Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rob0203

FSHud 1.3. Beta Wow!!!!

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nixoq said:

You don't have to justify why it's not a feature, it was just a question.

You're right in that separation is a big part of oceanic procedures, but ORCA is also about being outside of radar coverage and VHF range, having to switch to HF, conducting HF and SELCAL checks with ATC, dropping position reports, comparing waypoint ETAs to inform ATC of discrepancies to correct in order to ensure separation, etc. ORCA also doesn't only apply to long hauls crossing the big pond, I just flew a 1h40 flight through class II airspace (through PF3 which admittedly was a rather lacking experience) from Newark to Bermuda. Crossing the Gulf of Mexico on a 1h30-ish flight from Houston to Cancún for example also involves class II navigation.

I don't really get the argumentation to be honest, when it comes to separation this really is pretty much the same principle as separating aircraft on approach; assign speeds to maintain that separation. Given FSHud does this based on actual traffic movements there is no reason to ask for what the base behind a speed assignment in oceanic airspace is, because it's the same as why FSHud assign speeds on approach. In fact, given FSHud controls traffic this really is the only ATC program where oceanic separation and position reports actually make sense. Imagine getting a mach number assigned based on the AI aircraft in front of you in class II airspace, how cool would that be.

That said, it really was just a question whether it does or doesn't simulate it since FSHud actually controls traffic and separation. If it's coming later that's fine. I'm about to pull the trigger on FSHud, btw, since this thread has convinced me of it delivering more than other ATC programs I've used.

In any case - this operation should be handled and performed by AI Traffic aircraft on the same level as well - my vision and meaning of "separation" is less about ATC with radar controlled airspace.
It is more about AI Aircraft behavior - no matter where it is located.
A good example of pattern flight or approach of uncontrolled aerodrome - same "separation" logic should be applied.

But besides that, my mention was not about Oceanic/Airspace, but more about prioritize development tasks.
All what you've quoted with [..] exactly gives explanation WHY it is currently not supported (and seems like wouldn't be supported in 1.3 version) with all the reasons besides that.

I think what you're talking about, your oceanic flights - there are adventures and missions (some can be even created using SDK) which can be completely capable for such type of flights.

Edited by FSHud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, FSHud said:

In any case - this operation should be handled and performed by AI Traffic aircraft on the same level as well - my vision and meaning of "separation" is less about ATC with radar controlled airspace.
It is more about AI Aircraft behavior - no matter where it is located.
A good example of pattern flight or approach of uncontrolled aerodrome - same "separation" logic should be kept but without "ATC Chatting".

But besides that, my mention was not about Oceanic/Airspace, but more about prioritize development tasks.
All what you've quoted with [..] exactly gives explanation WHY it is currently not supported (and seems like wouldn't be supported in 1.3 version) with all the reasons besides that.

FSHud does separate traffic and it gives speed assignments though, doesn't it? Or did I get that wrong? If it does, all I'm saying is that oceanic procedure simulation, including but not limited to separation, would basically just be separating aircraft like on an approach or a SID or a STAR, just in a different scenario. Since FSHud actually has control over the AI, it would be an ideal program to make use of oceanic procedures - specifically separation (not chatting only but actually separating).

I'm not disagreeing with prioritizing other things over this. It's really just food for thought and would be cool if implemented at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

FSHud does separate traffic and it gives speed assignments though, doesn't it? Or did I get that wrong? If it does, all I'm saying is that oceanic procedure simulation, including but not limited to separation, would basically just be separating aircraft like on an approach or a SID or a STAR, just in a different scenario. Since FSHud actually has control over the AI, it would be an ideal program to make use of oceanic procedures - specifically separation (not chatting only but actually separating).

I'm not disagreeing with prioritizing other things over this. It's really just food for thought and would be cool if implemented at some point.

This is exactly what I mean.
By the end - all "separation" is kind of framework that is only about how to control and pilot AI Aircraft according different parameters.

In any case - it is written in our roadmap to support Oceanic Procedures.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FSHud said:

This is exactly what I mean.
By the end - all "separation" is kind of framework that is only about how to control and pilot AI Aircraft according different parameters.

In any case - it is written in our roadmap to support Oceanic Procedures.

Sorry but he asked if FSHud gives speed assignments and you didn't answer that question. i would like to know the answer too because I was thinking it doesn't. Does it give speed assignments (or restrictions)? 

Thanks.

