I've used Pilot2ATC in the past. Great software, probably on of the best  in terms of handling a FP, the fact that you can update the database with Navigraph is great, (I was a RC user and also own PF3 ATC). Main issue with Pilot2ATC is that the voices are word not allowed. I've seen videos in Youtube of people spending 300 dollars for "quality" voices and they will still sound ugly. Specially since those "pro" voices dont have any vhf effect, which not only affects immersion but IMHO as a former GA pilot, hearing an instruction when you have VHF degradation is also part of the challenge.

 

I dont own FSHud and BATC is still in early beta.

 

I've been using SI for weeks now. Key observations below:

- 100% AI based, means that you can literally ask anything in any way and the Ai will reply like a "human" person.

- Voices are the best i've heard. I use Liveatc in the background and sometimes is hard to  differentiate a real person from the AI generated voice. 

- VFR is almost release state. So if GA is your thing, then nothing comes even close. You can probably argue that PE would be better, but they cost the same per month and only cover a small part of the world. And (this might be nonsense to some), SI is adding voices every week, so you dont get to talk with the same person during your entire flight. Last time i've tried PE that was the case.

-IFR will get your FP from Simbrief. It works. It still has lots of issues with approaches. My main problem right now is that they will clear you  for the correct arrival and approach but.... 150nm from your destination.

- Response times averages 9 seconds. Sometimes it will reply in 4/5 secs sometimes will take 10. Is getting lower every week but still pretty slow response times for IFR.

- You can hear other people flying although it wont limit the chatter to the freq you are on. There is also AI generated chatter. No plan on adding FSLTL chatter since apparently is not possible. They will eventually release their own injector (very much like BATC).

- I've been simming since FS98 and I've never, ever seen a software develop so fast. If you join Si discord you will get an idea of what I am saying. They are literally pushing updatea every single day. SI also has a 24h free unlimited demo and then is up to you to sign up.

Me personally, I will be supporting SI until BATC is released, will probably buy BATC and then compare. 30$ per month is certainly a lot of money (Im from Argentina, so here is a LOT of commitment for a subscription) but right know is the most immersive software I've seen. Again only comparable to a full staffed VATSIM session (which unless you jump online at an event is a rare avis) .

 

I will be certainly following the info someone gave regarding PE giving worldwide support (couldn't find any link on that). If that happens I think it would be unmatched and will certainly be worth 30$ per month.

 

8 hours ago, tup61 said:

I don't use voice so I use FSHud. It's extremely easy to setup and use (the complete opposite of P2ATC with its 'ridiculously long manual') and it does the job.

BATC (which I am beta testing) will be similar to FSHud when it comes to ease of use. Install, set just a few preferences and off you go. How it will turn out in the end, I really don't know.

SI in its current state is of no interest for me at ALL. As I said I don't use voice and SI currently also doesn't do traffic (afaik P2ATC does neither) and it's way too pricey.

When looking at the specifications it seems BATC will offer the best of all worlds: voice and button control, complete control of traffic, FAA and ICAO procedures, worldwide accents, local settings for almost everything, one time purchase (unless you want Premium voices), extremely easy to use and so on. Only problem is: BATC hasn't been released yet and no one knows how it will all work out.

Out of the three available ATC addons FSHud wins by a large margin as far as I am concerned as a button user.

I want to talk to ATC because it feels immersive, and I have never had problems with it recognizing what I am trying to say. So that lack of speech recognition eliminated FSHud from consideration. That is a "deal-breaker" for many. Regarding the ridiculously long manual, I have never read the manual from start to finish. If I am looking for something it is most likely covered in the manual. There are a ton of options in the program, so explaining those options is a plus, not a minus. IMO of course.  

33 minutes ago, tup61 said:

Was that a Simbrief plan? FSHud often deviates from it due to weather changes/differences. That's a feature, not a bug. 😉 

Probably yes. However, I am not complaining about FSHud deviating from the given flight plan; that happens in real life as well and that's a good feature of it. However, it also happens in real life that a pilot request a different altitude, or a direct to another waypoint. At least as far as I know, I cannot request that in FSHud. 

I give you one example: I started one flight at CYWG and got the instruction to taxi to runway 18 via Foxtrot. I thought I should take Foxtrot Tango to the end of the runway, but FSHud expected me to depart from the intersection Rwy 18 and Foxtrot. The instruction actually made sense since I used the ATR 42-600, so departing from that intersection saved some time. However, there I was, holding short at the end of runway 18 and could do nothing, I didn't even understand what went wrong. At some point I just departed and received clearance to take off when I passed the intersection.

In real life, ATC would have likely just cleared me to depart from the end of rwy 18. If I had had the chance to request that, I would have. But I couldn't and that inflexibility is why I do not use FSHud anymore.

