7 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@nrunning24, your comments are disrespectful so I won’t be saying any more. There is a world outside the US where SIDs are used. 

Not sure how its disrespectful to point out that your blanket statement is just false, and that because you were in contact with real ATC controllers 10 years ago during RC4 development doesn't make you any kind of authority on anything ATC related.  Yes there is a world outside US.... But there also is USA air travel as well.  BATC actually handles the USA vs world differences in many respects.  If you actually used MSFS you would know that when airports have SIDs like in the UK, the BATC controller will clear you via the SID, and only does the vectors at airports that require it..... Its much more advanced than anything RC4 ever did.

9 hours ago, Farlis said:

The "requesting descend" and ATC only answering which runway to expect and not giving any descend clearances.

This happens on GA flights in the U.S. that do not follow a STAR. Something I usually don't fly. But currently do, and came across that issue the first time. Outside the U.S. and when you have STAR filed you very much get a flightevel to descend to

Not quite correct from my point of experience. 

I fly mainly Europe, mainly IFR with SIDs and STARs, and I get this issue 100%.

If I request descent, answer is "land runway xy" (only if ATC haven't me told to descend before, but told me the expected approach) 

 

I filed this bug many, many times, at least since September, maybe already earlier. Others have done too. But no reaction and no fix. 

10 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

The only time I can remember landing in KSAN in IFR I got offered short approach to squeeze me between airliners and so I took it. 

Then this is maybe the culprit. Airliners are treated differently and they do get visual approaches per default if weather permits, and the GA guys get whatever they have filed.

OK...So maybe asking me if I see the airport 90 miles out is a bit of a stretch. 😁

Sometimes BATC gets a little confused.

Still my favorite ATC out there. 

 

1 hour ago, Farlis said:

Then this is maybe the culprit. Airliners are treated differently and they do get visual approaches per default if weather permits, and the GA guys get whatever they have filed.

We have several airline guys here. Let hear it from them!

As a GA flyer, the last few patches have improved many of my issues.  Descents still come way, way too late for me.  Vectoring works mostly better (as long as you get lower yourself). Sometimes things are tight, but nothing crazy for a GA plane.  Honestly I don't want to fly the full approach anyway in a Bonanza if the weather is good.  I load up an approach into the GNS anyway.

I definitely get too many visual approaches in the US, but it usually let's me request another.  The problem comes in if they assign you a runway with no IFR approaches and won't let you switch.  I haven't really run into the long visual issues, granted I always try to have a final waypoint roughly 25-50 miles from the airport.  You definitely don't want to leave too much distance between the airport and last waypoint (and not too close either).  

My rule of thumb is brief an approach to the runway and pay attention to altitude as you can't rely on the ATC.  If vectors aren't putting me on a reasonable path, just ignore them and fly the approach.  You can't just rely on it, it does work at times, but when it doesn't, you need to be ready.  

4 hours ago, kerosene31 said:

The problem comes in if they assign you a runway with no IFR approaches and won't let you switch

THIS is a problem I have with BATC. I was flying into KYKM and the weather was marginal VFR. I had filed for the ILS 27, but vectored for the visual to 22 (which has no approach.) They cleared me for the visual while I was still in cloud (would never happen IRL.) I requested the ILS 27 and got a terse “runway 22 is the active!” That would never happen as 22 is too short for airliners. With no visual on the runway, I had to rage-quit BATC and vector myself to the ILS for 27. That was frustrating enough to put BATC on the shelf. Now when I do use it, I ask for the appropriate runway, it tells me no, I ignore it and complete the flight with no ATC. 

2 minutes ago, haskell said:

THIS is a problem I have with BATC. I was flying into KYKM and the weather was marginal VFR. I had filed for the ILS 27, but vectored for the visual to 22 (which has no approach.) They cleared me for the visual while I was still in cloud (would never happen IRL.) I requested the ILS 27 and got a terse “runway 22 is the active!” That would never happen as 22 is too short for airliners. With no visual on the runway, I had to rage-quit BATC and vector myself to the ILS for 27. That was frustrating enough to put BATC on the shelf. Now when I do use it, I ask for the appropriate runway, it tells me no, I ignore it and complete the flight with no ATC. 

Had the same thing with the parallel runways at KBFI.  One is short and visual only, the other has approaches.  800ft ceilings and it wouldn't let me switch to the parallel runway.  The odd thing, it was clearing AI traffic to land on the other runway, but it just told me "no".  It wasn't even like the other runway wasn't in use.  

If I had feedback for them, I would say never say "no" to us, at least while in early access.  Let us request whatever.  

4 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

We have several airline guys here. Let hear it from them!

Airliners, like any other aircraft, get whatever type of approach they request.  When it's clear and a million, will ATC sometimes assume everyone can take the visual?  Sure.  And if you're unfamiliar with the area, it's dark, there's some sun haze or a thin layer between you and the airport, or you just don't feel like accepting the responsibility (there are actually airline pilots who have a policy of never accepting a visual), you just ask for the instrument approach and then you'll get that.  Controllers don't really care, and they certainly can't argue with pilots about it. 

There have certainly been plenty of times I've accepted visuals.  There have certainly been plenty of times I've stated I'll require a different approach.  They're just different approach types for IFR traffic. 

That's the real world.  When I experimented with BATC, one of many things it did that caused me to shelve it was trying to assign a visual in marginal VMC conditions and then not changing me to an instrument approach when I requested it.  This is a pilot decision, not a controller decision.

Yeah i'm really starting to enjoy BATC but being refused an instrument approach in marginal conditions is pretty shoddy stuff.  I guess you can just fly the ILS anyway and ignore the request and it'll clear you to land when you are 7 or so miles out?  

1 hour ago, Stearmandriver said:

Airliners, like any other aircraft, get whatever type of approach they request.  When it's clear and a million, will ATC sometimes assume everyone can take the visual?  Sure.  And if you're unfamiliar with the area, it's dark, there's some sun haze or a thin layer between you and the airport, or you just don't feel like accepting the responsibility (there are actually airline pilots who have a policy of never accepting a visual), you just ask for the instrument approach and then you'll get that.  Controllers don't really care, and they certainly can't argue with pilots about it. 

There have certainly been plenty of times I've accepted visuals.  There have certainly been plenty of times I've stated I'll require a different approach.  They're just different approach types for IFR traffic. 

That's the real world.  When I experimented with BATC, one of many things it did that caused me to shelve it was trying to assign a visual in marginal VMC conditions and then not changing me to an instrument approach when I requested it.  This is a pilot decision, not a controller decision.

There's been a Lufthansa aircraft which had to divert in the US because they are not allowed a visual approach at night via their SOP and the controller (KSFO I think?) wanted to make them wait for a long time in a holding for an instrument approach. So "it's a pilot decision" is a bit too simplistic here, when it's ATC which controls the pilot. Sure, you can insist on an instrument approach, but if ATC makes you wait for 30+ minutes then it's not really "a pilot decision".
As for BATC, by now it will only give you a visual in clear VFR; MVFR should always lead to an instrument approach now. Also you can by now request any approach you want (and unlike the real controllers BATC will grant it to you without any holding 😉 )

26 minutes ago, Langeveldt said:

Yeah i'm really starting to enjoy BATC but being refused an instrument approach in marginal conditions is pretty shoddy stuff.  I guess you can just fly the ILS anyway and ignore the request and it'll clear you to land when you are 7 or so miles out?  

It might give you clearance, or it might just forget about you and never call again.  Sometimes they hand you off to ground after you land, sometimes not.  

Mostly it does give you clearance as long as you aren't too far off where they expect you to be.  

Again the big thing is have an approach loaded just in case.  As soon as it tells you a runway, pick an approach you might fly and have it loaded just in case.  You can also request an instrument one, if there is one for that runway which usually works fine.   The problem is if the runway they want you to land on doesn't have any published approaches.  

But yes, if it starts telling you to do something that is not right, just take over and navigate yourself (why it is important to have the approach handy and loaded).  If there's an ILS, just have the frequency and course all loaded in before you get there.  

12 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

There's been a Lufthansa aircraft which had to divert in the US because they are not allowed a visual approach at night via their SOP and the controller (KSFO I think?) wanted to make them wait for a long time in a holding for an instrument approach. So "it's a pilot decision" is a bit too simplistic here, when it's ATC which controls the pilot. Sure, you can insist on an instrument approach, but if ATC makes you wait for 30+ minutes then it's not really "a pilot decision".
As for BATC, by now it will only give you a visual in clear VFR; MVFR should always lead to an instrument approach now. Also you can by now request any approach you want (and unlike the real controllers BATC will grant it to you without any holding 😉 )

ATC only controls pilot to some extent. Pilot can deviate if safety is prerogative. I heard on many occasions when pilots deviate from ATC instructions due to TCAS traffic for example.

2 minutes ago, kerosene31 said:

It might give you clearance, or it might just forget about you and never call again.  Sometimes they hand you off to ground after you land, sometimes not.  

Mostly it does give you clearance as long as you aren't too far off where they expect you to be.  

Again the big thing is have an approach loaded just in case.  As soon as it tells you a runway, pick an approach you might fly and have it loaded just in case.  You can also request an instrument one, if there is one for that runway which usually works fine.   The problem is if the runway they want you to land on doesn't have any published approaches.  

But yes, if it starts telling you to do something that is not right, just take over and navigate yourself (why it is important to have the approach handy and loaded).  If there's an ILS, just have the frequency and course all loaded in before you get there.  

I've been following this philosophy all week and have only had to deviate once (and that was due to my out of date airport).  

I'm really enjoying BATC, the accents, the amount of traffic, the general way it all behaves.  I'm thinking about making the switch permanent, but yeah there are these things to be ironed out.  

1 minute ago, sd_flyer said:

ATC only controls pilot to some extent. Pilot can deviate if safety is prerogative. I heard on many occasions when pilots deviate from ATC instructions due to TCAS traffic for example.

Yes granted, but IRL it's very, very rare.  I've had to do this once in my life.  

You are often hauled up to explain yourself as well, although as this was a trainee ATC person I was given a free pass as it was their error.