1 hour ago, Kaiii3 said:

for that we need a solid SDK first.....

Yes I agree.

How are things going with FSHud? Been away for a while and had a look at some video's. Yes, it may not be a HUGE improvement over the default ATC but I do see a few interesting things, like ATC assigning the approach at an appropriate time (unlike default ATC which assigns it WAAAAAY too late), no constant switching between controllers, the option to easily change cruising alt (or even approaches)... all in all it does look like a cleaned up version of default ATC and I am thinking about getting it anyway now... Just curious if there have been any updates lately?

1 hour ago, tup61 said:

How are things going with FSHud? Been away for a while and had a look at some video's. Yes, it may not be a HUGE improvement over the default ATC but I do see a few interesting things, like ATC assigning the approach at an appropriate time (unlike default ATC which assigns it WAAAAAY too late), no constant switching between controllers, the option to easily change cruising alt (or even approaches)... all in all it does look like a cleaned up version of default ATC and I am thinking about getting it anyway now... Just curious if there have been any updates lately?

Ive looked into it big time and my conclusion was to wait. Its better but not much. e.g climb to 4,000ft always....really!!

pilot2atc looks a dogs dinner and you need voice

Pf3 looks the best to me and you can use button/Co pilot, I was going to buy it....untill I heard the voices...OMG....🤥

So saddly sticking to default and ATC Chatter thats brilliant.

Edited June 28, 20223 yr by Nyxx

1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

Ive looked into it big time and my conclusion was to wait. Its better but not much. e.g climb to 4,000ft always....really!!

pilot2atc looks a dogs dinner and you need voice

Pf3 looks the best to me and you can use button/Co pilot, I was going to buy it....untill I heard the voices...OMG....🤥

So saddly sticking to default and ATC Chatter thats brilliant.

That is pretty much my conclusion as well and I returned FSHud for a refund. Currently, it doesn't offer enough improvements over default to justify the cost and the features that are lost by using it. I hope that changes in the future.

1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

pilot2atc looks a dogs dinner and you need voice

 

I was completely uninterested in the voice aspect of it, until I got it then realised how much better it was. More to the point though I can't imagine using it without a second screen - even if the UI is a bit (????), although in all fairness having used RC and tried PF3 I haven't found one that didn't have a bit of rubbish UI......

 

G

My problem with it is you have to follow an arrow and if you miss the checkpoint it completely screws up your entire flight unless you fly back and hit the waypoint

How awful to see another immature product published! I hold back. Not because of the price, but the effort is not worth the anger and annoyance.

The easy solution to the weather problem is to let the user select the used runway at the destination. After all, he might be using his own weather to setup for interesting approaches! I am preaching this to Traffic Global since years, also in vain.

1 minute ago, flyingpauls said:

How awful to see another immature product published! I hold back. Not because of the price, but the effort is not worth the anger and annoyance.

The easy solution to the weather problem is to let the user select the used runway at the destination. After all, he might be using his own weather to setup for interesting approaches! I am preaching this to Traffic Global since years, also in vain.

I think you can do this but the problem is that all the traffic that the ATC is managing will be using the wrong runways. I agree this program just isn’t ready. You can complain about an immature SDK but if your program can’t do what it’s meant to do then it just needs to either wait for that SDK or find a proper workaround.

Okay, well, I'll wait then. ;)

1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

pilot2atc looks a dogs dinner and you need voice

So you think that needing voice, as in reality, is a bad thing? 

2 hours ago, Nyxx said:

...

pilot2atc looks a dogs dinner and you need voice

..

You dont need to use voice input with Pilot2ATC. There are predefined phrases (sorted by action like "Request"- "Clearance") which can be used for the copilot (you click it, and the copilot says it). The copilot can also automatically do readbacks.

Theres also a extented phrase generator for inputing variables (like request flight level increase of "xxx" feet).

49 minutes ago, Alvega said:

So you think that needing voice, as in reality, is a bad thing? 

I did not say that did I?……

I have my set up in the lounge so I can talk to the wife when she talks to me, So as she is watching TV she does not want me to be talking to ATC and I wear headphones 

OK!

13 minutes ago, Merawen said:

You dont need to use voice input with Pilot2ATC. There are predefined phrases (sorted by action like "Request"- "Clearance") which can be used for the copilot (you click it, and the copilot says it). The copilot can also automatically do readbacks.

Theres also a extented phrase generator for inputing variables (like request flight level increase of "xxx" feet).

That’s interesting I will have another look, thank you.

I've noticed a few nice updates to the program over the last 10  days or so. The program now injects more AI traffic. I tried at KBOS and went to a tower view and saw about 15 planes at the gates after a few minutes  FSHud also gets weather through an online source which should help with runway assignments. The program still has a ways to go but it's definitely moving in the right direction.

Mark

 

 

 

I have made several flights now by using FSHud, and I think I will stick with it. Yes, there are some problems still present, but at the end I think it is more realistic than default ATC. For instance the commands when entering the runway seems to be more like real behaviour.

Anyhow this tool has great potential, and the support is ABSOLUTELY outstanding. 

Patric