20 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

How does BATC ai traffic compare to FSLTL?

BATC does not have AI traffic. It uses whatever fleet you have installed. FSLTL, AIG, and JF Traffic are all supported.

5 hours ago, kerosene31 said:

Just to clarify, BATC has no subscription.  If you want the premium voices, it is an additional, but one time cost.  

I thought I was clear enough. Each time you use up the premium voice characters you have to buy new ones.

2 hours ago, CFIJose said:

BATC does not have AI traffic. It uses whatever fleet you have installed. FSLTL, AIG, and JF Traffic are all supported.

BATC has not have its own AI MODELS. But it does have AI TRAFFIC.

Edited February 20Feb 20 by Farlis

37 minutes ago, Farlis said:

BATC has not have its own AI MODELS. But it does have AI TRAFFIC:

Thank you for clarifying that there's a difference.

To me, controlling AI Traffic is not the same thing as having AI Traffic.

As a JF Traffic users since the FS9, I always thought that AI Traffic meant a fleet of airliners and ATC control. In F9, they even added additional ATC voices. You could even create FPs for the AI Traffic.

I went through that phase too, especially with default ATC in terrain-heavy areas. For me the biggest change was stopping trying to make the built-in ATC behave like something reliable for IFR and instead either flying the procedure myself or using a third-party tool when I actually wanted the ATC side to be part of the flight.\n\nIf you enjoy IFR itself, I wouldn’t give up on it because of the stock ATC. The procedure part can still be really satisfying once you separate it from the weak link. In my case I do a lot of offline IFR and FSHud has been the one that felt the most usable for that, mainly because the vectoring and airport configuration side give me more predictable arrivals than the default sim does.\n\nIf you fly a lot in Alaska specifically, I’d also simplify the environment while you’re getting comfortable again: shorter routes, one aircraft you know well, and published procedures you can cross-check yourself instead of trusting every descent blindly. That made IFR a lot less frustrating for me.

No love for P2ATC in this thread? lol

I actually see that theme a lot on these forums, plenty of folks comparing and complaining over BATC and SI and FSHUD but rarely does anyone mention P2ATC. I guess it's 'too old'? I find it invaluable and I wouldn't want to use MSFS2020 without it; the EFB is probably better in 2024, but for 2020, having the map and flight planner up on a second monitor is fantastic. Handles all the radio work (either with voice recognition or co-pilot), auto tunes frequencies when handed over, and most importantly, doesn't require Simbrief, it has its own flight planner built in, which is much faster to fill out, save flight plans for repeat use etc. You don't even need a filed flight plan, you can just enter the IACO you want to land at, and double clicking that waypoint in the P2ATC window brings up all the runways, approaches, and frequencies for that airport, you can then just radio the tower and request clearance for whatever type of approach you want it it'll take care of you. Its perfect for VFR and GA use IMO. Can't speak to airliners, as I'm not that far into the hobby yet lol

Set up is fairly involved but entirely documented and I ran into almost no issues (getting current AIRAC data without a navigraph sub was the hardest part), the voices are fine one you set them up (the default MS voices do sound robotic, but the software comes with ability to tune the voices to be faster/clearer/have radio static etc, so it doesn't sound bad at all). 

TBH, they (P2ATC) got my money by having a ten day trial - after ten days and all the set up, I was used to it and hooked in; BATC would seriously benefit from having one as well.

Edited April 14Apr 14 by Kristofski
clarity

Who is "they"?

I fly with SayIntentions and despite the high cost, I never, ever get flown into a mountain.  

5 hours ago, Kristofski said:

No love for P2ATC in this thread? lol

Immersion has progressed so much in the last 6 years.  The controller and pilot voices from BATC are almost indistinguishable from real ATC calls, to my ears.

Having heard the voices from P2ATC, regardless how good the functionality may be, I'd feel like I was back in 2008.   The MS voices (whether tweaked or not) are a million miles away from today's AI voice 'state of the art'.

This speaks to an interesting aspect of ATC addons;  as I see it, there are users who are more drawn to the procedural accuracy included within an ATC addon, and those more drawn to general ambience and 'feel'.   I'm personally in the latter camp.  I read some users here who are heavily frustrated because something like BATC told them to descend too early. My solution to that is simply that I'll ignore the request, until I'm ready to go down 🙂

Or for receiving vectors that aren't ideal on approach.  I'll just do my own thing, and contact the tower when appropriate.   I am not suggesting that everyone needs to perceive ATC addons in the way I do.  Just that for me, the overall ambience, immersion and enjoyment from something like BATC, is the purpose I'm using it.   I guess those that enjoy P2ATC are in the other camp - they can tolerate 2008-era voices, as long as the procedural accuracy is there.

No-one's right or wrong; it's just a case of ATC addons catering to different needs.

MSFS 2024 specializes in GA flying.  Go for it.

dd

The voices in P3D were absolutely fine for me. What I need is AI planes that move smoothly (up and down slopes, and turning corners), convincing take off animations where the aircraft rotates instead of just jumping off the ground, convincing landings (flare instead of ram into the ground like a bomb), and an airport environment that does not see AI planes operating from both ends of a runway, or getting stuck on the taxiway because the ATC is not clever enough to work out the location and movement of all aircraft. P3D actually did a much better job of this than some people realise; not perfect, but not bad either). I have no idea what improvements to these core features any of the third party addons bring to the table, but the default AI environment is a waste of processing power.

Edited April 14Apr 14 by Christopher Low

10 hours ago, Kristofski said:

No love for P2ATC in this thread? lol

I actually see that theme a lot on these forums, plenty of folks comparing and complaining over BATC and SI and FSHUD but rarely does anyone mention P2ATC. I guess it's 'too old'? I find it invaluable and I wouldn't want to use MSFS2020 without it; the EFB is probably better in 2024, but for 2020, having the map and flight planner up on a second monitor is fantastic. Handles all the radio work (either with voice recognition or co-pilot), auto tunes frequencies when handed over, and most importantly, doesn't require Simbrief, it has its own flight planner built in, which is much faster to fill out, save flight plans for repeat use etc. You don't even need a filed flight plan, you can just enter the IACO you want to land at, and double clicking that waypoint in the P2ATC window brings up all the runways, approaches, and frequencies for that airport, you can then just radio the tower and request clearance for whatever type of approach you want it it'll take care of you. Its perfect for VFR and GA use IMO. Can't speak to airliners, as I'm not that far into the hobby yet lol

Set up is fairly involved but entirely documented and I ran into almost no issues (getting current AIRAC data without a navigraph sub was the hardest part), the voices are fine one you set them up (the default MS voices do sound robotic, but the software comes with ability to tune the voices to be faster/clearer/have radio static etc, so it doesn't sound bad at all). 

TBH, they (P2ATC) got my money by having a ten day trial - after ten days and all the set up, I was used to it and hooked in; BATC would seriously benefit from having one as well.

Pilot2ATC has always been excellent for a solid IFR experience. Way more to it than people realize

On 2/18/2026 at 9:53 PM, P_7878 said:

It can be done. I’ve done it often, myself being a mountain lover, and a frequent mountain explorer in MSFS.

Done this?
Colorado High Country Bush Trip (Long) - User Content for MSFS | Flightsim.to

... and...

 

16 hours ago, bofhlusr said:

Done this?
Colorado High Country Bush Trip (Long) - User Content for MSFS | Flightsim.to

... and...

 

Oh...thanks for picking up on a comment of mine from 2 months ago...🙂...

I will look into the above videos, and will surely, replicate some of it...seem very nicely put together along with charts and maps.

Yes, such Bush Flying is indeed challenging and enjoyable in our SIM. Since my FSX days, I have gathered (and preserved to this day) several books on bush flying and bush country airports (meant for RW Pilots) in the mountainous regions of North America. I would regularly pick a random airport e.g., in the states of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, and fly to/from it. I also do this once in a while in MSFS.