35 minutes ago, Juan LLobera said:

I've used Pilot2ATC in the past. Great software, probably on of the best  in terms of handling a FP, the fact that you can update the database with Navigraph is great, (I was a RC user and also own PF3 ATC). Main issue with Pilot2ATC is that the voices are word not allowed. I've seen videos in Youtube of people spending 300 dollars for "quality" voices and they will still sound ugly. Specially since those "pro" voices dont have any vhf effect, which not only affects immersion but IMHO as a former GA pilot, hearing an instruction when you have VHF degradation is also part of the challenge.

 

I dont own FSHud and BATC is still in early beta.

 

I've been using SI for weeks now. Key observations below:

- 100% AI based, means that you can literally ask anything in any way and the Ai will reply like a "human" person.

- Voices are the best i've heard. I use Liveatc in the background and sometimes is hard to  differentiate a real person from the AI generated voice. 

- VFR is almost release state. So if GA is your thing, then nothing comes even close. You can probably argue that PE would be better, but they cost the same per month and only cover a small part of the world. And (this might be nonsense to some), SI is adding voices every week, so you dont get to talk with the same person during your entire flight. Last time i've tried PE that was the case.

-IFR will get your FP from Simbrief. It works. It still has lots of issues with approaches. My main problem right now is that they will clear you  for the correct arrival and approach but.... 150nm from your destination.

- Response times averages 9 seconds. Sometimes it will reply in 4/5 secs sometimes will take 10. Is getting lower every week but still pretty slow response times for IFR.

- You can hear other people flying although it wont limit the chatter to the freq you are on. There is also AI generated chatter. No plan on adding FSLTL chatter since apparently is not possible. They will eventually release their own injector (very much like BATC).

- I've been simming since FS98 and I've never, ever seen a software develop so fast. If you join Si discord you will get an idea of what I am saying. They are literally pushing updatea every single day. SI also has a 24h free unlimited demo and then is up to you to sign up.

Me personally, I will be supporting SI until BATC is released, will probably buy BATC and then compare. 30$ per month is certainly a lot of money (Im from Argentina, so here is a LOT of commitment for a subscription) but right know is the most immersive software I've seen. Again only comparable to a full staffed VATSIM session (which unless you jump online at an event is a rare avis) .

 

I will be certainly following the info someone gave regarding PE giving worldwide support (couldn't find any link on that). If that happens I think it would be unmatched and will certainly be worth 30$ per month.

 

$30 per month is definitely a deal-breaker for me. P2ATC is plenty immersive for $60 one time purchase. But it is great to have options! 

37 minutes ago, Juan LLobera said:

I've used Pilot2ATC in the past. Great software, probably on of the best  in terms of handling a FP, the fact that you can update the database with Navigraph is great, (I was a RC user and also own PF3 ATC). Main issue with Pilot2ATC is that the voices are word not allowed. I've seen videos in Youtube of people spending 300 dollars for "quality" voices and they will still sound ugly. Specially since those "pro" voices dont have any vhf effect, which not only affects immersion but IMHO as a former GA pilot, hearing an instruction when you have VHF degradation is also part of the challenge.

 

I dont own FSHud and BATC is still in early beta.

 

I've been using SI for weeks now. Key observations below:

- 100% AI based, means that you can literally ask anything in any way and the Ai will reply like a "human" person.

- Voices are the best i've heard. I use Liveatc in the background and sometimes is hard to  differentiate a real person from the AI generated voice. 

- VFR is almost release state. So if GA is your thing, then nothing comes even close. You can probably argue that PE would be better, but they cost the same per month and only cover a small part of the world. And (this might be nonsense to some), SI is adding voices every week, so you dont get to talk with the same person during your entire flight. Last time i've tried PE that was the case.

-IFR will get your FP from Simbrief. It works. It still has lots of issues with approaches. My main problem right now is that they will clear you  for the correct arrival and approach but.... 150nm from your destination.

- Response times averages 9 seconds. Sometimes it will reply in 4/5 secs sometimes will take 10. Is getting lower every week but still pretty slow response times for IFR.

- You can hear other people flying although it wont limit the chatter to the freq you are on. There is also AI generated chatter. No plan on adding FSLTL chatter since apparently is not possible. They will eventually release their own injector (very much like BATC).

- I've been simming since FS98 and I've never, ever seen a software develop so fast. If you join Si discord you will get an idea of what I am saying. They are literally pushing updatea every single day. SI also has a 24h free unlimited demo and then is up to you to sign up.

Me personally, I will be supporting SI until BATC is released, will probably buy BATC and then compare. 30$ per month is certainly a lot of money (Im from Argentina, so here is a LOT of commitment for a subscription) but right know is the most immersive software I've seen. Again only comparable to a full staffed VATSIM session (which unless you jump online at an event is a rare avis) .

