I did two flights today (BOS-LGA) with each ATC.

With FSHud, even though the voices are very good now, I noticed a lack of humanity on the voices. With BATC, I like the "Over to Tower, see ya" (Now, if they ever do the Vatsim "SEE YUH" I'd laugh my behind off)

BATC, I felt the quality of the ATC was better., I'd get "cross XXX at or above an ALT."

Being able to change the runways/approaches is something I feel they need to add soon. If it is just reading  the Simbrief plan, I can see this being an issue on long hauls.

It also had no clue about AWE call sign. Insteac of Cactus, I got "Airbus 2115."

As part of clearance, I haven't gotten an "expect runway x", but I see on some videos folks do get it. EDIT: It's on the bottom of the readback buttons. My Bad.

I wish I could just read the ATIS.

Edited May 12, 20242 yr by BrammyH

I'm three flights in now and quite enjoying it.  Haven't experienced any major bugs or glitches and it's so many miles beyond default ATC.  I haven't used voice yet.  Flew into EGAA tonight and got very good vectors for the RNAV 07 approach.

It would definitely be helpful to have the option to change runway assignment.

On callsigns, it would be nice to have an option to enter our own...I love flying the BAe-146 and F-28 using callsigns of airlines that don't exist anymore so I'm thinking some of those ICAO codes will not be known by BATC (as per the AWE example above).

I've bene using the excellent FS ATC Chatter alongside BATC to give me background chatter. I have noticed there seems to be a lot of times where the frequency being used by BATC shows as out of range in FS ATC Chatter.  I see that BATC abbreviates the last digit off of the ATC frequency so maybe that's why?

All in all though, I'm quite happy with this, certainly US$30 well spent and I'm looking forward to how it develops.

8 hours ago, BrammyH said:

It also had no clue about AWE call sign. Insteac of Cactus, I got "Airbus 2115."

I assume the reason for this is that US Airways has discontinued their operations 9 years ago and no one uses that callsign any longer?

 

 

There is one thing that bugs me and that is when you are at the hold short point for take off and you get your clearance for Take-off, tower expects you to readback the runway again. That's just uneccesarry, a simple "Cleared for take-off" readback should be sufficient.

Edited May 13, 20242 yr by Farlis

Another update - quite impressive to keep seeing daily patches:

**Minor Update 1.0.27.EA**
- Fixed a couple bugs with the program getting stuck on "Submitting Response" or "Generating Speech."

- QoL tweaks to the store page.

- Frequencies ending in 0.005 now work correctly across all comms types.

- Active runway setup has been tweaked to allow stronger crosswind components inline with real world ops.

- When an airport does not have a custom ops file, only use Simbrief arrival runway as a guide in very low wind / variable wind scenarios.

- Which active runway is selected has been optimized further to best first the aircraft type in use.

1 hour ago, Farlis said:

That's just uneccesarry, a simple "Cleared for take-off" readback should be sufficient.

Total disagree. There was a deadly incident with some regional carrier in the US a couple of years ago, where they took off from the wrong runway during night and crashed. Reading back the runway is an essential safety barrier. Keep in mind Tower does not necessarily see you (visually or on the radar), especially at night at smaller airports.

EDIT: Also there was another incident in Singapore (?) with a 747 that accidentally took off from a runway under maintenance and crashed and burned into a caterpillar on the runway.

Edited May 13, 20242 yr by Fiorentoni

1 hour ago, Farlis said:

I assume the reason for this is that US Airways has discontinued their operations 9 years ago and no one uses that callsign any longer?

Correct. However, FSHUD allows the use of historic call signs. I fly a ton of old US Airways routes. 

It's very odd but even though I do think BATC is way too buggy still and FSHud is superior when it comes to the ATC itself I just can't stop using BATC... There is something about the interface and the voices and also parts of the phraseology which makes me use BATC all the time. Even though I know it is a very, very buggy addon. And even though I actually seriously wonder if they will ever be able to fix things completely. I mean... the dev himself said it is impossible (!!!) to create an ATC addon that will work for every airport and every procedure in MSFS. So... should we be happy with 75% or the airports working? Or 50%? I never heard another ATC addon dev day they won't be able to support every airport and procedure. But well, maybe the BATC dev simply is honest and the others aren't. 😉 

11 hours ago, BrammyH said:

Being able to change the runways/approaches is something I feel they need to add soon.

 

8 hours ago, regis9 said:

It would definitely be helpful to have the option to change runway assignment

This is why I personally have not purchased BATC.  With Say intentions I can ask anything of ATC, no problems with needing to follow a script.

