It is worth reminding here that the developers already asked in April whether the community wanted the EA version, or whether we should wait another few months for them to release a more stable version... And it was the community that decided that we wanted this product. When you bought it, you had at least a few warnings that there would be errors.

3 hours ago, MarcG said:

They very clearly announced it was an Early Access release from the very beginning, features are very much Alpha as per the thread title, so nah it's your own fault for not reading properly, don't blame the product for your lack of patience.

and the BATC devs even added the word "supporters." If you don't want to help, don't get involved.

I made the decision in the beginning that I wanted no part in the process. I've been a beta tested for a few sim devs and I never had to pay to test an add-on. I commend those early adopters and wish the BATC team success..

9 hours ago, bahnzo said:

Here's a screen shot of one of the issues I had. Amusing....

Did you make a bug report on the discord?

9 hours ago, michdb8 said:

on the air they have lights on taxi i don't know

I saw a plane landing that was completely dark. 

24 minutes ago, RobJC said:

I saw a plane landing that was completely dark. 

That's an issue with your local AI package, not from BATC obviously.

Edited September 16, 20241 yr by roland_lfor

47 minutes ago, roland_lfor said:

That's an issue with your local AI package, not from BATC obviously.

I use AIG models but traffic is controlled with BATC. Any idea where I would look to fix this?

You probably miss a texture in your AIG package. If I remember you have an option to check the integrity of installed files. (I don''t use it anymore)

25 minutes ago, RobJC said:

I use AIG models but traffic is controlled with BATC. Any idea where I would look to fix this?

i got lights  at night with aig models

57 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Any idea where I would look to fix this?

Make sure to run AIG Manager often, the models are constantly being updated.

It still seems to work best when the STAR leads to a fix that throws you onto the LOC, so you can pretty much look after yourself. I still have had some quite funky vectoring or feel that I’m on a magical mystery tour around the sky. 
However I do fly with it all the time now and really enjoy the immersion it brings. When it all works perfectly - which is more often than not - it’s an awful lot of fun. 

18 hours ago, bahnzo said:

You are one of the mods on their discord, right? Might want to mention that when you praise their product. 

 

No, I'm not a mod. I'm a Community Mentor, which is exactly what I'm doing here: Helping the community. I don't earn anything from it, not even a free supporters pack.

And I *did* mention this in this very thread at least once or twice.

BATC with traffic. What can I say. It's alpha for sure. It can be fun at one time and utterly annoying the other. The part up to cruise usually is the fun part, the second part of the flight still has to many problems.

I just received an approach plus transition and I was flying perfectly along the planned route when suddenly ATC started to give me vectors out of nowhere (perhaps this is part of the new seperation logic?) but the heading it gave for my final clearance of the ILS was completely wrong, like around 160 degrees wrong. After a while I decided to forget about the vectors and went back to the planned route. All went fine from there on apart from the fact that I flew underneath (and actually overtook!) a Boeing 737 that was planning to land on the same runway... Odd. Specially since I was flying a SF50.

But well, it's alpha! Not even beta! So this is to be expected. When BATC does work as intended it is a joy to use!

Edited September 16, 20241 yr by mistolip

18 minutes ago, mistolip said:

BATC with traffic. What can I say. It's alpha for sure. It can be fun at one time and utterly annoying the other. The part up to cruise usually is the fun part, the second part of the flight still has to many problems.

I just received an approach plus transition and I was flying perfectly along the planned route when suddenly ATC started to give me vectors out of nowhere (perhaps this is part of the new seperation logic?) but the heading it gave for my final clearance of the ILS was completely wrong, like around 160 degrees wrong. After a while I decided to forget about the vectors and went back to the planned route. All went fine from there on apart from the fact that I flew underneath (and actually overtook!) a Boeing 737 that was planning to land on the same runway... Odd. Specially since I was flying a SF50.

But well, it's alpha! Not even beta! So this is to be expected. When BATC does work as intended it is a joy to use!

That's why I say: Ask on Discord. Because often enough there's explanations for this:

1) Being vectored off the STAR is very common in real life (in Europe at least), and can mean a shortcut, more space for separation, or it just fits better the current active approach. So that's perfectly normal, even though at the moment it's still quite rare in BATC.

2) The vector you got away from the approach direction was going to give you more track miles, either because BATC thought you were still too high or because a direct turn would have been too tight for BATC's calculations. If you would have flown the given vectors, after one or two minutes you would have given a new vector onto final (with enough time and space to lose altitude and speed and configure etc.)

That's not to say that there aren't any bugs - there are plenty of them. But often enough it's just a misconception or misunderstanding and by solving that, people can keep enjoying BATC instead of waiting for a fix that is never gonna happen 🙂 Therefore, don't hesitate to ask over at Discord! There's a lot of mods and a lot of community mentors and even the devs are regularly there to answer questions.

16 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

That's why I say: Ask on Discord. Because often enough there's explanations for this:

1) Being vectored off the STAR is very common in real life (in Europe at least), and can mean a shortcut, more space for separation, or it just fits better the current active approach. So that's perfectly normal, even though at the moment it's still quite rare in BATC.

2) The vector you got away from the approach direction was going to give you more track miles, either because BATC thought you were still too high or because a direct turn would have been too tight for BATC's calculations. If you would have flown the given vectors, after one or two minutes you would have given a new vector onto final (with enough time and space to lose altitude and speed and configure etc.)

 

This  is not true at all in the US, every ILS approach results in a change to visual approach with the worst vectors to the final I have experienced in any Sim ATC I have used. Ninety degree localizer  intercept angles a few miles from touch are totally incorrect and makes approaches with BATC a joke. 

An ATC program should be just that, not a Traffic control problem, with ATC as an afterthought.

10 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

An ATC program should be just that, not a Traffic control problem, with ATC as an afterthought.

ATC isn't an afterthought, the AI is the afterthought.

They weren't even planning on adding AI until people started asking for it. They brought in a new dev specifically for the AI.

Edited September 16, 20241 yr by Tuskin38