5 hours ago, psolk said:

Will do.

I also have the event viewer logs if that would help? 

Probably FSHud has nothing to do with MSFS crash logs - I guess you will get same error as mentioned in the MSFS bug, you can forward it to Asobo afterwards...

Another thumbs up for FSHUD v2 here after, to use the popular phrase, my Best EVER flight sim flight.  And, as I've been flying flight sims since the Commodore 64 days of 46 years ago, that is no mean feat!

I set up a flight in VR (Pimax Crystal Light) in MSFS2020 from EGCC Manchester to EGPD Aberdeen.  I used live weather - which was heavy rain with dense cloud up to mid cruise, live time (it was late afternoon/early evening) and with FSHUD running with just the FSLTL Injector.  I set a limit of around 20 aircraft in both categories which gave me a decent number of static, taxying and active ATC aircraft at both airports and in the air.

The 1 hour flight was in the Fenix A320, held at 5000 ft in dense cloud and rain until passed to London Control and then up to FL340 and blue skies

The whole thing just felt so real.  The injected airport traffic and FSHUD ATC communications traffic added immensely to the realism and FSHUD worked like a dream.  Yes - I had to mentally add 'but mind the mountains' to the ATC instruction to descend from 14000ft to 2500 ( 🙂 ), especially as it was back to zero visibility cloud density and Aberdeen approach is over mountains, but that is a known issue (ie, incorporating terrain limitations) and I have no doubt will be addressed.

MSFS2020 - a splendid sim (still)     FSHUD v2 - a splendid ATC product (already).   

 

Edited September 28, 2025Sep 28 by AJZip2

definitilly , fshud is the best atc addon  for MSFS , and ................FSHUD 3.0 will be awisome

Just now looking at atc programs. Currently using psxt/realtraffic as a trial.
 

Would fshud intercept that traffic as well? Also, any need for aiflow and/or aiground when using fshud?

 Thanks  

 

4 minutes ago, Rob G said:

Just now looking at atc programs. Currently using psxt/realtraffic as a trial.
 

Would fshud intercept that traffic as well? Also, any need for aiflow and/or aiground when using fshud?

 Thanks  

 

AIFlow and AIGround are workaround tools intended to work with MSFS controlled traffic and to solve MSFS controlled traffic problems.
FSHud has it's own internal AI Traffic management system - completely separated from the way that MSFS control the traffic.

In FSHud every AI Traffic aircraft is actually "piloted" from gate to gate according FSHud generated taxi and flight path by different conditions.

Tools like PSXT/RealTraffic is kind of "traffic broadcast reflection" that simply takes currently flying aircraft location and inject the same loaction aircraft in MSFS
without much of idea what is going on ATC side management. 

6 hours ago, FSHud said:

AIFlow and AIGround are workaround tools intended to work with MSFS controlled traffic and to solve MSFS controlled traffic problems.
FSHud has it's own internal AI Traffic management system - completely separated from the way that MSFS control the traffic.

In FSHud every AI Traffic aircraft is actually "piloted" from gate to gate according FSHud generated taxi and flight path by different conditions.

Tools like PSXT/RealTraffic is kind of "traffic broadcast reflection" that simply takes currently flying aircraft location and inject the same loaction aircraft in MSFS
without much of idea what is going on ATC side management. 

I appreciate the reply. However, I am still a little confused. Will FSHUD intercept the traffic inserted by PSXT just like it would with other injection processes?:

Is there a way to slow down the ATC responses in the beginning until you get used to them? I have never used ATC for anything before.

@FSHud What level of AI technology sits behind FS-Hud in terms of dialog with the pilot? One thing I've noticed using SayIntentions is that while its AI traffic injection control  is atrocious, it does allow me to have simple dialog with the controller. I can ask it things like what the QNH is at my alternate or other airports for example and it will tell me. If I ask it what bearing XXXX waypoint is (even if its not in my flight plan) it will tell me.

I don't recall FSHud being this flexible - I recall it being more "on rails" as some people would say. I do have FSHud but have never had much luck getting this level of "conversation" out of it. 

Is this something that does exist in the program or is it something planned?

Cheers

 

4 hours ago, Rob G said:

I appreciate the reply. However, I am still a little confused. Will FSHUD intercept the traffic inserted by PSXT just like it would with other injection processes?:

FSHud will intecepts all aircrafts in MSFS except following:
1. Default MSFS 2024 traffic aircraft - because this aircraft streamed from cloud and there is no way to get full aircraft information.
2. Online Player/VATSIM or any other streamed aircraft - because there is no way to get any of aircraft minimal intentions (like destination airport or source airport) - if ithis is how PSXT injects it's traffic, the answer is no.
 

