Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest jshyluk

FSX - 3rd incarnation of AI & ATC, & STILL no ability to declare an Emergency!?

Recommended Posts

Not sure if this has been discussed before,But come on MicroSoft, you're into your 3rd Version of AI & MORE for ATC, with the full ability to either randomly or choose many system failures... Many of which in the real world would require the declaration of an emergency & type of problem & ask for suitable assistance. - i.e. declare engine fire, hydraulic failure, systems failure, Gear up/ down failure & so on. With the ATC responding with suitable replies...Even FUIII 9 years ago had a crude version of emergency declaration, to which the ATC directed you to the nearest airport.Surely Microsoft could have developed something into FS by now, that directs you to the nearest suitable airfield for your aircraft type, or if remote, allow you to declare a ditching or crash landing etc...Is it just me, or are many simmers out there frustrated that this has still yet to be implimented?Has any third party plugin been developed or indeed possible?, to give this ability .. & I'm not talking about external volenteers manning virtual ATC.. I mean built into the sim.Sorry if this is like a bit of a rant, but i suppose it is a wee one ;-)Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Real world ... aircraft manufacturers and airlines own the rights to their designs, trademarks, logos, etc. and they prefer not to have their airliners depicted plunging into flaming heaps of aluminum with passengers flung about the nearby airspace.Tends to depress ticket sales a wee bit. ;)And believe me, if FSX animated this, you'd be seeing FSX animations on the evening news every time someone flew a jet into something. (Frankly, I'm surprised we don't see more of this anyway.)So, it's not that Microsoft wouldn't want to have this sort of realism. It's that it would be abused in the real world. Microsoft has partners and those partners have sets of priorities. It's a give and take and I think for the most part, a reasonable balance has been struck.Just my opinion,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Is it just me, or are many simmers out there frustrated that>this has still yet to be implimented?>Have to say in all these years it has never even ruffled my skirt one bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Real world ... aircraft manufacturers and airlines own the>rights to their designs, trademarks, logos, etc. and they>prefer not to have their airliners depicted plunging into>flaming heaps of aluminum with passengers flung about the>nearby airspace.>>Tends to depress ticket sales a wee bit. ;)>>And believe me, if FSX animated this, you'd be seeing FSX>animations on the evening news every time someone flew a jet>into something. (Frankly, I'm surprised we don't see more of>this anyway.)>>So, it's not that Microsoft wouldn't want to have this sort of>realism. It's that it would be abused in the real world.>Microsoft has partners and those partners have sets of>priorities. It's a give and take and I think for the most>part, a reasonable balance has been struck.>>Just my opinion,Kevin,Where did the OP say anything about animations?? We have ATC, and we can have equipment failures. Why is there no facility in the ATC menu to declare an emergency and get vectors to the nesarest available airport?? That's all he's asking. I can't say that I haven't wondered about the exact same thing because I have.Regards,Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who has had quite a few rw emergencies-vectors to the nearest airport has never been a request-and there is the whole difficulty-emergencies are so varied and responses from atc would have to be equally varied to add any kind of realism. There is a lot more that could be added to atc that is done on a regular basis (ammended clearances, vectors around special use airspace/traffic/, altitude changes, weather deviations etc.) that I'd like to see done first. As for vectors to the nearest airport-look at your gps-a lot quicker than asking atc! :-)http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hi,>>The MS bloggers have said that the canned ATC is considered an>obsolete feature (replaced by multiplayer ATC) and will not be>updated, even in future versions.>>-->Tom Gibson>>Cal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.com>>Freeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.com>>Drop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___It couldn't be further from obsolete. With this system, we can get ATC services for any flight, anywhere, at the time of our choosing, with consistent quality (regardless of the fidelity of the current system).NONE of the multiplayer options offer this nor will they likely ever offer this.J-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FS series strikes a balance between the general/casual user and the hardcore simmer. Most everything modelled can be built upon by 3rd party users and I personally prefer that so I can choose which feature I'd like to have detail for such as a specific aircraft, weather, ATC and the like.Regarding ATC you have Radar Contact, VOX atc and multiplayer, all more detailed than the generic FS ATC which I will note is actually pretty good considering the price of the sim.As far as an overhaul to ATC I believe one of the devs at Aces stated it wasn't going to happen, but that was over a year ago so who knows, maybe they'll change their minds, but like everything in FS you have dedicated 3rd party teams handling most of the generic aspects of the sim.What I like about that is in many cases they continually update their product and make changes, something I don't think you would see from Aces considering FS is not the only software they maintain.Of course, not that I wouldn't like them to overhaul the ATC system, but I'm personally not that upset about it as there are a few very well done 3rd party options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presently ACES is collecting data for a possible enhancement with the current ATC system vs what we can do with trickery in the XML. Will they use it is not known at this point but if enough Users request a better ATC through the proper e-mail address to MS then anything is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One stumbling block to improving the ATC involves technology that made the ATC so revolutionary for FS2002: real voices.Basically, the MSFS talking ATC uses voice acting, which at the turn of the milennium was a new-ish concept for flight sim. The only other option is the old talking-computer voice, which sounds un-lifelike at the very least. Voice acting for video games is an extremely demanding process in terms of time and cost commitment, due to the high requirements placed on the sound engineers. Every single piece of dialogue must be clearly read, cleanly archived, and then accurately doped into the program so that it plays in real-time on precisely the correct cue. Then, there are issues regarding file size, sound compression, and so on that keep the engineers