7 minutes ago, hvw said:

I couldn't agree more. A royal PITA that is, but I more or less got used to it. But let's not deviate from the subject of this thread too much. 🙂 Yes, MSFS2020's ATC sucks big time 🙂 

Yes it does, I use PF3.

That does not mean as some continue to imply that MSFS is only good for "fun flying" and P3d is required for "serious flying"  nor does it imply MSFS is only good for "sightseeing" though...   These are some of the original fallacies that were spread about MSFS's capabilities that are far from true today.  MSFS is very much IFR suitable, suitable for serious flying beyond sightseeing, has numerous advanced complex add-ons and has options like PF3 and FSHUD while not ideal works in MSFS fine.  

Edited August 6, 20223 yr by psolk

4 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I met and had dinner with the developer of RC4 many years ago in Atlanta. We had some lengthy discussions over dinner, and there was an ATC controller also at our table. It was a great program back in the day, but that day was over 2 decades ago. In terms of software development, that is ancient history. In the same way, P3D is based on another piece of software that was first published in around 40 years ago. What are we going to talk about next...."Is the floppy disk still relevant  today?"  😉

If that was 2006 I was there too courtesy of John Dekker and Doug Thompson.

Why should 16 years make any difference? Have the basic rules of ATC changed in that time?

Start down at the relevant point. Downwind, Base and 30° heading to intercept the localiser are as relevant today as then. Some thing don’t change. Your analogy doesn’t hold water.

11 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Years of being involved in flight sim suggests otherwise. There have been remarkably few third party ATC programs in the 27 years I’ve been using the original Microsoft Flight Sim and P3D.

If it’s as easy to write the code to emulate ATC as you suggest why haven’t those clever people at Asobo done it? From what I can see it’s more or less a copy and paste from FSX.

It doesn’t bother me in the slightest. I’ll only ever use MSFS for fun flying. My serious flying will remain with P3D where Radar Contact will always be my first choice.

I didn't say that it was "easy" to write code to emulate ATC (coding is not easy), I was indicating that the skills to do so are not nearly as inaccessible as you indicated. As to why Asobo hasn't done it? As I said its a matter of will, not a matter of skills for them. Top Gun Maverick and scenery have priority over flight dynamics, ATC, accurate weather depiction, or AI traffic. But then again there are plenty of things in MSFS / P3D / FSX that could or should have been done over 40 years that still haven't and not for a lack of ability - they just haven't been done because either Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, or 3rd parties have chosen not to.

 

 

Apparently it's a Flight SImulator not an Air Traffic Control simulator. Although so far they haven't managed to simulate flight particularly well so I hardly expect them to update the awful ATC.

I just turn it off as I fly VFR 95% of the time as in real life but I totally understand how frustrating it is for IFR flyers.

I notice that if you ignore the ATC (which happens alot when I forget to switch the voices off) they do sound quite aggressive when they "terminate the service". Must be the crack..

 

 

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

Gee, I must be doing something wrong. I have been flying IFR flights in MSFS since it was release, probably well over 2,000 flights by now almost all with my VA, on several different aircraft. Going back to P3D. for me, is like returning to DOS 3.1. 

Same. Well I have no idea how many hours I've got. But been flying mostly IFR since MSFS launched and my impression is that the sim just keeps improving in this regard. Now with the latest iteration of the Working Title G1000 GNXi (which will be the default one in SU10), excellent payware options like the TDS GTNXi GTN750/650 as well as the payware airliners and their LNAV/VNAV implementations, my opinion is that MSFS is as much a fully fledged IFR simulator as XP11. Haven't tried P3D. 

And by the way I use default ATC and IMO it's good enough in most situations. Yes it's very basic e.g. it won't do any sensible vectoring, but it handles SIDs, STARs and approaches well enough. Especially if you file an IFR flight plan prior to loading the flight. This is what I've been doing in my latest "project" which is flying the Cessna 414 Chancellor from Jakarta to London, and ATC has been doing a sensible job all along, apart from some descent instructions which have been a bit "wonky".

EDIT: One more thing actually. MSFS has frequent navdata updates and I haven't noticed many discrepancies so far.  

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Reinstall P3D for your IFR flights. Keep MSFS for the sightseeing. 😉

This is simply not true. At best it's a myth that refuses to go away 😉

Edited August 6, 20223 yr by Cpt_Piett

12 minutes ago, Mike T said:

I didn't say that it was "easy" to write code to emulate ATC (coding is not easy), I was indicating that the skills to do so are not nearly as inaccessible as you indicated. As to why Asobo hasn't done it? As I said its a matter of will, not a matter of skills for them. Top Gun Maverick and scenery have priority over flight dynamics, ATC, accurate weather depiction, or AI traffic. But then again there are plenty of things in MSFS / P3D / FSX that could or should have been done over 40 years that still haven't and not for a lack of ability - they just haven't been done because either Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, or 3rd parties have chosen not to.

