What's fundamentally lacking in current MSFS ATC?

[Noel 4,563]

7 minutes ago, tup61 said:

Not sure what us currently using FlightAware...? But if 'it' is and if that is what's preventing 'it' from actually controlling traffic then it perhaps shouldn't use FlightAware. FSHud controls ALL traffic so it can be done.

When I look at for example LittleNavMap the traffic is the same as it is in MSFS.  So FSHud is creating fantasy AI traffic, not realtime actual?

I would not want fantasy, fake traffic, even it it all syncs well.  Often, even now, default traffic syncs somewhat well but that is probably mainly attributed to the fact I have greatly limited the amount of real time AI traffic such that the odds of syncing my flight w/ actual often happens reasonably well.  It is a fundamental issue because by using actual RT traffic our own flights are the problem as they must jive w/ preexisting flights which are controlled by actual ATC.  It's a conundrum but would love to see it managed better as I value actual traffic in the sim.

Edited June 19, 2023 by Noel

[tup61 1,638]

3 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

I have taken a pause from buying stuff to ease the wallet strain. FSHUD is a candidate for breaking that pledge.

Mind you, as I said before, it's not perfect yet. But it's being worked on and works fine as it is (at least for my kind of use). I do look forward though to what BeyondATC may become...

[BrammyH 461]

3 minutes ago, Noel said:

So you're thinking it should load all FA flight plans of incoming and outgoing traffic?   I don't see how that can happen, the part where it "takes over actual control".  So a particular plane is headed for RwyX, and ATC moves it to another runway?  

On a general sense yes. At least for the area I am flying in. So, if I am flying from KDCA to KEWR, it should know of, and control the traffic in that airspace. Too often it will clear me for take off, while also clearing a plane for landing on the same runway. It knows of our existence since it issues a go around for the landing approach, but the AI plane ignores it.

Which is why any talk of ATC needs to be coupled with discussions on the AI.

[tup61 1,638]

1 minute ago, Noel said:

When I look at for example LittleNavMap the traffic is the same as it is in MSFS.  So FSHud is creating fantasy AI traffic, not realtime actual?

Doesn't LNM simply show the traffic that's in MSFS...? (I honestly don't know, I never checked traffic in LNM... don't even know you can do that LOL) I also don't know if MSFS has real time traffic? I do know that FSHud can work together with FSLTL: FSLTL injects the traffic and then FSHud controls it. Somehow. Again, I have no clue if it's real time or not. And I don't really care too, I have to add, as long as ATC controls everything there is in the sim. To me that's far more important than having life traffic. But perhaps FSLTL does use live traffic...? (Totally clueless here LOL)

[BrammyH 461]

3 minutes ago, tup61 said:

Mind you, as I said before, it's not perfect yet. But it's being worked on and works fine as it is (at least for my kind of use). I do look forward though to what BeyondATC may become...

Yeah. For now, when I get close to a busy airspace on landing I will kill FSLTL if the AI can't sort it out.

[Noel 4,563]

2 minutes ago, tup61 said:

Doesn't LNM simply show the traffic that's in MSFS...? (I honestly don't know, I never checked traffic in LNM... don't even know you can do that LOL) I also don't know if MSFS has real time traffic? I do know that FSHud can work together with FSLTL: FSLTL injects the traffic and then FSHud controls it. Somehow. Again, I have no clue if it's real time or not. And I don't really care too, I have to add, as long as ATC controls everything there is in the sim. To me that's far more important than having life traffic. But perhaps FSLTL does use live traffic...? (Totally clueless here LOL)

I'm not sure how it works either.  Prior to installing FSLTL I used "Simple Traffic".  And it simply changed liveries to match what actual real traffic was in the area.  I know both that traffic is actual live traffic though will not be perfectly synced in terms of time--there will be some delay.  But I can look at flights in FlightAware and they are present in MSFS and LNM.  I've "shadowed" actual flights for fun, for example when my wife flew back from San Francisco on United I created the same flight and flew alongside her plane.  

[Bob Scott 7,745]

What's fundamentally lacking in the current MSFS ATC?

The fundamentals.

[HiFlyer 9,374]

This reminds me of an old girlfriend, who early in the relationship presented me with a list of things she expected from her man...

After I got finished reading what appeared to be a small novel, I looked at her in astonishment and asked her had she ever gotten all of this from any previous boyfriends.

 To which she replied no, but she was expecting better from me....

Which is my roundabout way of saying I've tried pretty much every SIM out there, And in comparison MSFS actually seems pretty good, when placed beside other efforts that have been out there literally for decades.

I guess it never hurts to ask, of course,  And Asobo has always seemed pretty accommodating, but I wonder if we underestimate exactly the technical feasibility of what we are so blithely requesting...

 Or... are we kind of like the little girl living in a small apartment, eagerly asking for a pony......

[SAS443 1,729]

11 hours ago, Noel said:

LiveATC.net is great as well and is free.

There's nothing more nerdy than digging up an archive-feed from LIveATC where you talk to the controllers and has it as background chatter while you are simming the same route.

 

[SierraHotel 987]

Touchy old subject ATC. Obviously, the best would be "live" a la Vatsim etc, but the main drawback with any free voluntary service is lack of coverage and this where Pilot2 ATC, Vox, FSHud and ProATC/X/SR come in. It's also where it all seems to quickly fall apart, and by that I mean people's expectations. All the aforementioned baring Vatsim are computer programs and whilst there is a small margin for, shall we say, drift, all of them pack up and go home if we venture too far from the expected inputs. Once you understand this, it's possible to work within the bounds of said program and obtain a certain degree of realism. All the ATC programs I mentioned do have a learning curve which varies from very steep to a gentle bump. My go to is ProATC/SR, and my reasons are as follows. I have been using it since it was released (well over 10 years), I beta tested it. When used within constraints, it will give you accurate SID and STAR, Climb and Descent, Vectors to Final, Diverts and last but not least, Holds. It's also very forgiving if you cut short or ignore vectors to final, and will (in most circumstances) give you clearance to land. It also gives you Live ATC which changes depending on the country you are currently overflying and talks to and directs your AI Air Traffic (don't get too excited when I say directs I mean it's mimicking the in game ATC which is talking to live AI Traffic). However, when all is said and done it is just a computer program and unless you (a) set it up correctly and (b) use it within it's programmed constraints it will disappoint you at every turn, as will any ATC program that you purchase and not use accordingly. Having seen a few demos of the current flavour of the month, Chatgpt AI, I'm longing for that wizard developer who manages to integrate it into an ATC program, now you are talking! No really............................................................

[Noel 4,563]

11 minutes ago, SierraHotel said:

Chatgpt AI, I'm longing for that wizard developer who manages to integrate it into an ATC program, now you are talking! No really............................................................

Aside from all of the other ATC options I'm wondering what perhaps the bare minimum is for a reasonably plausible ATC in-sim.  I guess a major question is should it try to sync with RT Online Traffic, or not.   I hope they continue this approach myself.  I can see ChapGPT/AI being used very well to machine learn the nuances of ATC speech that is well within reach, including w/ the full cadre of voice options it's already happening, using AI to simulate actual human speech and song.

[Mace 1,954]

3 hours ago, Bernard Ducret said:

Yes you can: Try Multi Crew Experience with a free trial period.

Correct me if I'm wrong but MCE allows you to speak to your *co-pilot* but not ATC.   This thread is about ATC.

Edited June 19, 2023 by Mace

[sjed 9]

It has always appeared to me that the ATC was exactly the same as FSX. They just cut the ATC out and inserted it into MSFS2020 with no changes or upgrades. It's been a long time since FSX came out and, with better and better technology, they should have figured a way to make ATC better by now.

[Danno 194]

I don't usually file IFR. Success is unpredictable. Just now, I finished an IFR flight and it's still ridiculous. Putting aside no vectoring unless you ask for it, it wasn't horrible until I was on short final. And then tower cleared another aircraft for takeoff. In the opposite direction of the active (coming right at me).

All the pretty graphics in the world does not make up for the lack of a such a fundamental simulation feature. A suggestion for Microsoft going forward...  if ATC isn't working realistically, just call it what it is... VFR Sim 2024.

 

 

 

[HiFlyer 9,374]

15 hours ago, Danno said:

I don't usually file IFR. Success is unpredictable. Just now, I finished an IFR flight and it's still ridiculous. Putting aside no vectoring unless you ask for it, it wasn't horrible until I was on short final. And then tower cleared another aircraft for takeoff. In the opposite direction of the active (coming right at me).

All the pretty graphics in the world does not make up for the lack of a such a fundamental simulation feature. A suggestion for Microsoft going forward...  if ATC isn't working realistically, just call it what it is... VFR Sim 2024.

Somebody previously mentioned that the sim is using live traffic.....

So its kind of hard to see how that's going to happen as well as taking a users actions, possibly prompted by another program entirely, into account.

Not saying it isn't possible, just that it may not be nearly as easy as we like to imagine.

Occam's Razor: If it was easy, it would already have been done by now, a mature and common technology available in just about every SIM.