1 hour ago, Adamski_NZ said:

Yes (sorry) - quite right. I should have said "on collision course" or something similar ... and I *do* see that happening, but not *that* often - maybe because most of my BATC flights so far have been from payware airports (mainly in NZ) and they're maybe better implemented than default Asobo ones.

Also, these taxiway errors were there for me with FSLTL Injector, prior to using BATC, so maybe the problem is common to any AI injector (so far at least).

I use SB+paid NG subscription, last time I had a taxi|AI taxi issue was when arriving KPDX V2 that I had purchased earlier....TODAY.

BATC is not free unlike fsltl, I fully expected an upgraded and more accurate ATC and AI traffic management experience. since its been close to a year since release, and knowing that bugs I had reported didn't get fixed, I deem batc a disappointment and waste of money at this point.

 

Edited March 23, 20251 yr by ypaul123

28 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

That is not 100% accurate. Most people on the server are giving them “atta boy’s.” When it comes to criticism, the folks I’ve interacted with have generally had a tone of defensiveness and belittlement, save for Captain. He’s pleasant to talk to, very receptive, and helpful. 
 

BATC has promise, but they would greatly benefit from listening to real pilots and controllers.

 

Edited March 23, 20251 yr by ypaul123

9 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I find just about all attempts at ATC to be bland and scripted.  At least SI allows conversations with ATC that feel pretty natural.

Yeah, and you can tell SI whatever you want to be blunt - it will be happy with it. That's not what I expect from an ATC controller. I think in the current state the ATC is too open on the SI side. In the real world, there are clear procedures in place that you need to stick to.

One of the core decisions that I doubt are the right ones on BATC side is the usage of the Unity engine.

The reason is the following: while I understand that the usage of this engine might help/ease the developers implementing features, this means that everyone starting this application is running another game engine on top of the flight simulator.

That will be the reason I expect SI to perform much better with the traffic injection as those are rendered "in the cloud" and not on your own PC. Fair enough, it comes with a different price tag.

7 hours ago, V1ROTA7E said:

That is not 100% accurate. Most people on the server are giving them “atta boy’s.” When it comes to criticism, the folks I’ve interacted with have generally had a tone of defensiveness and belittlement, save for Captain. He’s pleasant to talk to, very receptive, and helpful. 
 

BATC has promise, but they would greatly benefit from listening to real pilots and controllers.

You’re right, I have exaggerated the experience. It’s more truthful for me to say that at least for me, criticisms have been taken well with staff members I’ve dealt with. 

26 minutes ago, AGuther said:

Yeah, and you can tell SI whatever you want to be blunt - it will be happy

Then don't tell SI whatever you want!  If you want the ATC to be professional, then be professional yourself in how you use it.

38 minutes ago, AGuther said:

Yeah, and you can tell SI whatever you want to be blunt - it will be happy with it. That's not what I expect from an ATC controller. I think in the current state the ATC is too open on the SI side. In the real world, there are clear procedures in place that you need to stick to.

It's not really the case in the strict mode, albeit that comes with its own issues. I've been getting yelled at for not reading back in the right way. Sometimes it is microphone issues, sometimes it's my own forgetfulness.

 

 

Edited March 23, 20251 yr by Georgleboui

I'm using BATC because of it's easy to handle user interface and the price with FSTL models and beeing satisfied most of the time. Occassionally I'm missing the possibility to quick reset the traffic e.g. before collision during taxiing and also missing the opportunity to edit the Simbrief transferred flightplan directly in BATC, sometimes it will not accept the star or a waypoint although MSFS and the aircraft has accepted the plan. Mayby the possibilities were there, but could not resolve both items, discord is not the solution since it confuse me more then enlighting me. For Pushback using pushback helper and it is working fine, and at least I have an enroute chatter until the approach. Satisfied (with both exceptions noted) customer here. Best regards

1 hour ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Then don't tell SI whatever you want!  If you want the ATC to be professional, then be professional yourself in how you use it.

Well I exaggerated that to show that the ATC system isn’t capable to handle such situations. In day to day use and while you’re being Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring it can happen that you overhear something or misunderstand and that’s the side I’m coming from.

But the SI guys know about this and they are working on it…it seems they are more open to acknowledging this than you are.

1 hour ago, AGuther said:

Well I exaggerated that to show that the ATC system isn’t capable to handle such situations. In day to day use and while you’re being Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring it can happen that you overhear something or misunderstand and that’s the side I’m coming from.

But the SI guys know about this and they are working on it…it seems they are more open to acknowledging this than you are.

Well, how about sticking to the point you raised in the post I answered?  If you as an individual use standard protocols and comms, SI is very likely to respond in the manner you expect.  If you give it rubbish, it is likely to respond with rubbish.

The SI guys are indeed working on it and are super responsive.

3 hours ago, cseu said:

I'm using BATC because of it's easy to handle user interface

I agree, the user interface is very good.

The day I stopped using it was descending to FL150 inbound to EGKK, Gatwick.  I was on a STAR that ended at Willo, but BATC gave me an instruction to descend to 4000ft, cleared for the ILS 26 - when I was 20 miles WEST of the airfield at FL220!

35 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I agree, the user interface is very good.

The day I stopped using it was descending to FL150 inbound to EGKK, Gatwick.  I was on a STAR that ended at Willo, but BATC gave me an instruction to descend to 4000ft, cleared for the ILS 26 - when I was 20 miles WEST of the airfield at FL220!

Yes. the GUI is indeed easy on the eyes, but then again - the inibuilds A350 is also very good looking.
Is it effective ? No really.

What matters is what's under the hood, sir.

Besides, BATC's GUI is severely lacking in functionality - you are only given a  limited set of options from which you can choose (LLM is not very good at its current state), and I'm not even mentioning the cases where you have to reconnect to GND Freq, for example -  because BATC fails to detect that you have already been pushed back and thus a taxi request is not even presented as an option. Same goes when you're mid flight where BATC "forgets" you are in the air and have to manually reconnect to center, that is if the software itself doesn't crashes and loses connectivity with the sim altogether...

These issues were also brought to their attention (by me) and nothing has changed for me since. Their response - lack of staff\devs\small dev team.

 

 

Edited March 23, 20251 yr by ypaul123

1 hour ago, ypaul123 said:

Then I will start suing for defamation. If you think I'm joking, try me.

Thanks for the laugh. You are really a piece of work, aren't you?

1 hour ago, ypaul123 said:

You know what—I’ll make your job easier. Show me how to retrieve the logs of my chats in the beyondATC server after I was banned, and I’ll share them myself with everyone here.

Then I will start suing for defamation. If you think I'm joking, try me.

 

 

Is this over and above the previous legal action you are taking from your previous BATC thread where you said:

"P.S - Now there appears to be a little BATC word not allowed who goes by the username @Tuskin38 spreading lies about me 'spamming' their discord server. I wonder how could that be if I have never used the username I'm using here as my Discord username... I've already involved my legal representative to deal with him further."

6 hours ago, Georgleboui said:

It's not really the case in the strict mode, albeit that comes with its own issues. I've been getting yelled at for not reading back in the right way. Sometimes it is microphone issues, sometimes it's my own forgetfulness.

 

 

You are referencing to a setting that is not recommended for usage: