Mainly the effective controlling of all traffic and proper funneling of said traffic in and out of departures, arrivals and approaches.

1 hour ago, Danno said:

All the pretty graphics in the world does not make up for the lack of a such a fundamental simulation feature.

MSFS2020 ATC is the equivalent of buying a $7,000 computer with a 3Dfx video card. I still would rather Radar Contact v4 over the default any day but FS24 is our priority and most likely still won't change. What to much?

3 hours ago, Mace said:

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

Yes, you are wrong in this regard. With MCE you can also talk to ATC, both default and PF3.

 

2 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

Yes, you are wrong in this regard. With MCE you can also talk to ATC, both default and PF3.

 

Ok, good to know.  But the question was, what is *MSFS* ATC missing.  Not "what can be added to it" like MCE or P2ATC.  MSFS ATC is definitely missing the ability to talk to it.

Have you ever used a program called "Voice Attack"?  Is this similar to how MCE interfaces with PF3?

8 minutes ago, Mace said:

Ok, good to know.  But the question was, what is *MSFS* ATC missing.  Not "what can be added to it" like MCE or P2ATC.  MSFS ATC is definitely missing the ability to talk to it.

True, of course.

 

Quote

Have you ever used a program called "Voice Attack"?  Is this similar to how MCE interfaces with PF3?

Actually I do use Voice Attack. Not sure if it can be considered similar to MCE. Basically yes, but MCE has its own logic and intelligence from many years of development, whereas Voice Attack is only as good as you set up your profile.

On the other hand the advantage of Voice Attack is that you have total control over all voice commands on your own and you can easily modify to your personal needs. That's why I ended up using Voice Attack for specific ATC situations side by side to MCE (when I used it with PF3).

Right now I use both Voice Attack and MCE to control FSHud by voice.

 

Edited June 19, 20232 yr by RALF9636

Wrong thread

Edited June 19, 20232 yr by HiFlyer

5 hours ago, Mace said:

But the question was, what is *MSFS* ATC missing. 

Thank you for that observation.  Perhaps lets get it back on the airway, so to speak.

Missing a lot of common sense. Indicative of the fact that whoever is responsible for it in MSFS 2020 tried porting over what was in FSX and did  not even understand what was there to begin with.   Carry forward of "please expedite" and creation of "Generic" are major clues.  Those and assignment of active runway opposite of what would be dictated by wind direction. 

And despite the pleas and cries, has ATC even been touched since MSFS 2020 release?
 

36 minutes ago, fppilot said:

And despite the pleas and cries, has ATC even been touched since MSFS 2020 release?

Overall it's better than it was initially.  As mentioned earlier I see much improvement in yo-yo altitude changes and I don't get vectored in to mountains anymore either. Initially ATC would frequently send me to a runway opposite of what wind vectors would normally dictate but that almost never happens now, at least for departure runways, so that's improved.

So yes, what does it NEED to meet a fair minimum standard.  It seems like Real Time Online traffic is virtually impossible to integrate w/ users because it is driven by FlightAware's actual traffic, where as simmers jump in the middle and are not part of traffic arriving and departing from an airport.  I see some value in using RT Online Traffic but perhaps it's fundamentally too difficult to integrate w/ simmers.

46 minutes ago, Noel said:

Overall it's better than it was initially.  As mentioned earlier I see much improvement in yo-yo altitude changes and I don't get vectored in to mountains anymore either. Initially ATC would frequently send me to a runway opposite of what wind vectors would normally dictate but that almost never happens now, at least for departure runways, so that's improved.

So yes, what does it NEED to meet a fair minimum standard.  It seems like Real Time Online traffic is virtually impossible to integrate w/ users because it is driven by FlightAware's actual traffic, where as simmers jump in the middle and are not part of traffic arriving and departing from an airport.  I see some value in using RT Online Traffic but perhaps it's fundamentally too difficult to integrate w/ simmers.

