22 hours ago, ifred said:

You can hand the communications over to a copilot who handles everything for you. So yes, headset-free-playing is possible.

Is there a video out there showing how this works? So made by someone who doesn't talk AT ALL the entire flight? Curious to see how the copilot asks things and how you control that.

I don't use a headset with SI.

Instead, I feed ATC audio to a small, separate speaker and I've attached a small lavalier style microphone to my yoke.

 

1 hour ago, mistolip said:

Is there a video out there showing how this works? So made by someone who doesn't talk AT ALL the entire flight? Curious to see how the copilot asks things and how you control that.

I'm curious about this as well. I mostly use the sim in the evening and talking might disturb sleeping children...

On 9/29/2024 at 4:41 PM, ifred said:

a copilot who handles everything for you

is a somewhat misleading statement. The co-pilot handles the comms and nothing else. He doesn't make requests.
And you would at least *once* have to talk to tell him to take the comms.
There are other ATC apps where you can keep silent. The unique selling proposition of SI is that it doesn't use manual input with your mouse. SI is meant to be talked to in quite free language. Speech recognition is excellent thanks to LLM.

PS: What I have not yet tried is to talk to the co-pilot and ask *him* to make an ATC request. Doesn't make much sense but I'll try it anyway next time.

46 minutes ago, flyingscampi said:

I'm curious about this as well. I mostly use the sim in the evening and talking might disturb sleeping children...

Just whisper,, amazing how good this program picks up what Im saying. Thats what I do:p

At LFBD I pretended no to be sure who would be handling clearance so I asked Tower (!!):

"We are new at this airport. Can you tell me who is handling the clearance here?"
"Mérignac tower, Clearance delivery is handled by Bordeaux control. You can contact them for your clearance."

With what other ATC program can you do that?

PS: If you *really* don't want to talk to SI, there is a space at the bottom of the UI where you can type in your text.

Edited September 30, 20241 yr by agutz

On 9/25/2024 at 2:03 PM, Bobsk8 said:

Been flying BATC the last two days, after weeks away. Looks like it is working fairly well except for the fact that every Star turns into a visual approach. The vectors used to be terrible, but lately not too bad, I just ignore the turn from downwind to base, for about 5 miles, and then it usually works out. 

I stopped using BATC for  a week or so, and recently they had an update, and it appears that the vectoring on visual approches, which was the only problem I was having, has been fixed. Did about 6 flights, and the vectoring was fine on all of the approaches.  😀

SI is so far out infront of any ATC device for this simulator its not even a fair fight. As much of these reviews above are saying, if you give SI a try, for both VFR, and IFR flights, you aint goin back!

Do all or any of these programs work with wireless headsets/mics

 

2 hours ago, joe cooper said:

SI is so far out infront of any ATC device for this simulator its not even a fair fight. As much of these reviews above are saying, if you give SI a try, for both VFR, and IFR flights, you aint goin back!

Send me $200 a year, and I'll try it.  😄

4 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

Send me $200 a year, and I'll try it.  😄

Free for 24 hours - wish granted.  Go try it !

Just another quiet vote for FSHud here. I've tried all three. BATC was the least impressive and most annoying so far (didn't understand my clear plain English accent) and had a lot of quirks, but it is clearly labelled as Early Access.

SayIntentions is good, and for VFR it's really enjoyable, and the only option. IFR I find it to be frustrating the majority of the time, and its vectoring is really poor compared to FSHud at least. I'm letting my subscription lapse at the end of this month. But I'll check it out again in future, as it is very promising.

I'm currently on the FSHud v2 alpha. Now, the developer is at pains to mention that if you aren't already used to FSHud 1.3, don't buy it for the v2 Alpha, because you need to learn how everything works first. But, with that disclaimer out of the way, I would say that it's so totally worth trying the Alpha! 😁

The speech recognition is better than BATC, but still quite rigid (though improvements have been added that I haven't had the chance to test yet) compared to SI. The voices are miles ahead of where they were in v1.3 (though I'd still say that the premium BATC ones and SI voices are still better), and they've started added regional variations for accents as well.

The star of the show with v2 FSHud for me though, is the traffic handling, vectoring and the incredible performance improvement for AI traffic. I've got around 100 aircraft (60% active, 40% parked) loaded up at EGLL or KEWR with negligible performance impact, all moving smartly around. Watching traffic vectored into EGLL is a sight to behold!

But... As the OP said he wanted to exclude traffic injection from the equation, I'll still say that for IFR I've not come across anything so accurate or simple to set up as FSHud.

2 hours ago, Redge said:

Now, the developer is at pains to mention that if you aren't already used to FSHud 1.3, don't buy it for the v2 Alpha, because you need to learn how everything works first.

As the v2 channel in discord is filling up with basic questions not related to v2 alpha testing. 

V2 is getting better and better though. Voice recognition is much better with latest few test builds. The panel is great, especially the map. I think voice quality is good. Now I’m hoping for more regional accents 🙂

2 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

V2 is getting better and better though. Voice recognition is much better with latest few test builds. The panel is great, especially the map. I think voice quality is good. Now I’m hoping for more regional accents 🙂

Yes, and that kind of stuff I think is trivial to add compared to what they've achieved already. From here on in, it's smaller improvements I think, such as more variation on the voices, and perhaps allowing a bit more freedom on readbacks (i.e. check to see that we read back specific keywords correctly, but don't worry about the other words around it so much).

Thanks to all of these great ATC alternatives arriving on the scene at once, I think they're each pushing each other to new heights!

deleted

Edited October 10, 20241 yr by G-YMML1