIVE ATC in MSFS 2020.

However, I have some issues with the ATC command 'Cleared to (ILS, VOR, VOR DME, etc) runway (xx) approach..." command. Basically, I only have so many chances to get it right before I'm too close and use the 'option one' command.

I'm trying to figure out how I can set up MSFS 2020 to practice this ATC command over and over so that I get it right without the need to reload the flight from the beginning and completely fly the entire flight.

I'm hoping for some suggestions...

Edited January 9, 20224 yr by flyblueskies

1 hour ago, flyblueskies said:

I really enjoy the MCE interface and have mastered most of the ATC commands using NATIVE ATC in MSFS 2020.

However, I have some issues with the ATC command 'Cleared to (ILS, VOR, VOR DME, etc) runway (xx) approach..." command. Basically, I only have so many chances to get it right before I'm too close and use the 'option one' command.

I'm trying to figure out how I can set up MSFS 2020 to practice this ATC command over and over so that I get it right without the need to reload the flight from the beginning and completely fly the entire flight.

I'm hoping for some suggestions...

 

In general, we try to enforce good ATC phraseology.

For instance, all requests must follow this pattern

station_you_are_calling + call_sign + some_request_verbiage_variation + actual_request

it's important to start with station_you_are_calling (Heathrow ground", "Frankfurt tower", "Delivery", "London approach" etc) because in real life, it gets the controller's attention immediately and lets other traffic ignore what's coming next.

Next comes the call-sign so the controller knows exactly who is calling

some_request_verbiage_variation is self explanatory ("ready for", "requesting", "standing by for" etc)

actual_request comes last.

That's the kind of rule MCE tries to enforce.

True, because many users have little knowledge of proper ATC phraseology, over the years and because of "perceived rigidness" (Not getting any reply), we reluctantly allowed things like "Speedbird 431  requesting taxi clearance", it's definitely not a good habit though. 

In the real world, you'll get away with that sort of transmission at a remote airport with single traffic where the controller is already aware of your departure and ready to grant, clearance, taxi and what not.

At a busy airport, it becomes a nuisance, because normally, starting with call_sign is a prerogative of the ATC controller so that the intended receipient can start listening to what comes next. This kind of transmission often leads to replies such as "station calling say again".

We always do our best to ensure as many variations are accounted for, but we will never cover all scenarios.

Tell me which speech commands come to you naturally for that specific request and we'll check the ATC spech grammar to see if it expects that kind of speech and eventually update it if it's a valid ATC message that was overlooked.

Edited January 9, 20224 yr by FS++

1 hour ago, FS++ said:

station_you_are_calling + call_sign + some_request_verbiage_variation + actual_request

We always do our best to ensure as many variations are accounted for, but we will never cover all scenarios.

Tell me which speech commands come to you naturally for that specific request and we'll check the ATC spech grammar to see if it expects that kind of speech and eventually update it if it's a valid ATC message that was overlooked.

Well, I do not have problems requesting something...

I have difficulty acknowledging a 'Cleared ILS (or VOR, etc) approach...' command.

Anyway, ATC tells me that I am 'Cleared to ILS runway 24 approach" and I want to acknowledge the command. I said "Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, 9KQ". I do not believe I mentioned the station.

The prior ATC communication was ATC 'Expect ILS 24 approach..." and I acknowledged 'Expect ILS 24 approach, 9KQ'.

That worked OK with ATC (I believe without stating the station name).

I do not believe I included 'Roger' as in 'Roger, expect ILS 24 approach, 9KQ'.

So, I assumed, right or wrong, that acknowledging the next set of commands, 'Cleared ILS 24 approach...' would work too, but I was not successful.

However, I don't mind saying the correct verbiage as long as I know what to consistently say.

But, back to my question...

Is there any way I can setup a scenario where I can practice this set of commands over and over to condition myself to say the right things?

Edited January 9, 20224 yr by flyblueskies

1 hour ago, flyblueskies said:

"Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, 9KQ"

Is there any way I can setup a scenario where I can practice this set of commands over and over to condition myself to say the right things?

That reply is correct and should be handled OK.

The rule I meantioned earlier what "requests rule". It doen't apply to the above

In this case you're acknowledging something and the MCE speech rule that is enforced is to have the call-sign at the end of the message.

acknowledge_whatever + call_sign and obviously no need to mention station you're calling.

MCE loads a different speech grammar for ATC depending on the type of call-sign you're usning.

