25 minutes ago, Falconfly said:

Does FSHUD create it's own traffic like vocatc? Have you noticed any conflicts like an opposite side takeoff for example? 

There have been conflicts but Fshud is being actively developped, what you are buying is early acces. Most of the time two updates per week. It has improved a lot lately!

It creates its own traffic, I use it with simple traffic.

I also used ProATC, but gave up on it during P3D times. It has the same issues with vectoring or handing you off to other areas back and forth or forgetting you at some point like all the other ATC programs I have used. Also, only one "minor" update in a year usually, so no way I will cash out more money on it unless I see some real improvements coming up. I do not need SR, and as others said, it has the same bugs as back when I used it in P3D. I would also assume it is same code for most parts. Also, the mixing of voices is a complete immersion killer.

I will keep an eye on FSHud which seems to be promising, although I actually would rather wait until the tools can interact with the Asobo traffic (AI and/or injected live traffic) before I make the final choice. And I want both VFR and IFR, even though MS ATC is not that bad anymore.

Until then I will stick with PF3. It also forgets me now and then and it URGENTLY needs a real user interface instead of some web browser window and short cuts for you to figure out what to press at what time, but it covers VFR and IFR, does its job most of the times pretty ok, has a lot of voices (even after deactiving the terrible or less convincing ones) and has at least some more updates in a year.

Only tried P2ATC in a demo version and it did not convince me for the price asked.

And yes, I surely will go VATSIM at some point but I still do not have the time to fully commit to it and do not want to a) embarrasse me too much and b) not ruin the experience for others by asking/doing stupid things. 😉

 

 

5 minutes ago, Heavy Metal said:

 

I will keep an eye on FSHud which seems to be promising, although I actually would rather wait until the tools can interact with the Asobo traffic (AI and/or injected live traffic) before I make the final choice. And I want both VFR and IFR, even though MS ATC is not that bad anymore.

 

 

 

Why would FShud want to interact with Asobe traffic? It generates its own traffic, so no Asobe needed!

I know, but why would I want an ATC tool to generate its own traffic? In my view that´s just a workaround to be able to interact with traffic. However, I want an ATC tool to access the traffic which is in the sim, be it by Asobo live traffic or maybe Just Flight Traffic once released or another tool injecting live traffic, etc. I do not want programs conflicting with each other. An ATC program should do ATC, not traffic. Understood, not possible at the moment, but in the long term that should be the target. Just my opinion of course.

2 minutes ago, Heavy Metal said:

I know, but why would I want an ATC tool to generate its own traffic? In my view that´s just a workaround to be able to interact with traffic. However, I want an ATC tool to access the traffic which is in the sim, be it by Asobo live traffic or maybe Just Flight Traffic once released or another tool injecting live traffic, etc. I do not want programs conflicting with each other. An ATC program should do ATC, not traffic. Understood, not possible at the moment, but in the long term that should be the target. Just my opinion of course.

FSHud reads BGL files, so if you use Simple Traffic or AIG it will generate the traffic from that.

I use with Simple Traffic and in China I see Chinese planes and at EHAM KLM etc.

1 minute ago, rob0203 said:

FSHud reads BGL files, so if you use Simple Traffic or AIG it will generate the traffic from that.

I use with Simple Traffic and in China I see Chinese planes and at EHAM KLM etc.

Ae you talking about liveries being used by FSHud or also about the flight schedules the planes are using? Where are flight plans taken from by FSHud? Does it have its own database, does it use current schedules, are these updated, does it use fictional routes? That´s what I mean. We have "live" information in MSFS (even if it is delayed by some minutes), we have or will get external tools with flight plans (hopefully accurate ones). And if I wanted to use them, can I then still use FSHUd with those? And do not say "why would you want to use those if FSHud already provides that" because if these programs do a better job regarding traffic then why would I want to let this pass? I think an ATC program should read the traffic which is used in the sim, no matter the source from where it is taken instead of ignoring it and just using its own.And of course, my intention is not to say FSHud is bad. I think it is pretty good actually as far as I can judge. I am just concerned with this part of it.

But I think this should be enough about FSHud when the thread actually is about Pro ATC.

I don’t have answer to all of your questions, if you want to learn more ask developers FsHud on their support forum

For me I see correct liveries at airports now I see a believable environment.

I run a flightsimator not a airline schedule simulator but of course everybody likes what he wants!

Edited September 8, 20223 yr by rob0203

So two of your 5 points are a) you trying to change your ATC tool mid-flight and b) you starting your flight at the wrong airport.

Your last point is usually an indication the flight plan you are following isn't exactly the same as the one in ProATC-X.  Whether that's the software or whether it's the underling navdata is a mystery.  I've just flown a STAR in the Fenix A320 and what appears in the aircraft (from Simbrief) isn't the same as what in the Navigraph (owner or Simbrief)'s charts, so there are a lot of possible reasons for that.

I agree with you on the other two i.e. being able to minimise the pop-up and on sound configurations.  It's the only product I use that you can't force to use a particular device through Windows sound settings.

 

When it comes to the comparison between FSHud and Pro ATC SR after a few posts its often the same. Pro ATC SR is not actively enough developed based on the experience in the past and FSHud is promising based on the current development.

But people should take what is currently there and not what was happening in the past or will happen in the future. 

And from that perspective FSHud still misses a lot of things which a ATC tool should do (for example assigning STARs and runways for landing based on weather etc.) which Pro ATC SR does. So from that perspective Pro ATC SR is currently the more enhanced ATC solution than FSHud with some usability limitation. 

