Ref the more 'modern' 3rd Party ATC packages, I started off with BATC and - while there was a lot about it that I really liked - I got super-frustrated of being vectored to a point in the initial descent and then basically abandoned and the downright refusal to allow start of descent by pilot request even though that TOD was in the flight plan and airway restrictions. Similar repeated issues with arrival taxi and the like.

I then tried FSHUD and - for the most part - found this suited me much better. My biggest gripe is that, similar to BATC, vector instructions are often far, far too late. But better than BATC had been.

But after around 6 months, and after some reasonably large updates, I thought I would try BATC again. And yes - improvements in a number of areas - BUT vectoring seems just as haphazard and one every three flights I seem to be just abandoned by the ATC controllers.

So I'm back to FSHUD. By no means perfect but usable most of the time.

Edited 11 hours ago11 hr by AJZip2

7 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Is there any chance in the Premium captain's voice options we might be able to access various languages such as German, French, Italian, Russian, Spanish, Norwegian?
Yes that's already in internal testing and should come with the next update :)

Awesome thanks for that! Cheers

2 hours ago, Farlis said:

I call fake advertizing. I tested SI for 2 Months last Summer and I was not impressed at all. Everything to do with the core of ATC it does way worse than BATC.

I'm still waiting for my trial version - the guy took a pic of my badge at the expo and said they were offering 1 week trials.

BATC has been terrible for the last 2 months but I flew a flight last night, it was very structured, and in an airliner. It did a really good job. It was the smoothest flight so far. IMO though, the application is very inconsistent. I had 5 flights prior to this that were simply atrocious... like calling out the field to me from 82 miles away for a visual LOL.

I will admit BATC has come a long way from their first release. I just hope they can really start nailing the arrival/approach phase - that's where ATC should shine.

3 hours ago, AJZip2 said:

Ref the more 'modern' 3rd Party ATC packages, I started off with BATC and - while there was a lot about it that I really liked - I got super-frustrated of being vectored to a point in the initial descent and then basically abandoned and the downright refusal to allow start of descent by pilot request even though that TOD was in the flight plan and airway restrictions. Similar repeated issues with arrival taxi and the like.

I then tried FSHUD and - for the most part - found this suited me much better. My biggest gripe is that, similar to BATC, vector instructions are often far, far too late. But better than BATC had been.

But after around 6 months, and after some reasonably large updates, I thought I would try BATC again. And yes - improvements in a number of areas - BUT vectoring seems just as haphazard and one every three flights I seem to be just abandoned by the ATC controllers.

So I'm back to FSHUD. By no means perfect but usable most of the time.

This is my experience too. I also tried SI via the free trial they offered again, but the descent clearances always left me way too high and there were multiple traffic conflicts on the ground with AI taxiing right through me. Even had an Ai taxi through me and depart after I was instructed to line up and wait. Imo FShud is currently the most reliable option and I prefer it to BATC and SI by a significant margin, but their vectoring still needs to be more efficient.

I agree that vectoring has had some regression over the last one or two months, especially overshooting the localizer for me.
That said the devs are aware and consequently vectoring is currently the major focus of internal testing in BATC, so there's hope for significant improvements in the very near future.