3 hours ago, Rob G said:

Is there a way to slow down the ATC responses in the beginning until you get used to them? I have never used ATC for anything before.

You can reduce speed and effects of ATC conversations.

3 hours ago, KL Oo said:

@FSHud What level of AI technology sits behind FS-Hud in terms of dialog with the pilot? One thing I've noticed using SayIntentions is that while its AI traffic injection control  is atrocious, it does allow me to have simple dialog with the controller. I can ask it things like what the QNH is at my alternate or other airports for example and it will tell me. If I ask it what bearing XXXX waypoint is (even if its not in my flight plan) it will tell me.

I don't recall FSHud being this flexible - I recall it being more "on rails" as some people would say. I do have FSHud but have never had much luck getting this level of "conversation" out of it. 

Is this something that does exist in the program or is it something planned?

Cheers

 

You must be also noticed that SI also charges monthly subscription fee to allow this kind of feature - and the is a good reason for that:
1. Althought all of the AI technology of today - it's still not possible to run reliable AI GPT enginge on user's end because it takes a lot of CPU/GPU resources - while you have to be resource limited due to the fact that MSFS is running.
2. Running AI GPT on cloud or use AI GPT services is relatively expensive (looking on Chat GPT API prices is not relevant because there is huge continious conversation context that need to maintain to get reliable answers).
Therefore, as long as you don't mind to pay monthly fee - we can add this feature 🙂

It is also possible to add more variations (like you mentioned QNH, Alternative Airport, Direct to Waypoint and many other things) - but it just increases "amount of rails", and you still can't ask anything you like.
 

2 hours ago, FSHud said:

You must be also noticed that SI also charges monthly subscription fee to allow this kind of feature - and the is a good reason for that:
1. Althought all of the AI technology of today - it's still not possible to run reliable AI GPT enginge on user's end because it takes a lot of CPU/GPU resources - while you have to be resource limited due to the fact that MSFS is running.
2. Running AI GPT on cloud or use AI GPT services is relatively expensive (looking on Chat GPT API prices is not relevant because there is huge continious conversation context that need to maintain to get reliable answers).
Therefore, as long as you don't mind to pay monthly fee - we can add this feature 🙂

It is also possible to add more variations (like you mentioned QNH, Alternative Airport, Direct to Waypoint and many other things) - but it just increases "amount of rails", and you still can't ask anything you like.
 

Thanks for the reply - I wasn't having a go at you or your product, FSHud does a great job of controlling both AI traffic and the user aircraft. I was just asking about its AI capabilities. 

To be fair, I'd be happy to pay for them in FSHud because you've already got the AI control and user control performing really well. But while I'm happy to pay a subscription, I'm guessing a lot of others probably arent 🙂

 

 

Hello,

I am looking for a replacement for the ATC add-on I use at the moment for IFR flights with multi-crew ops, which is PF3 in combination with MCE. Both programs together give me relatively reliable ATC, and a capable FO, which can provide check-lists and deal with said ATC. But sadly, PF3 is not being further developed, and it seems the dev has capped support (forum offline).

Can FSHud, maybe with an additional add-on, be a replacement for these types of flights?

Well, I use FSHUD and BATC, both with AI traffic injected by the program itself in the case of BATC and by an external injector in FSHUD. 

With both I use FSLTL for the 3d models and with FSHUD I use the FSLTL Injector.

FSHUD deals very nicely / consistently with injected AI traffic. 

FSHUD and BATC provide you with the chance to talk yourself or use your Co-Pilot for the job, as well as for the tunning of the required freqs.

Neither does VFR control.

FSLTL is free!

I can't but recommend FSHUD !

Edited October 5, 2025Oct 5 by jcomm

1 hour ago, jcomm said:

FSHUD provides you with the chance to talk yourself or use yoiur Co-Pilot for the job, as well as for the tunning of the required freqs.

BATC also does this. Both good programs.

IMO  BATC is better at ATC.

FShud is lights out better at flight injection.

This will get me into trouble but although the voices are better in BATC they are more realistic in Fshud. 

Setup and layout is better in BATC.

Fshud needs a injector ( I also use FSLTL) 

I really like and prefer  the map used in Fshud  but that could just be me.

To me it depends on what is more important

 Live realistic traffic or better ATC.

I have enjoyed both.

Both are not perfect but are getting better with every update.

@Ron Lefebvre, 

couldn't have put it better👍👍👍

Fully agree...

Edited October 5, 2025Oct 5 by jcomm