Hi All,

I currently use Beyond ATC with traffic injection which is fine. I am keen to give Say Intentions a go after seeing them in Holland last week. The bit that is bugging me is the lack of ground traffic injection at the moment. Has anyone got suggestions of how to use Say Intentions in MSFS2024 while having active ground traffic? Potentially through FSLTL? Does this work well or is it just better to use BATC?

Thanks

Matt

Just use the FSLTL injector with SI.

My preference is for ATC to control and seperate AI traffic otherwise I find using it a bit pointless.

 

Is there a way to move the SI window to a client device yet?  Having any window open is a total immersion killer for me so today I run the FSHUD interface on a client machine...

4 minutes ago, flyingscampi said:

Just use the FSLTL injector with SI.

My preference is for ATC to control and seperate AI traffic otherwise I find using it a bit pointless.

 

Does SI control traffic too now? Tried the 24 hours demo some time ago and liked it (expecially regarding VFR and talking to ATC in my own language for VFR flights at small airports), but the lack of controlled traffic stopped me to subscribe. Using BATC now mainly cause of traffic.

 

I use BATC and really like it. It isn't perfect and sometimes the vectoring/altitude assignments go wrong but in general it adds a lot to the experience and makes the sim a lot more immersive, especially with the traffic.

16 minutes ago, flyingscampi said:

Just use the FSLTL injector with SI.

My preference is for ATC to control and seperate AI traffic otherwise I find using it a bit pointless.

 

I think SI does this now from what i have read? You just dont hear it? Or is this another setting you need to change?

I think I answered my question above as well.  I am relatively pleased with FSHUD and it's AI control so I am going to try the 24 hour demo as it would need to be exponentially better than FSHUD for $195 per year!  I mean if I was using this as long as I used PF3 and FSHUD it would have cost me $3,900!!!  Even using it for just 4 years which is reasonable with the MSFS release cycles would cost $780!!!  After typing this out I don't think I am going to do the trial after all.  It's just not feasible. 

12 minutes ago, mattloveday1987 said:

I think SI does this now from what i have read? You just dont hear it? Or is this another setting you need to change?

Traffic Injection

-

Coming Soon

Can I use SayIntentions.AI from my iPad?

Created by SayIntentions Support, Modified on Fri, 23 Aug, 2024 at 1:47 PM by Justice McCracken

Yes, we use a feature called ComLink, which allows you to view the SayIntentions com history (and tune frequencies) from ANY device, ANY time, without the need to install additional software.

 

Simply open the web browser on your device and visit:  https://sayintentions.ai/comlink after you've loaded your flight.

 

33 minutes ago, ConairMSFS said:

Does SI control traffic too now? Tried the 24 hours demo some time ago and liked it (expecially regarding VFR and talking to ATC in my own language for VFR flights at small airports), but the lack of controlled traffic stopped me to subscribe. Using BATC now mainly cause of traffic.

 

SI traffic feature is in development, when it's released I'll try it as well (if reviews are favourable!)

I use BATC as it ticks my boxes (except button assignment on VKB controllers)

2 hours ago, mattloveday1987 said:

Hi All,

I currently use Beyond ATC with traffic injection which is fine. I am keen to give Say Intentions a go after seeing them in Holland last week. The bit that is bugging me is the lack of ground traffic injection at the moment. Has anyone got suggestions of how to use Say Intentions in MSFS2024 while having active ground traffic? Potentially through FSLTL? Does this work well or is it just better to use BATC?

Thanks

Matt

I have both and also have 7 more invites to give out to use SI for free with their OpenSky beta. On my last flight I used both with turning off voices in BATC for both ATC and Traffic. Then I just used SI for all the ATC as normal. I flew from New Orleans to Hobby so both airports had plenty of AI traffic at the gates and so of them were operating but non gave me conflicts. 

Since I have the full version of SI I also get radio chatter from other users who were in the area on that freq at some point and time. I chose that over the BATC AI traffic calls since I didnt want BATC to step on the SI controllers. It worked fine for me so I'll be doing that until SI gets native AI Traffic.

If you want an invite to use SI for free with no expiration (basically everything BATC is doing as far as ATC goes but for free unlike the BATC that cost money to buy) then PM your email address and I'll get you the link. 

 

 

1 hour ago, psolk said:

Is there a way to move the SI window to a client device yet?  Having any window open is a total immersion killer for me so today I run the FSHUD interface on a client machine...

As soon as I start the SI client, I immediately minimize it and never look at it again. SI is all voice so theres no reason to have the window open. 