One speech grammar optmized for airliners so the speech engine can expect things like "Tower Air berlin 234 holding point 25 left ready for takeoff"

Another one for GA planes with typical call-signs

Cessna November Mike Tango six Bravo (full callsign including aircraft type and full tail registration

Lear Mike Tango six Bravo (entire tail registration only)

Beech Niner Kilo Quebec (aircraft_type + last 3 digits in tail registration"

Assuming MCE loaded the correct grammar, add the aircraft type before the last "9KQ" because speech engine expects you to speak something that sounds like "Cessna", "Baron" or whatever GA type of plane. Maybe a new one needs to be added to the list

To satisfy the acknowledgment and call-sign rules, try "Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, aircraft_type 9KQ" or without aircraft type but more than the last 3 digits.

Which call-sign did you select in MSFS settings? Is it intended as a GA traffic (as I'm guessing) or airliner? And what type of aircraft is it?

1 hour ago, FS++ said:

To satisfy the acknowledgment and call-sign rules, try "Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, aircraft_type 9KQ" or without aircraft type but more than the last 3 digits.

Which call-sign did you select in MSFS settings? Is it intended as a GA traffic (as I'm guessing) or airliner? And what type of aircraft is it?

OK, I'll give that a try.

The aircraft is the GA SWS Kodiak.

I'm using the standard Kodiak call sign with that plan, N269KQ.

I take it that there is no way to setup a scenario where I can keep resetting to test for the correct acknowledgement.

Just wondering how you test...

2 hours ago, flyblueskies said:

OK, I'll give that a try.

The aircraft is the GA SWS Kodiak.

I'm using the standard Kodiak call sign with that plan, N269KQ.

I take it that there is no way to setup a scenario where I can keep resetting to test for the correct acknowledgement.

Just wondering how you test...

We use a tool that comes with the Microsoft Speech SDK (we use the C++ part of the SDK by the way) to test the speech grammars statically. That means adding specific airport and airline names.

But nothing beats testing in the sim, where some variables kick-in.

For instance, thanks to the ability to read the ATC menu, MCE can dynamically update the speech grammar (when a new airport name shows up) so that it can easily pick-up things like "Biggin tower" "Trivandrum ground" and of course inject an airliner call-sign that can be anything. The alternative is to put 20 000+ airport names, 800+ airline names and hope for the best. Not reliable.

There is nothing preventing you testing though.

Just be aware, due to optimizations, some speech rules are enabled only when on ground (requests for taxi and takeoff) and others only when airborne.

Just get off the ground, get yourself into an ATC menu that doesn't have "Acknowledge whatever", then keep transmitting "Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, 9KQ" and see what the speech engine is picking up. Nothing will be selected on the menu if such option isn't present..

It's unlikely to be a speech recognition issue related to accent. Maybe just needs a tweak to the grammar. I'm not sure whether "kodiak" was ever taken into account, but then, normally MCE would get the aircraft type from the sim anyway (assuming MSFS provides it as was the case with FSX and Pepar3D).

 

Edited January 9, 20224 yr by FS++

Thank you Gerald,

I've tried several times again and there are two acknowledgments I have trouble with:

1. APPROACH tells me "9KQ, you are 17 miles east of Vigra. Contact Tower on 118.1 when inbound on the approach"

I tried "Tower on 118.1, 9KQ". This did not work.

I tried "Contact Tower on 118.1 when inbound on the approach, 9KQ". This did not work.

In both cases APPROACH responded with "9KQ, did you copy?" and "9KQ, acknowledge last transmission".

I finally simply said "Roger, 9KQ" and MCE interpreted, and ATC responded with "Tower on 118.1, 9KQ" and "Tower, N269KQ, 14 miles northeast, inbound ILS runway 24 approach".

Here is the ATC picture:

 

 

 

2. Tower cleared me to ILS runway 24 approach by saying "N269KQ, Tower, Altimeter 29.85 Wind 128 at 19. Cleared ILS runway 24 approach".

This is the last interaction in the picture above.

I responded, "Cleared ILS runway 24, 9KQ" and "Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, 9KQ" but in both cases, I did not get any response either from MCE or ATC.

I finally simply said "Roger, 9KQ". MCE/ATC finally responded with "Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, 9KQ".

So, in these two cases, the only acknowledgement that works for me is "Roger, 9KQ'".

I'm not sure what I am doing wrong...

This is an IFR flight from ENSD to OMABI to ENAL. The flight plan is at 6000 feet. The plane is the Kodiak 100 with the NXI G-1000. I follow the plan until ATC clears me to ILS 24 via VABOP, direct to VABOP.

All MCE/ATC works in all cases except the two situations above. Again, in those two cases the only working solution I found is 'Roger, 9KQ'

 

 

 

 

Edited January 9, 20224 yr by flyblueskies

Just my 2 cents worth,

Try saying "Roger" first then the rest of your statement as "Roger" is the trigger word for most acknowledgements. For ex. "Roger, 9KQ Cleared ILS runway 24" or "Roger, Contact Tower on 118.1 9KQ".

 

Tony J

Thanks Tony! I was just thinking the same thing!

