FSHUD 1.3.103

[PAZFLOR31 18]

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

You and the other poster are describing problem after problem, and you are stating it is the "best ATC out there". I have been flying PF3, IFR only flights flying well over  15 years, with zero problems, and that is with about 12-14 flights per week. ??

I am glad that you are so happy. Good for you.

As you may have have noticed through going all the reviews about ATC addons (I'm sure you have), what each person looks for in an ATC add on may differ quite significantly from one to another. So this is very subjective and what you find bad may seem good to another and vice versa.

Now I confirm that FSHUD is indeed the ATC addon that satisfies me the most (considering my own expectations), and I bought them all since the very first one got on the market.

As for the the listing of problems, you may notice that far from winning and or complaining, I simply list the occurrences as I experience them, the goal being that FSHUD may pick on my post (and hopefully other's) in order to see and understand what needs to be improved. 

Have a good life

Edited July 9, 2023 by PAZFLOR31
tipo

[Alvega 2,124]

6 hours ago, PAZFLOR31 said:

Ok since I get no feedback on simforums, I keep posting here.

The person named @russianspd in this thread is an FSHud employee, so I wonder why he didn't reply to you when you said this.

[PAZFLOR31 18]

6 minutes ago, Alvega said:

The person named @russianspd in this thread is an FSHud employee, so I wonder why he didn't reply to you when you said this.

Well at least now I can be sure that FSHUD picked on my post😂😂

[PAZFLOR31 18]

New trial flight with Fenix A320, FSLTL, FSHUD, payware addons at departure and arrival.

The flight was: LFPG 09R LGL5G LGL A5 NTS R14 NORMI A5 XAMAX XAMA9A LPPT 02

LFPG was nicely populated with both static and active aircrafts.

Taxi when well (no runway crossings though, so unable to check), ATC followed me without a hitch

Take off clearance went well.

Step climb through FL190, FL210 to my Cruise level 360 went well.

Cruise boringly ok.

Received my expected arrival 30 NM before TOD, which is really a nice touch from FSHUD.

Upon announcing my readiness for descent I was requested to descend to FL140.

Shortly after being cleared for the STAR, Center transferred me to approach.

Approach made me descend to 4000' as per STAR altitude restriction, and finally I caught the ILS LOC, my copilot announced "Established on localizer"

Got my clearance to land with the required wind parameters, and here I am at Gate 107 with GSX having taken care of logistics, stretching my legs after an absolutely perfect FSHUD-1.3.103 beta monitored flight.

10 over 10.

My flight within Argentina, the other day, went equally as smooth.

Only my previously flight in Oceania area was like a travel in the twilight zone.

So I guess that there must be some mapping (?) issues in some areas of the planet.

I would say that FSHUD is really onto something good. I'll stick to it.

[Bobsk8 12,753]

4 hours ago, russianspd said:

VOX seems promising if they do control the AI. People don't want flashy voices. They want AI control to match and work into what they're doing. If you want flashy ATC use VATSIM (but the "AI" and ATC are actual people but not the point but is included in the ATC realm)  or ATC Chatter or BATC when it comes out. No one product will have EVERYTHING. But the two runners who currently are bridging the gap are VOX/FSHud. 

Well the voices in FShud don't have to ever worry about being "flashy", that's for sure. 

[rob0203 692]

1 hour ago, PAZFLOR31 said:

New trial flight with Fenix A320, FSLTL, FSHUD, payware addons at departure and arrival.

The flight was: LFPG 09R LGL5G LGL A5 NTS R14 NORMI A5 XAMAX XAMA9A LPPT 02

LFPG was nicely populated with both static and active aircrafts.

Taxi when well (no runway crossings though, so unable to check), ATC followed me without a hitch

Take off clearance went well.

Step climb through FL190, FL210 to my Cruise level 360 went well.

Cruise boringly ok.

Received my expected arrival 30 NM before TOD, which is really a nice touch from FSHUD.

Upon announcing my readiness for descent I was requested to descend to FL140.

