39 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I am happy with BATC now, use it on every flight,  and will stick with it. I don't care about the AI traffic part of it, and might not even use it, don't know yet. 

The air traffic is pretty good now, not perfect, but way better than the default.

21 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

The air traffic is pretty good now, not perfect, but way better than the default.

Never used default, FSLTL works fine. 

Do these addon ATC products fix the problem of landing and departing aircraft using opposite ends of the runway? Do they also separate landings and departures if there are two or more runways at an airport?

7 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

Do these addon ATC products fix the problem of landing and departing aircraft using opposite ends of the runway? Do they also separate landings and departures if there are two or more runways at an airport?

I haven't tried beyond ATC yet, since they decided to stick with non-real-time traffic, which unfortunately is a deal breaker for me, but I would be surprised if it did not solve that issue since that's created by how MSFS itself handles runways. Beyond ATC's traffic is directed entirely by an external engine, so it should be unaffected by any of MSFS's internal quirks. 

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Abriael

1 hour ago, Abriael said:

which unfortunately is a deal breaker for me

Why?

  

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

Never used default, FSLTL works fine. 

FSLTL uses the default AI systems mostly. They do have some overides.

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Tuskin38

39 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

Why?

Because part of simulating aircraft operations includes simulating the world in a dynamic, ever-changing state. If I simulate the same flight today and tomorrow, I should not find myself in exactly the same situation. 

Beyond ATC averages out data over time, which flattens that dynamism considerably and creates big inconsistencies with reality (for instance, you'll see seasonal flights out of season because the schedule has not updated), you won't have to deal with delayed flights or traffic spikes due to external factors, etcetera.

When I see a flight departing, I like to know that same flight is departing in real life, at the same time. Beyond ATC's method, while it has some merits, does not achieve that.

Real-time traffic and weather for me represent the "today" and future of flight simulation. Having averaged out periodic data isn't that different from using schedules (the only big difference is that the schedule is generated automatically and not compiled and inserted by hand, which is not a relevant difference for me as a user), and that's very much the "yesterday" of traffic in flight simulation for me, which I am not keen to go back to. 

More power to those who enjoy it, but it's just not for me. 

The ideal solution would be for MSFS to partner with both FlightAware and FlightRadar24, and integrate the data they get from both for a much deeper dataset that has better worldwide coverage. The deficiency in the coverage of traffic in MSFS is entirely due to the deficiencies of FlightAware's data. That's what I've been suggesting for a long time, and I still have hope that it'll happen at some point. 

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Abriael

3 hours ago, Noel said:

Hmm...what would you call it?   

A flying game. 

5 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

A flying game. 

Funny, considering that default ATC is bad in literally any simulator available. So I guess for you they're all "flying games."

Of course, that's a moot point, since all home computer simulators are games, and the two terms are not in conflict. Flight simulation (like racing simulation, train simulation, and whatever simulation) is a genre of gaming and has always been. 

If you want actually good ATC, that's what Vatsim is for. If you deal with a program, it'll always be bad.

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Abriael

34 minutes ago, Abriael said:

Because part of simulating aircraft operations includes simulating the world in a dynamic, ever-changing state. If I simulate the same flight today and tomorrow, I should not find myself in exactly the same situation. 

Beyond ATC averages out data over time, which flattens that dynamism considerably and creates big inconsistencies with reality (for instance, you'll see seasonal flights out of season because the schedule has not updated), you won't have to deal with delayed flights or traffic spikes due to external factors, etcetera.

When I see a flight departing, I like to know that same flight is departing in real life, at the same time. Beyond ATC's method, while it has some merits, does not achieve that.

Real-time traffic and weather for me represent the "today" and future of flight simulation. Having averaged out periodic data isn't that different from using schedules (the only big difference is that the schedule is generated automatically and not compiled and inserted by hand, which is not a relevant difference for me as a user), and that's very much the "yesterday" of traffic in flight simulation for me, which I am not keen to go back to. 

More power to those who enjoy it, but it's just not for me. 

The ideal solution would be for MSFS to partner with both FlightAware and FlightRadar24, and integrate the data they get from both for a much deeper dataset that has better worldwide coverage. The deficiency in the coverage of traffic in MSFS is entirely due to the deficiencies of FlightAware's data. That's what I've been suggesting for a long time, and I still have hope that it'll happen at some point. 

I prefer scheduled traffic because it allows me to change the time of day and still have lots of traffic.

So I can fly in Japan when it's the middle of the night there IRL but still have the amount of traffic you'd have in the middle of the day.

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Tuskin38

10 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

I prefer scheduled traffic because it allows me to change the time of day and still have lots of traffic.

So I can fly in Japan when it's the middle of the night there IRL but still have the amount of traffic you'd have in the middle of the day.

That's your preference, but MSFS 2024 solves that, while still preserving dynamic traffic simply by letting you rewind time by up to 24 hours. Same with the weather. 

Scheduled traffic is fully static and as such is a very poor representation of air traffic operations, which are anything but static.

Of course, your preference is entirely valid for yourself, but schedules are thankfully becoming obsolete for me. The only reason for me to use them is to represent traffic that is not dynamically tracked, but that can still be achieved on top of dynamic traffic. 

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Abriael

Well until BeyondATC can talk to that traffic, I'm not using it.

7 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

Well until BeyondATC can talk to that traffic, I'm not using it.

Which is your choice, and a choice that is valid for you. You asked why it was a dealbreaker for me. 

If I have to choose between decent ATC (AI is not "good" ATC, and likely won't be for a long time, even beyond the fact that I do not support generative AI) that I have to pay a premium for, and fully dynamic traffic, I'll choose fully dynamic traffic every time.

I can be my own ATC if I need to, and vector myself around in a way that would be realistic. Simulating traffic in a satisfactory way is something I cannot achieve myself, so that's my priority. 

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Abriael

1 hour ago, Abriael said:

Funny, considering that default ATC is bad in literally any simulator available. So I guess for you they're all "flying games."

Of course, that's a moot point, since all home computer simulators are games, and the two terms are not in conflict. Flight simulation (like racing simulation, train simulation, and whatever simulation) is a genre of gaming and has always been. 

If you want actually good ATC, that's what Vatsim is for. If you deal with a program, it'll always be bad.

Actual real ATC doesn't sign off to watch a football game, when you are approaching an airport, or control the entire country from two stations as happens on Vatsim. 

8 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Actual real ATC doesn't sign off to watch a football game, when you are approaching an airport, or control the entire country from two stations as happens on Vatsim. 

And actual real ATC doesn't give you completely nonsensical instructions, which generative AI will keep doing for the time being. 

You're entitled to prefer 24/7 presence and full coverage over consistency of the quality of the instructions. I prefer consistently higher-quality, human interaction at the price of coverage. Can't have both, unfortunately.

When the former also comes at the cost of dynamic real-time traffic, for me, the choice is a no-brainer. 

An ideal solution does not exist, so anyone will prioritize what's important for them. 

Edited November 10, 20241 yr by Abriael

35 minutes ago, Abriael said:

And actual real ATC doesn't give you completely nonsensical instructions, which generative AI will keep doing for the time being. 

You're entitled to prefer 24/7 presence and full coverage over consistency of the quality of the instructions. I prefer consistently higher-quality, human interaction at the price of coverage. Can't have both, unfortunately.

When the former also comes at the cost of dynamic real-time traffic, for me, the choice is a no-brainer. 

An ideal solution does not exist, so anyone will prioritize what's important for them. 

Flew Vatsim for a few years, cleared for an ILS when you are 5 miles from the runway at 13,000 feet is not my idea of "consistent quality" ATC.