BATC has the best voices by far in Premium. However the traffic does some crazy stuff like nosedive into the runway teleport into the air, do an instant 360 and keep flying, push and starts that are way too fast. They also don’t support historical weather which I’m sorry I’m not going to only fly at night when I get home. 
 

I’ve now switched back to SI using PSXT which gives me lots of traffic and SI can detect that traffic and make you hold short etc. Also the chatter is really good.

However SI will forget about you sometimes which sucks and will forget about what it had told you 5 mins ago to do. 

 

there is no perfect ATC program and I’m sure I will continue to switch between both. 

On a side note, I wonder whatever happened with VoxATC @kevinfirth I recall you were a tester, is there any progress on that front?

*Edit

I found they have a discord and there was an update by Kevin a few days ago. Summary is as follows

• * Working version for '24, don't seem to be targeting a '2020 release anymore or atleast '24 is the main focus
• * voice recognition is now LLM based
• * more voices added
• * simbrief support added
• * VFR support added in accordance with CAP413 standards including radar service, military transition
• * working with AIG on dynamic VFR flight plans including circuits, CX and local
• No date on release, ready when its ready

From what I'm reading, core functionality is there but its just now about bugfixing. Though I could've sworn Kevin said this a year ago as-well. No matter, excited to see how it bodes.

Edited March 18, 20251 yr by Lucky38i

1 hour ago, Lucky38i said:

On a side note, I wonder whatever happened with VoxATC @kevinfirth I recall you were a tester, is there any progress on that front?

*Edit

I found they have a discord and there was an update by Kevin a few days ago. Summary is as follows

• * Working version for '24, don't seem to be targeting a '2020 release anymore or atleast '24 is the main focus
• * voice recognition is now LLM based
• * more voices added
• * simbrief support added
• * VFR support added in accordance with CAP413 standards including radar service, military transition
• * working with AIG on dynamic VFR flight plans including circuits, CX and local
• No date on release, ready when its ready

From what I'm reading, core functionality is there but its just now about bugfixing. Though I could've sworn Kevin said this a year ago as-well. No matter, excited to see how it bodes.

Yep, we added more 🙂  And then 2024 came along and made things more difficult with the streaming aspects.  And, divorce and day jobs kinda made things more difficult, sorry!

After using BATC with enough flights to get a good understanding of how it works and how its different from SI, I've got to say that I feel SI is going about the ATC part the better way. I say this for the following reasons.

BATC needs a flight plan to even use it. Now this might be for AI traffic purposes but regardless, if its not and its being coded for ATC services then how will BATC handle VFR when it comes? With SI, I can give a cold call to ground with no filed flight plan and be on my way. It has no idea if I want to stay in the pattern or what direction of travel I plan to depart the airport until they ask or I tell them. Coming from PilotEdge, as well as real life flying, you learn to state what you plans are once airborne in the cold call.

At any given point while flying VFR I can pick up flight following.

SI handles airspace transitioning perfectly. I was on a flight where I normally fly at an altitude that has be above Class D but on this flight I was cruising at 1,500 and realized I needed to request transition from two abutting airspaces and it was all just perfect.

Where BATC will not let you pick an approach, SI will. BATC under some conditions will let the user pick an approach but if you fly down low, it seems to be 100% not an option. With SI, you can request various approaches and get them.

With BATC, you need to pick where you park and BATC has to feel like that spot works for your plane. To do that, after landing, you have to open the BATC map and then look at the parking spots to find a parking spot number and hope that even though you are in a small GA plane looking to park at the FBO, that the parking spot is correct. With SI you just state where you would like to go after landing without needing to pull up a map of the airports parking spot numbers and they give you the correct taxi clearance.

BTW the was the correct taxi instruction to get to Atlantic from were I exited the runway at B2.

These are just a handful of examples but the pattern that I've noticed is the SI is more understanding and accommodating where BATC seems to be more rigid and scripted in how it handles the flight. To BATC credit it is also trying to work other AI traffic where SI is not, but it seems that there are two completely different approaches to how the ATC is designed to handle the users plane.

It is for this as to why I feel SI will be more successful with the users experience based off the AI just being smarter and more open and understanding. This is not a dis on BATC as I have their product and use it as well. Its just more of an observation of how they differ to get to the same results and with BATC (currently) they seem to be less user friendly.

Edited March 20, 20251 yr by Ident

55 minutes ago, Ident said:

It is for this as to why I feel SI will be more successful

Depends, what successful means.

Regarding functionality, yes.

Regarding sales, no. Never ever will I buy or even try it for 200$ per year. At 50$ I will start thinking, but then it must be exceptional good!