Shortly after being cleared for the STAR, Center transferred me to approach.

Approach made me descend to 4000' as per STAR altitude restriction, and finally I caught the ILS LOC, my copilot announced "Established on localizer"

Got my clearance to land with the required wind parameters, and here I am at Gate 107 with GSX having taken care of logistics, stretching my legs after an absolutely perfect FSHUD-1.3.103 beta monitored flight.

10 over 10.

My flight within Argentina, the other day, went equally as smooth.

Only my previously flight in Oceania area was like a travel in the twilight zone.

So I guess that there must be some mapping (?) issues in some areas of the planet.

I would say that FSHUD is really onto something good. I'll stick to it.

I had some great flights also with Fshud and it is being actively developed at the moment so I see it coming far.

Yesterday I did a flight from EGSS and there was a lot of traffic. Main issues:

- Overvectoring

- I had to wait to long for traffic at the runway, could have easily have takeoff clearance between two arriving aircraft.

But I know the developers are aware of these issues since the new version is in Beta and have all the trust they will fix it because all the quality updates we get for free!

[RALF9636 1,972]

8 hours ago, tup61 said:

Later on Captain was told that he might be wrong and that FSHud actually controls traffic. So he is less sure if it is possible or not and said he would give the FSHud beta a try.

Always astonishing to see how software developers seem to live inside their own bubble not even knowing what their main competitors are doing.

So MS/Asobo seem to have been completely unaware of the features the most commonly used weather engine ActiveSky has offered in P3D for years when they created their own weather engine for MSFS lacking so many features.

And the developer of BeyondATC didn’t even know what FSHud is already able to do when he determined the scope of his software.

I wonder what would be possible if BeyondATC and FSHud would team up to create THE ultimate ATC addon. It seems they would complement each other nicely at the current stage of their development.

Edited July 10, 2023 by RALF9636

[tup61 1,582]

4 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

Well the voices in FShud don't have to ever worry about being "flashy", that's for sure. 

The advantage being that a subscription isn't needed... 😉 BeyondATC will sound a lot better (even though, as you know, I do think the FSHud voices are great!) but those great B-ATC voices are the ONLY reason we will have to pay and pay and pay for a subscription. Every advantage has a disadvantage. 😉 Luckily we won't have to pay too much according to the dev although it's still unsure what the prices will be.

5 hours ago, PAZFLOR31 said:

10 over 10.

Usually FSHud does its job rather well. Although the best flight I had with it probably would get 9 over 10 from me. Usually it's 8 over 10. And sometimes something below 5 over 10. 😉 All in all I am very happy with it. But BeyondATC might change that.

BTW Another drawback of FSHud ( 😉 )is that it sometimes won't accept the SB-plan as it is and you have to edit it in the FSHud planner. That can be quite cumbersome and really should be improved.

Edited July 10, 2023 by tup61

[michdb8 44]

3 hours ago, tup61 said:

The advantage being that a subscription isn't needed... 😉 BeyondATC will sound a lot better (even though, as you know, I do think the FSHud voices are great!) but those great B-ATC voices are the ONLY reason we will have to pay and pay and pay for a subscription. Every advantage has a disadvantage. 😉 Luckily we won't have to pay too much according to the dev although it's still unsure what the prices will be.

Usually FSHud does its job rather well. Although the best flight I had with it probably would get 9 over 10 from me. Usually it's 8 over 10. And sometimes something below 5 over 10. 😉 All in all I am very happy with it. But BeyondATC might change that.

BTW Another drawback of FSHud ( 😉 )is that it sometimes won't accept the SB-plan as it is and you have to edit it in the FSHud planner. That can be quite cumbersome and really should be improved.

is confirm that BeyondATC is going to be subscription plan not one payment option?

[Bobsk8 12,753]

5 hours ago, tup61 said:

 

BTW Another drawback of FSHud ( 😉 )is that it sometimes won't accept the SB-plan as it is and you have to edit it in the FSHud planner. That can be quite cumbersome and really should be improved.

