May 11, 20233 yr Commercial Member 8 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said: @Dutch727, SID and STARs we’re planned for v6 but John stopped development and it never saw the light of day. I include a SID and STAR in the plan I load into RC4 and as my flights are generally under two hours they generally work okay. At 40 miles out I always opt for vectors anyway as that’s generally how r/w ATC works. Agreed and for the most part RC does everything I want. But I live in a part of the country where "revenue" flights to KDCA and KATL are not uncommon and I'd like to be able to fly those realistically, which is simply not possible with RC. At KDCA it will vector me over restricted airspace most of the time. At KATL I get vectored right into the path of traffic landing at other runways. I can put in "Alt Restrictions" so as to be able to fly pre-programmed procedures at both those airports, but...what if the runway assignments have changed and I'm forced into unrealistic vectors or head-on runway collisions? I know we can't have everything. In a perfect world I'd have RC for most of my flights and FSHud or P2A for the more complex ones. That would be lovely. Charles "Dutch" Owen - Developer at Military Visualizations - currently working on the C310R and SR-71A project for MSFS.
May 11, 20233 yr 3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said: @Dutch727, SID and STARs we’re planned for v6 but John stopped development and it never saw the light of day. I include a SID and STAR in the plan I load into RC4 and as my flights are generally under two hours they generally work okay. At 40 miles out I always opt for vectors anyway as that’s generally how r/w ATC works. That is what VoxAtc also did really well, it also generated and controlled its own traffic from BGL files. I really liked that you were cleared for a STAR and then halfway the STAR it changed to vectors like most of the time IRL. However the menu system / User Interface from VoxAtc looked like it came straight out of a commodore system of the 80's. Edited May 11, 20233 yr by rob0203
May 11, 20233 yr 6 hours ago, Dutch727 said: Get one waypoint wrong and fly off course with FSHud and it seems to often just stop talking to you. Taxiing is also difficult and sometimes involves going in circles to hit the exact spot in order to move to the next waypoint - I spend most of my time heads down in the cockpit staring at the little arrow on the ground. Not sure what version of FSHud you were using. But I never had any of these issues in all my flights with FSHud. Actually it is one of the great adavantages of FSHud that you do not have to hit all the waypoints - neither in the air nor while taxiing. If you stray off track FSHud will just recalculate and take it from there. The arrows in the FSHud window might be misleading (I don't know because I never use them, I keep the FSHud window closed all the time) but you can just ignore them and FSHud will keep on working. Edited May 11, 20233 yr by RALF9636
May 11, 20233 yr 1 hour ago, rob0203 said: That is what VoxAtc also did really well, it also generated and controlled its own traffic from BGL files. I really liked that you were cleared for a STAR and then halfway the STAR it changed to vectors like most of the time IRL. However the menu system / User Interface from VoxAtc looked like it came straight out of a commodore system of the 80's. P2ATC does exactly the same and vectoring is top-notch. However it also shares the UI concept from VoxAtc, so .... 😄 For transparency: I'm a community mentor at the BATC discord. However, I do not get paid for it in any way.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.