7 hours ago, RNAVV19R said:

Haven’t experienced any of the issues discussed in this thread.

Of course, they all drive at the wrong side of the motorway too. 🙄

No offence meant😂

I had to get rid of BATC. It was on rails and often just didn't get the basics right.

As for its very expensive competitor, I'm now very impressed. Separation, traffic alerts, taxi conflict avoidance, near immaculate routings, holds, shortcuts. It's amazing, and worth the money.

2 hours ago, Langeveldt said:

I had to get rid of BATC. It was on rails and often just didn't get the basics right.

As for its very expensive competitor, I'm now very impressed. Separation, traffic alerts, taxi conflict avoidance, near immaculate routings, holds, shortcuts. It's amazing, and worth the money.

I have to agree that the ATC is the best with Si... Even traffic wise one thing it has going for it is the Taxituner which allows traffic not to be bound by the usually broken taxi nodes 3rd party developers usually ignore... Crowd sourcing is the way!

On 6/19/2026 at 3:20 PM, Ricardo41 said:

Vectoring during the approach phase is mostly garbage.

BATC provides some background ATC chatter, and it can now inject real live traffic. The voices are decent. That's about it.

This ^ BATC gets me off the ground in decent shape, provides me with lots of company (on the ground, I don't see very many aircraft in flight) and once I'm at TOD, I just ignore it. Try as they might, with all the breathless "updates" the release on a weekly basis, they still can't seem to make any real progress.

I always was a critic of BATC, especially regarding the TOD and the following descent path, especially when not using a STAR (getting vectored).

But my own experience is actually - since one of the last 2 or 3 updates - that it got much better. They did make some backoffice changes in the descend calculation and how the pilot is handled (when no alt restrictions are on the way down), that are helping the pilot to have a bit more 'freedom' to manage their descend accordingly. Approaching with a STAR (especially when the STAR has any kind of alt restriction), BATC works best - but it always did.

But I like getting vectored, even if there are STARs available. It's a bit more 'dynamic'. So I leave out any STAR nearly half of my approaches. Even at big airports. And I think BATC got better recently. Not perfect - but clearly better than before.

What BATC still hardly can accomplish: vectoring to a runway, you already flew direct in when nearing the airport. Example: fly from EDDF to EGLL, with the 27 rwys in use at EGLL - and don't use any STAR in the SB flightplan. You'll come from the east and fly directly into the rwy heading at around 270°. Should be easy for BATC just to vector you straight in/down, one may think. But it seems not, at least not with the alts.

(btw: I don't know how BATC is performing in the US, since I hardly fly there and some procedures are different in FAA land)

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by Watsi

I can see why SayIntentions appeals if separation and taxi conflict handling are the main priority. For my own use, the subscription side is still the sticking point, because I do not fly enough every single month to make that feel painless.

That is why I still judge all of these ATC tools mostly on the boring parts: descent planning, vectors, sequencing, and what they do when traffic is actually around. BATC has very good radio ambience, no argument there, but once I am babysitting the arrival and traffic awareness myself, it stops feeling like the main ATC tool and starts feeling more like background chatter.

On 6/20/2026 at 2:52 AM, Funky D said:

I loathe the default ATC as much as everyone else, but I just find it a bit sad that even the add-on products have the same issues as the default ATC.

The odd thing is that BATC didn't have these issues that are often mentioned for a very long time. But, for some reason, the programme is steadily regressing, becoming increasingly unstable and unreliable, and getting cluttered with unnecessary features, such as GSX integration.

When I bought Beyond two years ago, I was really happy with it. These days, however, every flight just annoys me. This is because traffic is getting in the way again, controllers are issuing stupid vectors, and traffic still costs me 20–25 FPS, etc.

I know it's Early Access, but that usually implies development, not continuous breakdown.

Keep in mind I'm not neutral when reading this (see signature), but this is my honest opinion as a customer nonetheless:

I've using BeyondATC daily from day one, so 2+ years. The progress is immense in those two years. Seriously, you should look back what issues there were in 2024 and compare that to now.
Of course it does have some temporary regressions while trying to fix complex stuff for good (for example right now a complete overhaul of ground handling is in internal testing, with the aim to prevent stuck traffic much more reliably), but that's the nature of an early access product. Keep in mind BATC can inject a lot more traffic than any other tool (especially if you are using live traffic) and this does increase the complexity even further; it's not an easy task (if it was, someone else would have done it ages ago and we'd be all using that software). It does frustrate me too at times, but it's still the most reliable tool, and I've tried them all (and I also regularly watch videos with flights with SI, so I know the progress [or lack of] there).
I'd love to fly with Vatsim and I do every once in a while (1000+ hours), but it's so limited quantity wise (either overcrowded or deserted, nothing in between), that just doesn't make fun.

I know for a fact that the big anonymous survey BeyondATC has made with its userbase has given a very positive overall feedback, so - contrary to this thread - most people are overall happy with the progress and current state and are using BATC for most of their flights. On the other hand I can tell you for a fact that the devs are aware of all the issues and flaws and what's still missing (we make sure they know, that's the advantage of such a huge huge userbase) and - which is even more important - are constantly working on it.

EDIT: And as for "unnecessary features" - yes GSX integration ended up being one of them (which is more due to GSX), but CPDLC support and live traffic are immensely popular with the userbase and have led to an influx of a lot of new users on top. Other than that I don't see any unnecessary features? I mean if we are talking stuff like cabin crew voices or the webcam watching you while you're playing in order to know whether you're still at the keyboard, that's not BATC, that's another tool...

Edited 5 hours ago5 hr by Fiorentoni