I'll give that a try...

More feedback...

Tried the same flight again...still having problems.

Approach said "9KQ, you are 17 miles east of Vigra. Contact Tower on 118.1 when inbound".

I tried several responses without success...

"Roger, Contact Tower on 118.1, 9KQ"

"Roger, 9KQ, contact tower on 118.1"

"Contact Tower on 118.1, 9kQ".

None of the above worked...

Finally, simply said "Roger, 9KQ" and MCE/ATC responded.

 

 

Same problems with 'Cleared to ILS runway 24 approach"...only "Roger, 9KQ" works

I don't know what else to try except continue saying 'Roger, 9KQ" with these two acknowledgments.

All other MCE/ATC interactions works great.

 

 

2 hours ago, flyblueskies said:

More feedback...

Tried the same flight again...still having problems.

Approach said "9KQ, you are 17 miles east of Vigra. Contact Tower on 118.1 when inbound".

I tried several responses without success...

"Roger, Contact Tower on 118.1, 9KQ"

"Roger, 9KQ, contact tower on 118.1"

"Contact Tower on 118.1, 9kQ".

None of the above worked...

Finally, simply said "Roger, 9KQ" and MCE/ATC responded.

 

 

Same problems with 'Cleared to ILS runway 24 approach"...only "Roger, 9KQ" works

I don't know what else to try except continue saying 'Roger, 9KQ" with these two acknowledgments.

All other MCE/ATC interactions works great.

 

 

Try speaking the aircraft type "kodiak" or whatever is shown in MCE UI under ATC tab.

Remember, when only using the last 3 digits of the tail registration, a valid call-sign should include the aircraft type (Kodiak Niner Kilo Quebec).

The ATC speech grammar will be tweaked anyway.

I realize now, one has to look-up what MSFS is displating as some people will rely on that.

We could make it 100% reliable by forcing users to say one specific thing for specific requests or acknowledgment. That would mean instructions such as "start with "copy" or "roger", trips to the manual to check what you need to say. Not fun at all.

Instead, we assume the user is a real world pilot and trained in proper ATC phraseology.

The challenge is then for us to design a flexible ATC speech grammar that can catch most of the valid variations, so the real world pilot doesn't have to read the documentation at all. At least that's the idea.

But despite tweaking those grammar files for a decade, there is always the odd spoken sentence that doesn't make it through the grammar speech rules.

You guys just need to report those, and thank you for doing just that.

.

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by FS++

Thank you Gerald,

I'll try adding Kodiak to my call sign.

I do have a VFR pilot license, but honestly, have not flown in many years. I did not fly enough to develop ATC communication skills that come naturally...so, I really enjoy using MCE/ATC to help me develop that.

I definitely understand the challenges in developing the grammar speech rules.

Thank you for hanging in there and continuing to help me. I really do appreciate it!

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by flyblueskies

23 minutes ago, flyblueskies said:

Thank you Gerald,

I'll try adding Kodiak to my call sign.

Thank you for hanging in there and continuing to help me. I really do appreciate it!

My pleasure.

One more example

Currently the speech grammar can handle, among many other variations....

Cleared ILS runway 24 approach kodiak 8KQ"

Cleared ILS approach runway 24 kodiak 8KQ"

Cleared full  ILS runway 24 approach kodiak 8KQ"

Cleared full  ILS approach runway 24 kodiak 8KQ"

 

... and optionally precede above sentences with "roger", "copy", "roger copy", "wilco"....

But not prepared for...

Cleared to ILS runway 24 approach kodiak 8KQ" (unless the "to" wasn't emphesized.)

A simple edit to the grammar will ensure it does.

The same can be said of "Cleared for ILS runway 24 approach kodiak 8KQ" which was overlooked too.

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by FS++

OK,

There is one set of ATC commands that I cannot answer correctly. This starts the initial "...please acknowledge..." complaints from ATC.

ATC says: 9KQ, you are 17 miles east of Vigra. Contact Tower on 118.1 when inbound"

I tried:

"Tower, on 118.1, Kodiak 9KQ".

MCE/ATC did not like this and ATC kept complaining several more times as I desperately tried to communicate correctly. Finally, ATC cancelled my IFR flight!

I've circled the problematic ATC command in RED below:

My question is, how to correctly answer ATC?

I am not yet on TOWER, I'm with APPROACH.

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by flyblueskies

Finally got past the above...

The clue was in the ATC response: "1. Acknowledge Approach Clearance."

I spoke "Cleared ILS runway 24 approach, Kodiak 9KQ"

MCE/ATC responded correctly, and I moved to the next set of commands.

Besides understanding the correct ATC response, I also have to read the ATC text to help me understand which response MCE/ATC requires. I normally do not keep the ATC window open, but in these cases, it helps me to know what is expected.