FSHUD feedback ?

[jcomm 5,938]

Any feedback from the Flight1 new Integrated ATC and AI solution would be great to read for me 😉

I have always been after a good product covering both of these areas in a flight simulator.

Please let me know your oppinions.

[vincentrouleau 71]

As a hole, very nice platform. Here are a few points for me ( after 3 flights...).

- Added realism of taxi interactions with AI adds to FS immersion

- Hearing STAR instructions to AI also adds to realism

- The UI panel is very functional

- My main 'immersion' factor for me would be to be in a STAR landing queue with spacing give by ATC. Although technically possible, it was not happened to me so far. Lacks landing AI.

- Flightplan creation has a learning curve. Its not strait simbrief cut&paste

- Wind direction for selecting AI landing runway is taken at the start of the flight, so that can be an issue

- The big one for one is CPU usage. Although performance has improve a lot since first release. Fshub still consumes ~%20 of my 8800K. So it does impact my FPS on approach and taxi out. So its sort of killer for me. With a CPU with more core, this would not be an issue.

This has the potential to become the ultimate ATC,

 

.... but now back to flying the PMDG 737 on MSFS. With the Fenix coming out also. I thing my MSFS/P3D usage ratio will tild towards MSFS.

Edited May 14, 2022 by vincentrouleau
Typo

[jcomm 5,938]

Vincent,

thank you for the important feedback !

[Darcy 63]

I love it and have ditched Proatc.  They have been very responsive to tickets and fix issues quite quickly.  Adds better immersion factor for me and I use it most flights.  This and "A pilots life chapter 2" have really made P3D v5 even better!   

 

Darcy

[Shomron 251]

22 hours ago, vincentrouleau said:

As a hole, very nice platform. Here are a few points for me ( after 3 flights...).

- Added realism of taxi interactions with AI adds to FS immersion

- Hearing STAR instructions to AI also adds to realism

- The UI panel is very functional

- My main 'immersion' factor for me would be to be in a STAR landing queue with spacing give by ATC. Although technically possible, it was not happened to me so far. Lacks landing AI.

- Flightplan creation has a learning curve. Its not strait simbrief cut&paste

- Wind direction for selecting AI landing runway is taken at the start of the flight, so that can be an issue

- The big one for one is CPU usage. Although performance has improve a lot since first release. Fshub still consumes ~%20 of my 8800K. So it does impact my FPS on approach and taxi out. So its sort of killer for me. With a CPU with more core, this would not be an issue.

This has the potential to become the ultimate ATC,

 

.... but now back to flying the PMDG 737 on MSFS. With the Fenix coming out also. I thing my MSFS/P3D usage ratio will tild towards MSFS.

Thanks for the detailed feedback! How is the vectoring mechanism? From initial approach to landing

[Nemo 1,305]

Vectoring is fine but it could be a bit more communication. Landing clearance comes very late sometimes.

Two things that are still an issue for me:

1. The amount of ai traffic is much too low at many places (e.g. KSFO shows only 12-15 a/c after running at least 30 minutes).

2. Possibility to use a saved flight situation is still missing.

 

[pgde 571]

On 5/14/2022 at 3:51 AM, vincentrouleau said:

As a hole, very nice platform. Here are a few points for me ( after 3 flights...).

-- Wind direction for selecting AI landing runway is taken at the start of the flight, so that can be an issue

Quote was edited for space -- does this mean that AI can't depend on the active weather? Winds can change overtime in a flight? Can it be changed in mid-flight? And does a flight need to be generated with FSHUD or is the ATC 'real-time'? Does the real-time weather (from Active Sky) have any effect on the ATC vectoring? One last question, does the AI follow a flight plan (ala Ultimate Traffic) or are they random?

Will probably buy this once FAA terminology is used rather than ICAO. I don't fly in Europe -- only North and Central America.

Thanks!

[vincentrouleau 71]

You can alter your approach/runway. But ,at this time, the AI landing runway will be set by the active weather at destination at time of takeoff. The AI follows SID/STARS no flight plan as the bgl does not have that info. For the MSFS beta maybe though. I don't know the source of the flightplan in the MSFS beta. This is very much a workin progress. I am sure this will evolve over time. I do believe this we be the ultimate ATC over time

[ha5mvo 253]

So if the atc is canned, as it’s pre-determined by the user, how is it different in principle to the default atc?

[Patco Lch 1,465]

Or RC4?

[Samaritano 304]

I bought it and have made two flights so far. None of the two flights had AI traffic. The flight plannig tool it's kind of confussing/complex. Coppyiing and pasting a flight plan from Simbrief was not accepted and had to be heavily modified.

From this: KFLL.10L^FL350 FEALX1 ETECK GRUBR AR16 SEELO OGGRE Y436 PITRW STOCR3 KCLT.18C

To this: KFLL.10L^FL350 FEALX1 FEALX ETECK ETECK DCT GRUBR AR16 SEELO DCT OGGRE Y436 PITRW PITRW FLLGG STOCR3 HANDO DCT OZEJI ILS KCLT.18C

I have a ticket open and hopefully the dev can help me sort this AI traffic problem.

 

So far I still preffer Pro ATC/X.

[FSHud 212]

5 hours ago, Samaritano said:

I bought it and have made two flights so far. None of the two flights had AI traffic. The flight plannig tool it's kind of confussing/complex. Coppyiing and pasting a flight plan from Simbrief was not accepted and had to be heavily modified.

From this: KFLL.10L^FL350 FEALX1 ETECK GRUBR AR16 SEELO OGGRE Y436 PITRW STOCR3 KCLT.18C

To this: KFLL.10L^FL350 FEALX1 FEALX ETECK ETECK DCT GRUBR AR16 SEELO DCT OGGRE Y436 PITRW PITRW FLLGG STOCR3 HANDO DCT OZEJI ILS KCLT.18C

I have a ticket open and hopefully the dev can help me sort this AI traffic problem.

 

So far I still preffer Pro ATC/X.

Hello,

We have respond in ticket that it seems like you are not using BGL version of AIG Traffic.
All explanation about why we decided to use BGL version could be found here:

https://www.simforums.com/forums/understanding-fshudair-traffic-control-traffic_topic64710.html 


Regarding flight plan "complexity" and all of the reasons behind it was also explained in following forum:

https://www.simforums.com/forums/first-flight_topic64745.html


Mostly, simBrief integration (which would be released together with MSFS version) will ease this process. 

Thank you

[Samaritano 304]

Thank you. I replied to my post over at simforums.

When I looked in my AIG traffic folder I saw all files ending in .bgl so I assumed it was a normal traffic file and not a AIG .bgl file.

At this time I think I'm going to request a refund to Flight1.  I wish the dev team the best. I might re-visit the software if/or when the features promised are added.

[Kaiii3 1,978]

On 5/16/2022 at 7:10 PM, Samaritano said:

Thank you. I replied to my post over at simforums.

When I looked in my AIG traffic folder I saw all files ending in .bgl so I assumed it was a normal traffic file and not a AIG .bgl file.

At this time I think I'm going to request a refund to Flight1.  I wish the dev team the best. I might re-visit the software if/or when the features promised are added.

AIG BGL files are "normal" BGL files and follow the default BGL file structure. So if the files end on BGL you do not use AIGFP files (the "new" traffic files)

[Samaritano 304]

10 hours ago, Kaiii3 said:

AIG BGL files are "normal" BGL files and follow the default BGL file structure. So if the files end on BGL you do not use AIGFP files (the "new" traffic files)

That’s what I thought. I do have a folder with AIGFP files and assumed those where the new AIG format. So FSHud should be reading these .BGL files and injecting traffic.