4 hours ago, Drumcode said:

@Ray Proudfoot As I highly respect your opinion in this area, given you’ve been part of the best ATC add on back in the day. What do you think? 

I don’t have the time to watch a 1 hour video, sorry. I would prefer the instructions were the top priority with voice quality secondary. If the pilot is given realistic instructions culminating in a heading to intercept the localiser that would be a good start.

Plus rules for FAA and ICAO of course with all the variations. A flight out of Innsbruck will be interesting.

13 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I would prefer the instructions were the top priority with voice quality secondary.

Indeed.

13 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

If the pilot is given realistic instructions culminating in a heading to intercept the localiser that would be a good start.

Or not being cleared for takeoff when an AI aircraft is just about to enter the runway for takeoff in the opposite direction.

2 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

Or not being cleared for takeoff when an AI aircraft is just about to enter the runway for takeoff in the opposite direction.

There are numerous situations to cover. In your example why was the instruction given to taxi to the other end of the runway to another aircraft? Maybe winds were at right angles to the runway so a small deviation could cause that.

33 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There are numerous situations to cover. In your example why was the instruction given to taxi to the other end of the runway to another aircraft? Maybe winds were at right angles to the runway so a small deviation could cause that.

Wind was 180/7 according to ATIS, so that might explain the different runways.

But the issue here was that two aircraft have been cleared for takeoff on the same runway (in opposite directions) at the same time. Apparently because B-ATC does not take into account what AI traffic does at all.

 

Edited July 25, 20232 yr by RALF9636

7 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

Apparently because B-ATC does not take into account what AI traffic does at all.

There’s your first problem. It has to.

1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There’s your first problem. It has to.

Of course. That is exactly my point. But everybody seems to be so excited about the voices that nobody seems to care at all when B-ATC fails to cover the simple basics of ATC.

 

4 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

Of course. That is exactly my point. But everybody seems to be so excited about the voices that nobody seems to care at all when B-ATC fails to cover the simple basics of ATC.

It’s not the first time I’ve seen discussion about ATC programs more interested in the voices than the instructions. ☹️

Just now, Ray Proudfoot said:

It’s not the first time I’ve seen discussion about ATC programs more interested in the voices than the instructions. ☹️

or because everyone know they have stated multiple times AI control is already planned, thus people focus on what is tangible at this point; its immersive quality through sounding and feeling natural.

12 minutes ago, Sethos said:

or because everyone know they have stated multiple times AI control is already planned, thus people focus on what is tangible at this point; its immersive quality through sounding and feeling natural.

Even without controlling AI traffic an ATC addon should at least control the user aircraft in a way that takes into account AI traffic and keep the user out of the way of AI aircraft (like for example PF3 does).

The basic principle of ATC is to separate aircraft so that they don't crash into one another.

Yet in all the promotion videos of B-ATC I see the user aircraft nearly or even actually crash into AI aircraft.

I fail to understand how that can be considered acceptable no matter how immersive the voices are.

 

20 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

Even without controlling AI traffic an ATC addon should at least control the user aircraft in a way that takes into account AI traffic and keep the user out of the way of AI aircraft (like for example PF3 does).

The basic principle of ATC is to separate aircraft so that they don't crash into one another.

Yet in all the promotion videos of B-ATC I see the user aircraft nearly or even actually crash into AI aircraft.

I fail to understand how that can be considered acceptable no matter how immersive the voices are.

 

They have already stated AI control and awareness is planned, think you also know this considering your activity in every B-ATC thread. It's not released nor is it even slated for release this year, so they have plenty of time. The very foundation and reason why B-ATC was even conceived was clearly the rise of more natural sounding AI voices and a desire to have a more natural sounding environment, which all the other ATCs completely fail at. Not to just have ATC program #583 that sounds robotic and sort-of functions.  So that's obviously what is being focused on- and developed first and also what people are most excited to see, thus is also the primary drive behind pushing and selling B-ATC to its audience.

Edited July 25, 20232 yr by Sethos

14 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

I fail to understand how that can be considered acceptable no matter how immersive the voices are.

I think you're confusing acceptance with tolerance. Everyone would prefer it if B-ATC controlled traffic, but it does not. So you can ignore the product, or look at what it does do well. To some, what it does well is worth the investment, especially if that investment hastens the arrival of AI Control.

I also think people are willing to overlook issues that are being worked on. We're all very used to the early access models in gaming, nowadays. Patience is the blood of gamers.

4 minutes ago, Sethos said:

They have already stated AI control and awareness is planned, think you also know this considering your activity in every B-ATC thread. It's not released nor is it even slated for release this year, so they have plenty of time. The very foundation and reason why B-ATC was even conceived was clearly the rise of more natural sounding AI voices and a desire to have a more natural sounding environment, which all the other ATCs completely fail at. Not to just have ATC program #583 that sounds robot and sort-of functions.  So that's obviously what is being focused on- and developed first and also what people are most excited to see, thus is also the primary drive behind pushing and selling B-ATC to its audience.

Why not just wait until it's all ready, and controlling or at least seeing AI? They will release some fancy voices and a BA 737 will crash in to me (or me in to it) seems pretty pointless, to me at least. 

1 minute ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Why not just wait until it's all ready, and controlling or at least seeing AI? They will release some fancy voices and a BA 737 will crash in to me (or me in to it) seems pretty pointless, to me at least. 

Why not wait what? You're saying they shouldn't show off their work and advertise their software because it's not the holy grail of ATC yet?

Look through every thread about B-ATC; people are impressed, praising it and obviously giving feedback. People are clearly excited, so calling it pointless certainly doesn't align with the majority's desire.

Edited July 25, 20232 yr by Sethos

Just now, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Why not just wait until it's all ready, and controlling or at least seeing AI? They will release some fancy voices and a BA 737 will crash in to me (or me in to it) seems pretty pointless, to me at least. 

Because some people want the other features more than they want to not pass through AI traffic. It took me longer than I'd like to admit, but understanding that people with grossly different priorities than you exist is the quickest way to answer most questions that start "Why don't people just..."

21 minutes ago, WestAir said:

Because some people want the other features more than they want to not pass through AI traffic. It took me longer than I'd like to admit, but understanding that people with grossly different priorities than you exist is the quickest way to answer most questions that start "Why don't people just..."

While that is true I don't see the point in moaning about it.

The devs have clearly said what the program will be doing at release and what it will not be doing. It talks to you and the AI, but it does not control AI movement at all, it basically just reads back what AI is doing instead of controlling it. The controlling is still done by the internal ATC (even though I have the distinct feeling that it is also not really controling and instead of just descriptively talking about what the AI will do next. With the only difference that it is aware of the user aircraft, even if you don't talk to it.)

That's regretable, but it is what it is. And there is no point in repeatedly saying that is "unaccaptable".

 

So at release it will be good to learn communicating with ATC in a realistic fashion and will give you some illusion of interactivity. More like an "ATT" "Air Traffic Talk"-Program instead of an "ATC" program.

Edited July 25, 20232 yr by Farlis