and programmers busy long after the voice talent has called it a day. Add to that, FSX has hundreds of thousands of cues to keep track of: airport names, fixes, numbers, alphanumerics, carrier names, and procedures. Each item has to be read aloud by the talent, sweetened by the engineer, doped by the editor, and then matched to its own unique cue by the programmer. Then, on top of it all, we do all that over and over again because there's a number of different male and female voices. With the SDK, I am pretty sure it's possible to create your own custom sound file for FSX and add your own voice into the game, but nobody does it because nobody has the time and patience to do it without getting paid a fair amount.The voices for the MSFS ATC represent a high water mark for audio achievement in video games. It's not easy to find a computer game that has this much voice content that is of a consistently clear and appealing quality. That's also the hurdle, though. It's just too difficult to add onto this system using traditional means. Back in 2002, it would be impossible to predict how computer systems would evolve that would allow for ATC improvements, so MS made the system as best as they could to appeal to as many people as possible. It wasn't a system that looked to be improved, though.In my own opinion, I think that programs like EditVoicePack really caught the ACES team by surprise. You don't have a fully synthetic voice, like the talking computer, but on the other hand, it's not live voice acting, either. EditVoicePack used concatenated voices, which means that it looks for phenomes - syllables, basic voice sounds - , catalogues all of them into a giant data matrix, and then calls on them to make new words. It's a bit like a MIDI table, I think. Probably concatenated voices, or the new improved AT&T synthetic voices are going to be the way of the future for MSFS ATC. They likely will not add to the current real voice system, as I doubt many of the original voice actors are willing to go back to doing sessions. As an aside, I remember meeting one of the vocie actors at FanCon. I won't mention who he is, because I don't know if he would like that. However, I've talked with this person several times, and if he hadn't told me he was Voice # X in the ATC, I doubt I would ever have guessed. It's not that the voices in the ATC are unclear, but by their nature, spoken only a word or two at a time, and then made to sound like radio voices, the MSFS ATC voices are at once iconic and anonymous at the same time. A tough act to follow.Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like to thank everyone so far for their insightful responses.Hyper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hi,>>The MS bloggers have said that the canned ATC is considered an>obsolete feature (replaced by multiplayer ATC) and will not be>updated, even in future versions.>>-->Tom Gibson>>Cal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.com>>Freeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.com>>Drop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___Wow, if that's true I REALLY hope they fix their crappy "Lamespy" connections....VATSIM is fun but only if you fly in one area, and usually you only get 5-10 others flying in a huge area of airspace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Add to that, FSX has hundreds of thousands of cues to keep>track of: airport names, fixes, numbers, alphanumerics,>carrier names, and procedures. Each item has to be read aloud>by the talent, sweetened by the engineer, doped by the editor,>and then matched to its own unique cue by the programmer. Jeff, it's been a few years since I looked really closely at this, but as I recall there something on the order of ~37,800 individual .wav files needed......for each voice.That's quite a monumental task indeed... (he said drily) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be nice to see, but there are so many other functions of ATC that I would like to see first. The recognition of SIDs and STARs, better handling of AI aircraft, holds for spacing, and holds for weather are a few on my list. Given that emergencies in FS are rarely unplanned (unless you have an add-on like FS Reliability Factor in FS9), it isn't a crucial feature for me.----------------------------------------------------------------John MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satellite, Private ASEL 141.2 hrs, 314 landings, 46 inst. apprs.Virtual: MSFS 2004, MIDCON P-401"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> FSX - 3rd incarnation of AI & ATC, & STILL no ability to declare an Emergency!?Declaring an emergency is not something I would like to see, personally, but advancements in AI and ATC are definitely needed. FSX has been a big disappointment in that respect. And is for me the biggest reason why I'm not using it. If MS is never gonna update those systems, FS9 has a long future ahead of it.Now, there are alternatives for ATC, but the problem with those addons is that they don't do as a good a job at controlling AI as the default ATC does. I would want FS or an addon to control both AI and user according to the same principles and obviously there should be interaction between the two. AI should be aware of the user. Separation anyone... There's no point in having a great ATC addon if AI is controlled by a separate system. And online flying is nice - although I've never tried it - but it can never have the same coverage as a program. Global coverage and 24/7 are a must. Besides the ATC aspect, we really need better airport management. One-way runways without the need for multiple Afcads. The use of non-parallel runways without them being locked in a predefined star configuration. Better behavior allround of traffic all around the airport. A slightly different issue, but sloped runways would be nice as well.Just some of the issues that need to be worked on, it is a flight simulator after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of all the dynamics of real world ATC, declaring an emergency is probably the lowest on the totum pole for me. A nice to have, yes, but with so much wrong with the current circa FS2002 ATC module, there is so much more to be fixed before emergency declarations come to mind.And, NO MICROSOFT, real person ATC will NOT replace AI ATC any time soon. Sure the dream of having thousands of aircraft depicted as in the real world and controlled by real world ATC at any place and any time is a wonderful dream, but it ain't no reality. As it stands now, the airspaces are sparcely populated, ATC is sparcely manned and one cannot enjoy a consistant experience everywhere in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak for ACES, but I would guess without much doubt that Gamespy will be dropped for the nest FS. Multiplayer Internet connectivity for computer games has come a very long way since the time when Gamespy was considered as the best fit for FSX.This is my personal opinion, and may or may not be the same as the official opinion of AVSIM on this topic, if any.Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites