Today BATC trying to make me takeoff with a 7knt tailwind.  LOL stock ATC is getting it right though for msfs 2020.

 

 

Edited July 8, 2025Jul 8 by jwhak

1 hour ago, jwhak said:

Today BATC trying to make me takeoff with a 7knt tailwind.  LOL stock ATC is getting it right though for msfs 2020.

 

 

Actually, major airports often require aircraft to take off with a tailwind when the TAF shows the wind shift is only temporary and the tailwind is well within safety margins (below 10 kts). Major airports are unlikely to redirect inbound traffic, and the line of aircraft waiting for takeoff because the wind has changed direction. Doing so causes delays for dozens of flights for no reason. Of course if the wind shift will be for the next few hours or above 10kts they will change runways.

With Regional and small airports, it's a different story. With light traffic and no disruptions caused by changing runways there is no reason to take off with a tailwind.

So, BATC was probably right to require you take off with a 7kt tailwind. It happens all the time. 

Edited July 8, 2025Jul 8 by Mike T

14 hours ago, jwhak said:

Today BATC trying to make me takeoff with a 7knt tailwind.  LOL stock ATC is getting it right though for msfs 2020.

 

 

There is nothing wrong about that. A tailwind of up to 10knots is acceptable and many airports have prefered runways that will stay active with these kinds of tailwinds.

Edited July 8, 2025Jul 8 by Farlis

On 7/3/2025 at 5:18 AM, WillyTheGoat said:

As a stakeholder since BATC's inception and a designated supporter, I have consistently valued the organization's commitment to transparency and technical expertise, which initially fostered strong confidence in its offerings.  

However, recent developments suggest a discernible shift in operational efficacy, in my assessment.  

Historically, BATC operated with a core team of four developers (including three software engineers and one sound engineer), as communicated via official Discord channels during its formative phase. Leadership was spearheaded by an individual known as "Captain," while the traffic injection system—acknowledged as a foundational innovation—was engineered by "Whakamolenz," also credited as the architect of FSLTL.  

Currently, Captain's presence on Discord has markedly diminished, with no substantive community interaction recorded for several months. This decline in engagement correlates with observable delays, and potentially a cessation of progress, in core engine development—a domain primarily overseen by Captain. This hiatus has been attributed by representatives to shifting personal circumstances. While another developer has resumed community engagement following an absence, operational challenges persist.  

A significant backlog of unresolved issues has accumulated, including but not limited to: erroneous vector assignments, procedural incompatibilities at specific airports, and malfunctioning parking systems.  

Compounding this concern is the developer team's recent need requesting new issue submissions following each patch release. This policy lacks effectiveness and consistency, as stakeholders receive no indication of whether patches actually address previously reported defects. Consequently, reports frequently remain unacknowledged despite assurances that all submissions are reviewed. The community commendably attempts to mitigate non-critical issues (e.g., user errors or feature misunderstandings), yet core technical deficiencies persist unaddressed.  

This operational posture contrasts unfavorably with BATC's primary competitor, which demonstrates prompt issue acknowledgment, systematic resolution tracking, and explicit patch documentation linked to specific reports. The disparity in responsiveness is substantial. While differing monetization models may contribute, it is notable that BATC itself previously maintained higher levels of engagement than observed presently.  

Collectively, these circumstances give cause for concern regarding BATC's current strategic direction and prioritization of stakeholder experience.  

BATC is fantastic i don't get these posts its light years ahead of default and in my opinion its amazing.

43 minutes ago, Farlis said:

There is nothing wrong about that. A tailwind of up to 10knots is acceptable and many airports have pefered runways that will stay active with these kinds of tailwinds.

Correct, and some operators and or airports approve a tailwind of up to 15 knots - mostly because of very complicated approach on the opposite side provided runway length isn’t an issue.

43 minutes ago, Balint Szarka said:

Correct, and some operators and or airports approve a tailwind of up to 15 knots - mostly because of very complicated approach on the opposite side provided runway length isn’t an issue.

It should also be noted that community worked with the developers of BATC on discord in order for the program to get this right. 

In the earliest versions it didn't and would assign runways that were not necesarrily the correct ones in real life just because it was always prefering headwind.

There is also a list of airports within the program that has specifically tailoered operations files that tell the program how to implement the right flows at specific airports.

Things that include knowing the difference between a departure and an arrival runway, and knowing the preferential system.

A good example of correct implementation of this is Kerkira LGKR.

The preferential take off runway is 16 and the landing runway is 34. So that aircraft don't overfly the town. So the program correctly will let aircraft land and start on opposing ends of the runway, because this is how it is done in real life until the wind prevents it.

13 hours ago, Mike T said:

Actually, major airports often require aircraft to take off with a tailwind when the TAF shows the wind shift is only temporary and the tailwind is well within safety margins (below 10 kts). Major airports are unlikely to redirect inbound traffic, and the line of aircraft waiting for takeoff because the wind has changed direction. Doing so causes delays for dozens of flights for no reason. Of course if the wind shift will be for the next few hours or above 10kts they will change runways.

With Regional and small airports, it's a different story. With light traffic and no disruptions caused by changing runways there is no reason to take off with a tailwind.

So, BATC was probably right to require you take off with a 7kt tailwind. It happens all the time. 

Can't knock a little extra knowledge in the cup.  Thanks for the knowledge Mike T. Just a little real world experience at regional period & no major.

                                                   Happy Landings

 

Ah. Appreciate the insight on tailwinds. I kind of wondered that myself knowing that moving a bunch of airliners already lined would cause even more issues. Tailwinds for them are minimal considering how they are vs runway length. 

Thanks for the information everyone. 

See? THESE are the good discussions that need to happen. Not the pointless bickering about the voices. 

I finally had a decent BATC flight... first time ever.  I flew from MSP to IMT via WLSTN7 WLSTN at FL370 in the Flysimware Lear 35.  Almost everything BATC did was semi realistic (good enough for an entertainment product at least!)  It doesn't know the correct frequencies always but it was close, it gave me an ILS approach and the vector to final was semi realistic... it was way too far out (and descended me a little low) from what you'd get in real life (at an uncontrolled airport) but it was still reasonable.

So it is my belief that BATC can handle structured flights with jets a lot better than general aviation flights.  It must need angles and stuff for instrument approaches, sids and stars to determine how you control your aircraft.

Rather than start a new topic, maybe I can ask this here... Has MS/Asobo said anything about the roadmap for better ATC in the vanilla sim since releasing 2024?

Edited July 8, 2025Jul 8 by Virtual-Chris

Working title will be tackling it eventually IIRC

8 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Rather than start a new topic, maybe I can ask this here... Has MS/Asobo said anything about the roadmap for better ATC in the vanilla sim since releasing 2024?

 

8 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

Working title will be tackling it eventually IIRC

Actually, WT is already working on ATC. It has added and changed various things to default ATC since the release of MSFS2024. Not sure if MS/Asobo said anything about it though... Still, the changes are little and not enough to make me go from BATC back to default ATC. But hey, who knows in the future...

4 hours ago, mistolip said:

 

Actually, WT is already working on ATC. It has added and changed various things to default ATC since the release of MSFS2024. Not sure if MS/Asobo said anything about it though... Still, the changes are little and not enough to make me go from BATC back to default ATC. But hey, who knows in the future...

I'm using default ATC only. Actually also reverted to default AI Traffic too (I don't mind the fake liveries...).

It got better along SU3 and some annoying bugs hot fixed like imported flightplans failling to correctly import data like the Cruise altitude...

16 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Rather than start a new topic, maybe I can ask this here... Has MS/Asobo said anything about the roadmap for better ATC in the vanilla sim since releasing 2024?

Give it another decade, and you might see that .

 

Well all I can say is at KICT on winds KICT 092353Z 16012KT 10SM FEW050 32/20 A2996 RMK AO2 SLP131 T03220200 10339 20311 58018 BATC is ridiculous trying to give me 1L & 1R (UGH).  Look on flight aware actives are 19L & 19R.  Where does BATC get its data to determine active runways?

 

Edited July 10, 2025Jul 10 by jwhak