However, in MSFS, with its vastly improved (default) global mountain landscape (over the past SIMs), I've focused on higher elevations of the Alps, Rockies, Andes, and Himalayas (have had chance to visit these ranges in RW, with the exception of the Andes; maybe one day in future). Close to home, the Rockies range is my favorite, along with the Appalachians of the eastern U.S. In my several visits to Denver, I've visited the Rockies more often than the city of Denver itself...🙂...

During the last few years of MSFS, I have explored these mountains in the SIM quite extensively and posted several accounts in the Screenshots Forum.

I've found particularly fascinating to fly upstream along some of the major rivers of the World, all the way to their origin in the high mountains of the above ranges. Nothing is more daunting and challenging than e.g., tracking the mighty Brahmaputra River back to its (glacial) source in the densest of the Himalayas, up near 17,000 ft altitude. It's remarkable to observe how such a river, following the principles of gravity, guides itself down from such high elevations, twisting and turning in the mountains, finding the path of least resistance, and eventually bursting into the plains of South Asia, instantly breaking out into myriad channels. I have seen this place in RW, and it was equally fascinating re-visit in MSFS.

Of course, for such mountainous flying, one needs to choose the a/c accordingly, one that's powerful and also maneuverable (a C172 will not do...🙂...); there are several excellent options in MSFS. Despite all this being virtual, as one is navigating the valleys in such dense and high mountains, constant situational (and altitude) awareness is a must, but it is quite a rewarding experience in mountain flying.

Thanks for the comment and the videos.

Cheers...!

6 hours ago, P_7878 said:

Oh...thanks for picking up on a comment of mine from 2 months ago...🙂...

I will look into the above videos, and will surely, replicate some of it...seem very nicely put together along with charts and maps.

Yes, such Bush Flying is indeed challenging and enjoyable in our SIM. Since my FSX days, I have gathered (and preserved to this day) several books on bush flying and bush country airports (meant for RW Pilots) in the mountainous regions of North America. I would regularly pick a random airport e.g., in the states of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, and fly to/from it. I also do this once in a while in MSFS.

However, in MSFS, with its vastly improved (default) global mountain landscape (over the past SIMs), I've focused on higher elevations of the Alps, Rockies, Andes, and Himalayas (have had chance to visit these ranges in RW, with the exception of the Andes; maybe one day in future). Close to home, the Rockies range is my favorite, along with the Appalachians of the eastern U.S. In my several visits to Denver, I've visited the Rockies more often than the city of Denver itself...🙂...

During the last few years of MSFS, I have explored these mountains in the SIM quite extensively and posted several accounts in the Screenshots Forum.

I've found particularly fascinating to fly upstream along some of the major rivers of the World, all the way to their origin in the high mountains of the above ranges. Nothing is more daunting and challenging than e.g., tracking the mighty Brahmaputra River back to its (glacial) source in the densest of the Himalayas, up near 17,000 ft altitude. It's remarkable to observe how such a river, following the principles of gravity, guides itself down from such high elevations, twisting and turning in the mountains, finding the path of least resistance, and eventually bursting into the plains of South Asia, instantly breaking out into myriad channels. I have seen this place in RW, and it was equally fascinating re-visit in MSFS.

Of course, for such mountainous flying, one needs to choose the a/c accordingly, one that's powerful and also maneuverable (a C172 will not do...🙂...); there are several excellent options in MSFS. Despite all this being virtual, as one is navigating the valleys in such dense and high mountains, constant situational (and altitude) awareness is a must, but it is quite a rewarding experience in mountain flying.

Thanks for the comment and the videos.

Cheers...!

I wouldn't know if you've seen these but in case you haven't checkout Nordheim Missions too. They also cover canyons, the Alps, and other rivers too.

Adventure World Rivers I-IV · Unofficial MSFS Marketplace Browser