Maybe FSHud will come that far. But I'm flying now. Therefore I use Pro ATC SR and will observe the development of FSHud.

On 9/7/2022 at 9:57 PM, sunny_in_the_sky said:

It keeps trying to give you weird heading changes mid flight when there are none needed.

Open the map in PRO ATC SR and check where you are compared to the flight plan in PRO ATC SR. I guess there is a mismatch between the the one in the plane and the one in PRO ATC SR and ATC now wants to correct you.

If you get a direct or can anticipate that ATC wants to bring you back to your flightplan I often make a direct even if slightly deviating from ATC heading. As soon as you then pass the transition ATC is happy again and is letting you doing own navigation. 

14 hours ago, gb09f said:

I'm lucky to have 2 monitors

Yeah, it was designed with the expectation that you use multiple monitors, which I feel is a flawed assumption. They offer a shortcut to show and hide the main window, so why not also the smaller one?

10 hours ago, ailchim said:

So two of your 5 points are a) you trying to change your ATC tool mid-flight and b) you starting your flight at the wrong airport.

Your last point is usually an indication the flight plan you are following isn't exactly the same as the one in ProATC-X.  Whether that's the software or whether it's the underling navdata is a mystery.  I've just flown a STAR in the Fenix A320 and what appears in the aircraft (from Simbrief) isn't the same as what in the Navigraph (owner or Simbrief)'s charts, so there are a lot of possible reasons for that.

I agree with you on the other two i.e. being able to minimise the pop-up and on sound configurations.  It's the only product I use that you can't force to use a particular device through Windows sound settings.

 

I agree that A is a 'nice to have feature', but B should be handled in a more graceful manner. I personally end up having to load up at multiple airports all the time, for example to test the latest GSX bugs and what airports they are happening at. I think it's reasonable to expect wrong airport loading.

Regarding the last point, I am following the same path in Pro Atc, and have the latest Navigraph updates. I load the same flight plan from simbrief into both pro atc and fms, so they should be the same.

 

12 hours ago, ailchim said:

So two of your 5 points are a) you trying to change your ATC tool mid-flight and b) you starting your flight at the wrong airport.

Your last point is usually an indication the flight plan you are following isn't exactly the same as the one in ProATC-X.  Whether that's the software or whether it's the underling navdata is a mystery.  I've just flown a STAR in the Fenix A320 and what appears in the aircraft (from Simbrief) isn't the same as what in the Navigraph (owner or Simbrief)'s charts, so there are a lot of possible reasons for that.

I agree with you on the other two i.e. being able to minimise the pop-up and on sound configurations.  It's the only product I use that you can't force to use a particular device through Windows sound settings.

 

You can force a particular device in sound settings windows, but only after Pro Atc is loaded in MSFS flight.

Somehow all my background chatter disappears after restart then but do not know for sure if it is related to the above.

It deletes Oceanic Tracks on its own and puts in waypoints that are not even on the scheduled/published flight route once "Fly Now" selected. It does not recognize waypoints that are coordinates (ie 57N40), And lately I've noticed that in the airport database, it is not saving the preferences for preferred runways under X knots winds, or closing runways to landings/takeoff. So for example, with calm winds at KLAX ProATC-SR wants to use the 6s and 7s but in real life the 6s and 7s are almost never used (I lived in LA and can say that for a fact) because of noise ordinances in place. Additionally, at KBHM there is a small runway of just over 3,000 feet that ProATC-SR wants to use, but again, that would never be used by commercial traffic because it is too short. Because ProATC-SR is not saving these preference changes, the only way to fix it is to modify the original scenery folder which is far more work than needs to be done, if it can be done at all. And at least 1 of the default ATC voices does not even read the full instruction saying something like " D A L 123, 14.7" or "D A L 123, 22R" when it should be "Delta 123, contact center on 114.7" or "Delta 123, taxi to and hold short of runway 22R via..."

I've been saying since the early ProATC-X days that the program is flawed. With -SR all they did was take the latest -X version (which was highly flawed), slap a new coat of paint on it, add in the voice capabilities, and call it new. As I said before regarding this product: you can't take a car out of the junk yard, slap a new coat of paint on it, change the radio and call it new - the underlying problems that were broken are still there and still broken.

What upset me most about -SR was the promise of more frequent updates that never manifested. We were promised an update in August that was supposed to fix the ATC phraseology and the Oceanic Tracks and coordinates waypoints issues. Well, it's the end of October and that update never came, and its been silent from the developer and even the biggest supporters of Pro ATC like Mike Collins have gone silent and stopped promoting the word not allowed out of the product - likely because they have now realized just how much they contributed in scamming people into buying this product with the lies of updates and improved/fix functionality.

However, and with great sadness, I still use Pro ATC only because it is the only ATC program out there that offers random SID and STARS, STARS and runways can change with updated weather, and it talks to AI traffic throughout the flight, amongst a couple of other features that are not available from another ATC program at this time.

On Pro ATC: this is one of the very few - or maybe even the only - add-on that I spent money on (believing some of the hype around it), used once, and never touched again. Sure there are a lot of flawed products out there, but this is the only one I can recall that gets promoted when in fact it is extraordinarily user-unfriendly, has fundamental issues (a lot of which you can find in this thread) that would require a complete redesign/re-code, and has been so for some time. Buyer beware.