Just come into Barajas on the competitor product.  Silence nearly the whole way from LEIB, despite having my traffic density on 6.  

On landing there were two aircraft parked on the runway.  One struggling to get off on the high speed exit taxiway.  

Every week I get an email about some fluff I didn't ask for and that has no bearing on the core ATC experience.  I've just cancelled my subscription.  It's been nearly two years as a premium member or whatever they called it, so that must be well over $300 invested.  

Going all in with BATC for now, and hope my patience gets rewarded.  It feels a bit more on rails, but I like the accents, I generally don't get routed into any aircraft.  I haven't been routed into a mountain for a while now.  It seems to (slowly) be heading in the right direction.  I'm hoping for vectoring improvements, and AI VFR traffic, as well as VFR procedures for the whole world (even if they are just generic)

Edited May 4May 4 by Langeveldt

3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

As you can see a very different aircraft to Boeing and Airbus.

Not really though, not in the examples given anyway.  Everyone uses block altitudes.  I use them often enough while oceanic even in 737s.  I would think BATC could honor a block altitude with no problem; just like real ATC, there would be no need to monitor or care about anything the aircraft was doing as long as it remained in the block.

I'm more interested in having it not descend me into mountains or drop me on a downwind and forget about me lol.

When BATC works, it works great.  Unfortunately it gets stuck a lot.  Flight today JFK to Incheon. Things went beautifully until I was just behind another aircraft in line for 22R.  Then just sat there waiting for takeoff clearance as the departures just piled up behind me in line on the taxiway.  No other aircraft on approach or crossing the runway.  

On 5/4/2026 at 5:49 AM, Langeveldt said:

Just come into Barajas on the competitor product.  Silence nearly the whole way from LEIB, despite having my traffic density on 6.  

On landing there were two aircraft parked on the runway.  One struggling to get off on the high speed exit taxiway.  

Every week I get an email about some fluff I didn't ask for and that has no bearing on the core ATC experience.  I've just cancelled my subscription.  It's been nearly two years as a premium member or whatever they called it, so that must be well over $300 invested.  

Going all in with BATC for now, and hope my patience gets rewarded.  It feels a bit more on rails, but I like the accents, I generally don't get routed into any aircraft.  I haven't been routed into a mountain for a while now.  It seems to (slowly) be heading in the right direction.  I'm hoping for vectoring improvements, and AI VFR traffic, as well as VFR procedures for the whole world (even if they are just generic)

 

26 minutes ago, 3catcircus said:

When BATC works, it works great.  Unfortunately it gets stuck a lot.  Flight today JFK to Incheon. Things went beautifully until I was just behind another aircraft in line for 22R.  Then just sat there waiting for takeoff clearance as the departures just piled up behind me in line on the taxiway.  No other aircraft on approach or crossing the runway.  

 

I think it has a lot to do with all the third party airports and decoding all the data they provide.
After taking off from Asobo Madrid instead of the payware Madrid, I didn't have this problem.  

I'm having a lot of fun with BATC.  It is really getting me where I want to go to, in busy skies, without much problem.  

I guess it is a bit "on rails", but I'd prefer that whilst being predictable.  I hope they can kick on with VFR traffic and stuff.  

 

 

On 5/9/2026 at 5:17 PM, Langeveldt said:

I think it has a lot to do with all the third party airports and decoding all the data they provide.
After taking off from Asobo Madrid instead of the payware Madrid, I didn't have this problem.  

I'm having a lot of fun with BATC.  It is really getting me where I want to go to, in busy skies, without much problem.  

I guess it is a bit "on rails", but I'd prefer that whilst being predictable.  I hope they can kick on with VFR traffic and stuff.  

 

 

I don't think so - at least not in my case.  I have only the free Aerosoft Paderborn from the marketplace, everything else is stock.

i bought it in April and for the most part its fine but it is very frustrating. Vectoring is def not quite right.  Many times it just stops responding and I need to restart it, then the issue of whether or not you have to req ifr clearance again or it will continue with the flightplan.  There are things not implemented yet, like changing approach and runway which I found out when I had chosen a runway too short for the a320 but it would not let me change it!  One of the annoying things with it is that it at tod many times it will give you the approach and runway, report when ready for decent, and when you read back, it says, descend to... wrong words used .. but then at times you go back to ATC and say read to descend and you end up in a loop of, request altitude, give them an altitude and then it says unable to give you that at this time.. even though they asked when you are ready to descend.  Also ground traffic control is non existent, and sometimes I can have 6 planes ready to take off and not moving..