That would be an instant " not buying it" for me. I never have that issue with PF3 with thousands of Simbrief flights. 

[Bobsk8 12,753]

1 hour ago, michdb8 said:

is confirm that BeyondATC is going to be subscription plan not one payment option?

Apparently they are still looking into the cost. One theory is the program will come with some number of flights included in it's price, and additional charges might apply after a certain number of flights. As long as it isn't expensive, I would mind paying a yearly fee, for the great voices if the rest of the program works well. Right now I have no issues with PF3, and the voices have been upgraded in the last few years, and most are pretty good ( all 100 of them).  

Edited July 10, 2023 by Bobsk8

[RALF9636 1,972]

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

That would be an instant " not buying it" for me. I never have that issue with PF3 with thousands of Simbrief flights. 

I have been using (and testing) PF3 for many years with great enjoyment. It is a great app all in all.

So just for the record for anyone who reads your post: PF3 is not able to automatically import a flightplan from simbrief at all. Instead you need to export the flightplan from simbrief as a pln file, then import that into PF3. Then you have to revise every flightplan within PF3 to set up how your SID and STAR should be simulated, because PF3 does not know about SIDs and STARs.

With FSHud the import of the simbrief flightplan normally is literally one click and you are ready to go. FSHud takes care of your SID and STAR realistically. Even in those rare cases when there is the need to edit the flightplan, the process is not really more cumbersome than what you have to do with every flightplan in PF3.

Again, I like PF3, but we should try to assess the pros and cons of each ATC addon with a little objectivity.

 

[reecemj 149]

8 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

Again, I like PF3, but we should try to assess the pros and cons of each ATC addon with a little objectivity.

Well said! I use PF3 and Hud.

[laserit 93]

I've been satisfied with FShud and have few issues with it. Some of the problems like having to edit SB plans, seem to be fixed since an update or two. 

 

I use FShud and FSLTL together and have not tried the beta. I only use the latest release. I'd say 80% of my flights work without a hitch and the other 20% I have to cancel and restart from current position which is quite painless but it does break immersion.

 

I will agree with everyone else, the vectoring is currently annoying and very immersion breaking. There are too many quirks to count in the software but the same is true for every piece of ATC software I've tried.

 

Overall I'm satisfied with it and its my ATC of choice only when combined with FSLTL until something better comes out.

 

I'll fly with my FShud, PF3 and all the rest I've owned before I'd pay for an ATC only subscription plan. Maybe in combination with other services such as Navigraph, I might change my opinion.

 

Too many subscriptions these days, not a good business model for an ATC add on imho.

 

Hopefully the dev's of all these competing products read these threads.

 

 

[Bobsk8 12,753]

39 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

I have been using (and testing) PF3 for many years with great enjoyment. It is a great app all in all.

So just for the record for anyone who reads your post: PF3 is not able to automatically import a flightplan from simbrief at all. Instead you need to export the flightplan from simbrief as a pln file, then import that into PF3. Then you have to revise every flightplan within PF3 to set up how your SID and STAR should be simulated, because PF3 does not know about SIDs and STARs.

With FSHud the import of the simbrief flightplan normally is literally one click and you are ready to go. FSHud takes care of your SID and STAR realistically. Even in those rare cases when there is the need to edit the flightplan, the process is not really more cumbersome than what you have to do with every flightplan in PF3.

Again, I like PF3, but we should try to assess the pros and cons of each ATC addon with a little objectivity.

 

I use the simbrief autoloader to import FP into MSFS, Avliasoft EFB, and any other add on that requires it. One click and it is in. The only input I use in PF3 is the waypoint where I want Sid to end, and star to start. I never include SIDs and stars as part of the flight plan. the one thing that turns me off any ATC program is when it tries to micro manage me flying a star or Sid. I know how to read a chart ( I use Avliasoft EFB), and can fly it without micro managing of my flight path  ( turn to this heading, turn to that heading, yada.....)  

Edited July 10, 2023 by Bobsk8