If we really took the time to think about it, FSX had better ATC feature than MSFS 2020.

I'd go as far to say that I'm impressed with the visuals, performance, and stability of the sim. All other core features need improvement.

Edited August 6, 20223 yr by DJJose

Decided to create a POLL to see which ATC Program pilots are using for MSFS,  https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/622608-atc-program-survey/

1 hour ago, Alvega said:

Easy to understand why some threads are closed with "the thread has ran it's course". 😔

That thread that you refer to did run a bit hot at times, but most of the time the discussion was civil and relevant to the topic. 

unfortunately, it's a major undertaking to fully simulate ATC. You would definitely need some type of AI technology, which exists, to adjust procedures based on traffic. It would have to be versed in the many different ATC procedures around the world to be able to respond and adjust accordingly. That's a massive feature, it would be equal to or greater than the flight sim itself. Even it it was separate software, it has to be able to fully integrate with the sim and control traffic. Hopefully there is something in the works. One would have to become familiar with ATC procedures and regulations world wide to fully capture what's needed.

Rick 

25 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

This is simply not true. At best it's a myth that refuses to go away 😉

A suggestion cannot be wrong. Just as an opinion cannot be wrong.  😁

6 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Sadly, it’s unlikely ever to be available for MSFS.

It’s a forlorn hope that the default ATC will improve

You mean based on the fact FSX, and that P3D didn't bother to develop it further?  FSX also didn't do squat with scenery, default aircraft were useless, default weather was weak, and so much more.  Saying it's 'unlikely' based on the history of something very different is not particularly useful now looking at a team with huge resources and commitment to MSFS' future.  Default MSFS ATC has improved remarkably in many ways.  It does things FSX/P3D could never do.  Absolutely it needs attention and tuning but very often it's remarkably spot on, for example when following a very tight STAR into Cusco, PE with critical descent calls along the way.  You can't beat how it acknowledges actual real flight activity from FlightAware and coordinates incoming and outgoing traffic quite well--it falls down when you for example decide to pause the sim while you go eat breakfast, then return and resume, only to have to grapple with this lack of sync, but even then it does quite well.  I don't believe it has all that far to go to iron out some chronic weaknesses in it, and I'll bet they'll get to it, and will hire consultants as required, of course.

MSFS ATC is good enough.  If you want to use a 3rd party option.  The mindless ATC whipping needs to stop.

sp

7 minutes ago, Noel said:

Saying it's 'unlikely' based on the history of something very different is not particularly useful now looking at a team with huge resources and commitment to MSFS' future.  Default MSFS ATC has improved remarkably in many ways.  It does things FSX/P3D could never do. 

A few questions...

1) Does it still have a universal transition altitude of 18,000ft?

2) Can you have a call sign of “Speedbird 1”? I honestly wouldn’t expect “Speedbird Concorde 1” since it no longer flies. 😉

3) Are you told off for not climbing to your assigned altitude/ FL? Likewise for descent.

4) If there’s another aircraft on your landing runway are you instructed to go-around?

5) When taxiing to my departure runway am I instructed to contact Tower enroute?

6) Does it use hPa for non-FAA airports and inches for FAA ones in the ATIS?

Just curious as I don’t have MSFS so can’t answer these myself.

19 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

A few questions...

1) Does it still have a universal transition altitude of 18,000ft?

Yes unfortunately. 

2) Can you have a call sign of “Speedbird 1”? I honestly wouldn’t expect “Speedbird Concorde 1” since it no longer flies. 😉

Yes you can 🙂

3) Are you told off for not climbing to your assigned altitude/ FL? Likewise for descent.

Yes. If you don't ATC will constantly tell you off. 

4) If there’s another aircraft on your landing runway are you instructed to go-around?

Yes. 

5) When taxiing to my departure runway am I instructed to contact Tower enroute?

No. When requesting a taxi clearance you are notified to contact tower. Which you can do any time on the way to the holding point, but you cannot request takeoff clearance until you're at the holding point 🙂

6) Does it use hPa for non-FAA airports and inches for FAA ones in the ATIS?

Unfortunately no. This and the universal 18,000ft transition altitude is one of my biggest gripes with default ATC. 

Others - please correct me if I'm wrong. 

Edited August 6, 20223 yr by Cpt_Piett

@Cpt_Piett, thanks. Sounds like some aspects have improved since FSX but two big ones remain.