Edited May 12May 12 by targetpractice2

5 hours ago, targetpractice2 said:

i bought it in April and for the most part its fine but it is very frustrating. Vectoring is def not quite right.  Many times it just stops responding and I need to restart it, then the issue of whether or not you have to req ifr clearance again or it will continue with the flightplan.  There are things not implemented yet, like changing approach and runway which I found out when I had chosen a runway too short for the a320 but it would not let me change it!  One of the annoying things with it is that it at tod many times it will give you the approach and runway, report when ready for decent, and when you read back, it says, descend to... wrong words used .. but then at times you go back to ATC and say read to descend and you end up in a loop of, request altitude, give them an altitude and then it says unable to give you that at this time.. even though they asked when you are ready to descend.  Also ground traffic control is non existent, and sometimes I can have 6 planes ready to take off and not moving..

I suggest you get on Discord and also take a look at our tutorial, a lot of the questions are answered there within.

1) If you reconnect in the air, you do not have to file a new plan, just announce on frequency and it will continue fine
2) You can change the runway and approach. I do both regularly. Needs to be an active runway of course, but at least one that fits your aircraft type will be active at all times. Again, look at the tutorial and wiki for more infos.
3) Yeah the "report when ready" readback is a bit too strict. You need to say "call when ready" at the end. This interaction needs more freedom of phraseology.

For anything else please get on Discord, post a log and someone will tell you what's going on. It takes some time to understand BATC's flows and that's why we have an extensive wiki. That said stuck traffic is likely a bug, but even then no one can fix it if you don't file a report.

3 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

You can change the runway and approach.

Not after the descend phase has already begun. Your only chance to change the runway and approach when you first hear the "expect RW xy". Once it tells you what approach you will be getting you can only change the approach but no longer the runway.

BATC called for around landing at KSEA. I love those curve balls scenarios! OK, first BATC gave me vectors climb runway heading. Fine!

Next, BATC switched me to some kind of crosswind leg turning northbound. OK! However, That leg extended beyond 15 mile into rising terrain 😞 Bite me LOL

Some vectors are ok some are totally miss especially in high profile airports like KSEA

Hello, I'm posting here because I never received a response on Discord.

When BeyondATC gives you a vector, it's sometimes incorrect and even unrealistic (opposite direction). In this situation, if I ask BeyondATC for a "direct" flight to a waypoint on the flight plan (often IAF or FAF), which is the waypoint located after the vector, BeyondATC systematically refuses the "direct" request.
However, it would be useful, when BeyondATC "gets confused with the vectoring," to create a backup option such as "Backup Direct to Resuming Flight Plan."
What do you think?

Edited May 12May 12 by Area

3 minutes ago, Area said:

Hello, I'm posting here because I never received a response on Discord.

When BeyondATC gives you a vector, it's sometimes incorrect and even unrealistic (opposite direction). In this situation, if I ask BeyondATC for a "direct" flight to a waypoint on the flight plan (often IAF or FAF), which is the waypoint located after the vector, BeyondATC systematically refuses the "direct" request.
However, it would be useful, when BeyondATC "gets confused with the vectoring," to create a backup option such as "Backup Direct to Resuming Flight Plan."
What do you think?

For "go around" scenarios they could have used published missed approach (if airport has instrument approach)  and then direct to fix for ex. FAF

That is pretty close to why I still don't use BATC as my main IFR ATC. The voices and general atmosphere can be nice, but once descent timing, vectoring and traffic sequencing start getting messy, reliability matters a lot more to me than presentation.

If they sort out the approach logic, runway changes and the occasional silent/stuck moments, I think it becomes a much easier product to recommend. Right now it still feels a bit too inconsistent for me from one flight to the next.

I'm using the experimental version of BATC and am currently flying around China. They've finally taught the ATC that in China, altitudes are given in metres. It works. well done BATC!

1 hour ago, Alti said:

I'm using the experimental version of BATC and am currently flying around China. They've finally taught the ATC that in China, altitudes are given in metres. It works. well done BATC!

wow, not even SayIntentions has that yet.

Edited May 16May 16 by Tuskin38

that is what you can see now:

Edit: sorry , i have tryed some links, the pic will not shown in the new forum.

Edited May 17May 17 by Alti