Edited by Alvega

Alvega

CPU: AMD 7800X3D | COOLER: Cooler Master MasterLiquid 240L Core ARGB | GPU: RTX 4070 TI Super 16GB OC | Mobo: ASUS TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI |
RAM: 32 GB Corsair Vengeance RGB DDR5 6000MHz PC5-48000 2x16GB CL36 | SSDs: WD Black SN770 2TB NVMe SSD (WIN11), WD Black SN850X SSD 2 TB M.2 2280 PCIe Gen4 NVMe (MSFS), Crucial MX500 2TB (Other stuff) | CASE: Forgeon Arcanite ARGB Mesh Tower ATX White | Power Supply: Forgeon Bolt PSU 850W 80+ Gold Full Modular White 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Alvega said:

Sorry but he asked if FSHud gives speed assignments and you didn't answer that question. i would like to know the answer too because I was thinking it doesn't. Does it give speed assignments (or restrictions)? 

Thanks.

It still doesn't - but that would be major part of version 1.3.
Therefore we call it "BETA IN DEVELOPMENT" - I think in 2 weeks this feature would be added.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FSHud said:

It still doesn't - but that would be major part of version 1.3.
Therefore we call it "BETA IN DEVELOPMENT" - I think in 2 weeks this feature would be added.

Ok, thanks.


Alvega

CPU: AMD 7800X3D | COOLER: Cooler Master MasterLiquid 240L Core ARGB | GPU: RTX 4070 TI Super 16GB OC | Mobo: ASUS TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI |
RAM: 32 GB Corsair Vengeance RGB DDR5 6000MHz PC5-48000 2x16GB CL36 | SSDs: WD Black SN770 2TB NVMe SSD (WIN11), WD Black SN850X SSD 2 TB M.2 2280 PCIe Gen4 NVMe (MSFS), Crucial MX500 2TB (Other stuff) | CASE: Forgeon Arcanite ARGB Mesh Tower ATX White | Power Supply: Forgeon Bolt PSU 850W 80+ Gold Full Modular White 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FSHud said:

This is exactly what I mean.
By the end - all "separation" is kind of framework that is only about how to control and pilot AI Aircraft according different parameters.

In any case - it is written in our roadmap to support Oceanic Procedures.

I see.

I just bought it and installed the beta version. Played around with it a little and it seems a solid ATC program, but haven't done a flight with it yet.

Are more regional customization options planned like choosing between "decimal" and "point" or different accents in different regions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope not to many speed restrictions.

On Vatsim / Ivao a lot of times controllers give too many speed restrictions, the pilot is in the first place responsible for a good speed on decent and approach like 180kts on intercepting ILS or 160 until 3 miles out etc.  Only when absolutely necessary a speed restriction is given. 

Also already a lot of offline Atc software gives to many vectors, like overcorrecting all the time like 5 degrees. 

 

 

Edited by rob0203

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

I see.

I just bought it and installed the beta version. Played around with it a little and it seems a solid ATC program, but haven't done a flight with it yet.

Are more regional customization options planned like choosing between "decimal" and "point" or different accents in different regions?

Regional customizations are still under consideration - there is a chance that partially it would be added to 1.3

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One last thing, I noticed that with FSLTL and FSHud, aircraft are parking randomly around the airport. Any chance this can be changed to respect the airline gate assignments at airports?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

One last thing, I noticed that with FSLTL and FSHud, aircraft are parking randomly around the airport. Any chance this can be changed to respect the airline gate assignments at airports?

It is respected - if airline codes are specified in airport BGL files.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

One last thing, I noticed that with FSLTL and FSHud, aircraft are parking randomly around the airport. Any chance this can be changed to respect the airline gate assignments at airports?

Are you using default airport? Is this airport installed from MSFS Store?
Because those are two reasons that can be if Airline Codes are not detected.
Default airports doesn't provide airline codes and add-on airports are encrypted - but even if using MSFS SDK to retrieve airport data, it will not help - because SDK doesn't provide
airline codes as well.
The best solution is to install airline codes add-on (there are many almost for every airport).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, FSHud said:

Are you using default airport? Is this airport installed from MSFS Store?
Because those are two reasons that can be if Airline Codes are not detected.
Default airports doesn't provide airline codes and add-on airports are encrypted - but even if using MSFS SDK to retrieve airport data, it will not help - because SDK doesn't provide
airline codes as well.
The best solution is to install airline codes add-on (there are many almost for every airport).

I only tested at one airport but that was Flightbeam's KDEN (bought through Contrail) which has airline gate assignments. With FSLTL only the aircraft park at the correct terminals, with FSHud and FSLTL they don't.

Edited by Nixoq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...