Not at all arguing with you but wish to point out that not all of us do the same type(s) of flying.  My flying is primarily GA and light personal jet (Hjet) into and out of regional airports appropriate for that.  I have seen no viable alternative for traffic types that compliment.  Only tubeliners into International commercial airports and airline feeder airports.  A realistic simulator would provide some level of GA traffic.  I have seen it occasionally but have no ideal what traffic setting levels it depends on, and occasional as a term is quite a stretch. 

To answer the question in the topic title…

• The knowledge and input of real-world Air Traffic Controllers familiar with FAA and ICAO phraseology.
• A mathematician expert in trigonometry.
• The ability to read and extract flight sim data similar to how MakeRwys does in FSX and P3D.

With Microsoft’s ability to generate good quality voices that side is a given. It was the skill in the people who helped create Radar Contact v4 that made it the success it was.

The skill is out there. It just requires the desire to achieve a quality ATC product.

 

5 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

The ability to read and extract flight sim data similar to how MakeRwys does in FSX and P3D.

I think it was Chrisopher Low who said something to the effect P3D ATC calls out correct airlines of AI traffic moving in the region where the user is flying presumably in both departures and arrivals.  MSFS does this as well.  Others have said here a key feature desired is that ATC actually "controls" traffic.  This seems very troublesome when that real time (more or less) online traffic is being driven by outside sources like FlightAware which I believe is what MSFS is using.  At what point can MSFS ATC take over control for incoming or outgoing traffic, so that user aircraft can be synced w/ AI traffic, and so have less conflicts, less go-arounds, etc etc.  How does P3D manage this, or is P3D not looking at real time traffic, but instead is using fake/generated traffic?

I'm starting to think Real Time Online Traffic is the Achilles Heel of MSFS ATC, when one choose RTOT as I've always done.  If you're going to generate 'fake' AI traffic the problem sounds immensely easier to solve.  I'm assuming none of all other ATC products avoid RTOT.  Is that true?

Edited June 20, 20232 yr by Noel

1 minute ago, Noel said:

I think it was Chrisopher Low who said something to the effect P3D ATC calls out correct airlines of AI traffic moving in the region where the user is flying presumably in both departures and arrivals.  MSFS does this as well.  Others have said here a key feature desired is that ATC actually "controls" traffic.  This seems very troublesome when that real time (more or less) online traffic is being driven by outside sources like FlightAware which I believe is what MSFS is using.  At what point can MSFS ATC take over control for incoming or outgoing traffic, so that user aircraft can be synced w/ AI traffic, and so have less conflicts, less go-arounds, etc etc.  How does P3D manage this, or is P3D not looking at real time traffic, but instead is using fake/generated traffic?

PF3 uses Make Runways in MSFS, just as it did in P3D. 

On 6/19/2023 at 9:35 AM, Noel said:

How might this be done since currently it's using FlightAware AI traffic which "controls" AI traffic?  I have to assume FlightAware is using more or less realtime or recent METAR and so chooses runways compatible with that, whereas MSFS will assign runways not necessarily in line with the same METAR data.  

Live Traffic is no longer controlled by Flight Aware data directly. The sim now creates a flight plan based off the data on FlightAware. Which causes even more issues, I've seen flights arriving/departing hours before they should be.

I believe this change was done with the 40th Anniversary update.

But even before the switch, flights were only controlled directly by flight aware data while enroute. During taxi, takeoff and at the top of descent, movement was taken over by the default AI system.

Edited June 20, 20232 yr by Tuskin38

5 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

The ability to read and extract flight sim data similar to how MakeRwys does in FSX and P3D.

I fail to see why that's needed to make default ATC better...? You'd say MSFS can already read its own data perfectly well...!

12 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

PF3 uses Make Runways in MSFS, just as it did in P3D. 

You make it sound as if that's something good! 😉 I personally am not fond of addons that need yet another addon (freeware or not) to get things done...

2 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

Live Traffic is no longer controlled by Flight Aware data directly.

The sim now creates an internal flight plan based off the data on FlightAware.

I believe this change was done with the 40th Anniversary update.

So is it fairly accurate to say FA will send say a SWA 738 into KDEN, and MSFS uses that same SWA738, but controls its actual flight path, more or less?