 

I will be certainly following the info someone gave regarding PE giving worldwide support (couldn't find any link on that). If that happens I think it would be unmatched and will certainly be worth 30$ per month.

 

This sounds like what I've heard from others. I want to give SI a try, but I really can't talk to it while I fly due to family constraints and when I can fly. If they add a way to interface with the program without voice as on option, I would definitely try it. Hopefully they will be adding traffic injection as well.

 

At the moment for me P2ATC is the way to go, buy it and it's yours - plus out of the three options mentioned by the OP it is the only one that is multi-sim. Voice works well enough and it mostly does a decent job of it.

SI is far too pricey for me, not happening, never (unless I win the lottery). Also, just checked and there is currently an average 12.5 secs response time. Which to me is <word not allowed>.

Beyond ATC might be of interest, still a bit early to tell. Some of their "free" voices actually seem far worse than the SAPI voices P2ATC uses though, as they totally mangle what they are saying (mostly the non-UK/US speakers). Will be keeping an eye on that one though...

 

G

7 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

as they totally mangle what they are saying

Yes, the free (non-US/UK) voices read the instructions phonetically. Works like a charm sometimes but sometimes (totally) not. 😉 

Edited March 13, 20242 yr by tup61

14 minutes ago, qqwertz said:

... request a different altitude, or a direct to another waypoint. At least as far as I know, I cannot request that in FSHud. 

You can do both in the current Beta version of FSHud.

 

Quote

I give you one example: I started one flight at CYWG and got the instruction to taxi to runway 18 via Foxtrot. I thought I should take Foxtrot Tango to the end of the runway, but FSHud expected me to depart from the intersection Rwy 18 and Foxtrot. The instruction actually made sense since I used the ATR 42-600, so departing from that intersection saved some time. However, there I was, holding short at the end of runway 18 and could do nothing, I didn't even understand what went wrong. At some point I just departed and received clearance to take off when I passed the intersection.

Granted, these things still happen. To have a "take off from here"-option has been suggested several times on their Beta Forum and I think it is on their to-do-list.

 

Edited March 13, 20242 yr by RALF9636

10 hours ago, Jure said:

But I do miss Radar Contact every now and then...

Same here!

You CAN use it in XP11 and 12, though, if you are so inclined...

29 minutes ago, mmcmah said:

This sounds like what I've heard from others. I want to give SI a try, but I really can't talk to it while I fly due to family constraints and when I can fly. If they add a way to interface with the program without voice as on option, I would definitely try it. Hopefully they will be adding traffic injection as well.

FYI just in case you want to try the demo, although might not be what you are looking for, you can type  with your keyboard on SI instead of talking. Not a proper interface but very much like VATSIM voice receive only experience (sort of). 

11 minutes ago, Juan LLobera said:

FYI just in case you want to try the demo, although might not be what you are looking for, you can type  with your keyboard on SI instead of talking. Not a proper interface but very much like VATSIM voice receive only experience (sort of). 

Really? Thanks, I'll give the demo a look after they get IFR more ironed out. I have not seen that non-voice interface talked about before.

12 hours ago, tjrush said:

As long as Sayintentions is $30 a month, I don't believe it will survive.

 

I have been using it for a week and consider it a massive step forward in ATC.  You can ask anything and get a human like response.  It is in Beta, but after just testing the demo for 24 hours, I'm sold.

For me, a subscription is fine considering the back end costs that using AI generates.

1 hour ago, Juan LLobera said:

I've used Pilot2ATC in the past. Great software,

I used it for a bit, but found it (like all other ATC software) to sound robotic and canned.  Say intentions on the other hand is very human, and unlike Vatsim, has a controller everywhere all of the time.  

 

8 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I used it for a bit, but found it (like all other ATC software) to sound robotic and canned.  Say intentions on the other hand is very human, and unlike Vatsim, has a controller everywhere all of the time.  

 

Yes. I'm also a user of SI. Like I said, IFR needs lots of work. VFR is almost release ready at this point. But devs are updating the program almost daily, so hopefully in a couple of weeks IFR will be in a very similar state to VFR.

2 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

As for SayYourIntentions - I've watched this video:

And all I can say is... it's awful. It's even worse than default ATC, by a large margin. Early access or not, this will never even get close to useful, mark my words.

You have to be kidding, right?

I've been using it for a week and it is amazing!  There are no canned phrases to learn, just ask whatever you like and you'll get human like response.  I haven't watched the video you linked to, so is it the current version?  I contacted approach recently and was told to 'head towards the field initially'.  I requested descent and was told 'descend to 4,000ft, further shortly'

Most amazed I've ever been with an addon - and its only in beta!