What I have read so far about BATC is a more clever version of the standard scripted ATC we have had for years.  Say intentions has been a breath of fresh air in the ATC addon space.

31 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Say intentions has been a breath of fresh air in the ATC addon space.

Never used it, because it would be a breath of death for my wallet. Why do people compare a cheap $30 add-on to a ridiculously expensive subscription based add-on? It should better be A LOT better than Beyond ATC at this insane pricing. I'm perfectly happy with Beyond ATC in early access. With all the patches coming daily it will have a bright future ahead.

Edited May 13, 20242 yr by carlito777

7 minutes ago, carlito777 said:

Why do people compare a cheap $30 add-on to a ridiculously expensive subscription based add-on?

Because if you remove the cosmetics off the cheap 30$ add-on you'll find something that we have had for years. There are decade(s) old ATC programs that are at least as good if not a whole lot better when it comes to, well...ATC. At this point it brings nothing new unless you consider computer generated accents as being top priority.

The question of price is entirely irrelevant to the nature of the addon.

25 minutes ago, carlito777 said:

Never used it, because it would be a breath of death for my wallet. Why do people compare a cheap $30 add-on to a ridiculously expensive subscription based add-on? It should better be A LOT better than Beyond ATC at this insane pricing.

It IS a lot better IMHO, therefore the subscription cost, although high, is justified for the leap in technology.  All new technology starts off expensive, but reduces overtime. Posters have shown their preferences how BATC should improve, but SI doesn't have these restrictions now.

1 hour ago, ha5mvo said:

Because if you remove the cosmetics off the cheap 30$ add-on you'll find something that we have had for years. There are decade(s) old ATC programs that are at least as good if not a whole lot better when it comes to, well...ATC. At this point it brings nothing new unless you consider computer generated accents as being top priority.

The question of price is entirely irrelevant to the nature of the addon.

It's in early access with a long way to go, If BATC sells well it might have better future than any other ATC mod in flight sim history. Other ATC addons might not generate the users/funds needed to fully develope them, BATC is alot more affordable which will enable almost anyone can afford it, which will fund it well into the future (hopefully).

24 minutes ago, Amon1973 said:

It's in early access with a long way to go, If BATC sells well it might have better future than any other ATC mod in flight sim history. Other ATC addons might not generate the users/funds needed to fully develope them, BATC is alot more affordable which will enable almost anyone can afford it, which will fund it well into the future (hopefully).

Problem here is that the other ATC addons (apart from SI) are way more advanced and actually work. BATC can also work but I have yet to do a single flight without a bug (if I let ATC guide me). And I've been flying for a few months with it. And I see fixes coming for the same old bugs I encountered at the beginning of the beta. So the question is how long the users will support BATC. I was away for the weekend and when I came back to Discord this morning the amount of posts in the bugs section were immense... way too many to even start reading them. And mind you, there is no support ticket system or anything. It's just one looooooooooong list of all kinds of things that are going wrong. I really wonder how the devs are picking the fights they have to battle.

Take note: I am not a BATC-hater simply bashing it. I own the supporters pack and love BATC. It just is in a really bad shape right now. At this moment peope are getting fatal errors with BATC which I never had (or which was never mentioned) during beta... so there is a LOT going wrong with BATC right now. I really think the dev didn't know what he was getting himself into. (Which is supported by what I posted earier: that he said its impossible to create an ATC addon that will work for every airport and procedure world wide.)

And still I keep using BATC for every flight LOL

 

Edited May 13, 20242 yr by tup61

4 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Total disagree. There was a deadly incident with some regional carrier in the US a couple of years ago, where they took off from the wrong runway during night and crashed. Reading back the runway is an essential safety barrier. Keep in mind Tower does not necessarily see you (visually or on the radar), especially at night at smaller airports.

That's why you get a hold short point with a Letter which you read back. That exists only once and therfore you can't mistake the runway.

Edited May 13, 20242 yr by Farlis

29 minutes ago, Amon1973 said:

It's in early access with a long way to go, If BATC sells well it might have better future than any other ATC mod in flight sim history. Other ATC addons might not generate the users/funds needed to fully develope them, BATC is alot more affordable which will enable almost anyone can afford it, which will fund it well into the future (hopefully).

Hopefully indeed!

Point was, that BATC and SI are apples and oranges, hence no comparison. I wish them well but one needs to acknowledge also that it's a half (quarter?) baked product at this stage that has little to nothing to offer over existing products - at least for the foreseeable future.