13 minutes ago, KERNEL32 said:

Yes, like many out there, I loved RC!! Not trying to "defend" this developer but that was then, and AI nowadays can really do some amazing stuff including trig ala ATC... so it's just this guy and "Steve"?

Using Ai can gave its advantages but surely people learning trigonometry is better as otherwise how do people acquire those skills?

I’ve removed the second part of your reply as you have provided no evidence to your claim. If you or others persist you know the consequences.

33 minutes ago, Bernard Ducret said:

I usually stay away from threads where this happens, but it seems to become the norm and therefore difficult to escape from: Argue back and forth without substance, express - preferably loudly - a negative opinion about somebody, a company or a product we know very little - if anything - about, so as to claim later on, should the project fail: "See, I was right and told you a long time ago!"

What purpose does it really serve beside hurting people and spreading negativity? Warn potential buyers? What exactly are we encouraged to buy at this time: Be part of the testing, so why don't doubters enlist and fire at the team with something tangible to criticise: the real product instead of a list of objectives? Because that is not appealing or rewarding as it means hard work and no public forum to shine through with hasty judgement.

Some people here need to take a deep breath and learn how to enjoy life instead of throwing their misery to others in fora like this one made for genuine aviation lovers, not for experts in tasseography (tea leaves readers if you prefer).

This thread is (should be) about learning of a product under development, and for us to ask pertinent and constructive questions so as to guide and contribute if at all possible... not to throw mud at somebody who tries to explain his project, with some degree of passion and deft marketing - as his position would require.

We will have every opportunity to judge positively or otherwise the final product when it will be up for sale. Then we will have substance.

So what‘s the purpose of this thread from the OP if not getting feedback, and feedback being either factual questions, critical questions, a „looks nice“ or straight out „This doesn‘t seem legit to me, I‘d like to see some concrete stuff, this is not enough information etc.“.

That developer came out here in a community forum - not a marketing platform -, so what reaction would you consider appropriate? An acknowledging nodding?

"This does not seem legit" is not an acceptable comment to make when you know next to nothing about either the developer or the product. THAT is what I take issue with. As I stated above, healthy scepticism is fine, but not when it descends into disrespect without evidence. Once upon a time, we had a justice system that was ruled by "innocent until proven guilty". The internet seems to have thrown that one in the bin.

18 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

"This does not seem legit" is not an acceptable comment to make when you know next to nothing about either the developer or the product. THAT is what I take issue with. As I stated above, healthy scepticism is fine, but not when it descends into disrespect without evidence. Once upon a time, we had a justice system that was ruled by "innocent until proven guilty". The internet seems to have thrown that one in the bin.

But why is that not ok? We have multiple existing ATC programs on the market that still haven't got what this program claims to be able to do now and they have been in development for years. How is that disrespectful? Its not like we are creating threads to bash this person, this person is actively creating multiple threads to build up the excitement for a project that honestly seems to promise more than can be reasonably be expected all the while writing in AI platitudes. That very much doesnt feel legit.

Even take out the AI language of the posts, a brand new dev that just released their first program 3 months ago to basically no reception (haven't heard anything positive or negative) now 3 months later has a full beta of an ATC program that via his own promotion is doing more advanced things than anything on the market from devs that have been working in the community for years, with basically no previews or anything. That alone would make me say "this does not seem legit"

I am welcoming additional competition in this area of the Sim, surely nobody can disagree with that. With that said, I am leary of subscription models unless they add commensurate value to my flight simming, like a Navigraph.

The concept though is promising, especially if ACE can genuinely track aircraft within their routes and manage sequencing and separation dynamically. Since it’s still in beta, though, I’d be interested to see how it performs with dense traffic, missed approaches, go-arounds, and aircraft that do not follow instructions. Looking forward to seeing real-world testing before drawing firm conclusions.

I won’t know until I see the product on actual release, but wish the developer success on this project.

32 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

"This does not seem legit" is not an acceptable comment to make when you know next to nothing about either the developer or the product. THAT is what I take issue with. As I stated above, healthy scepticism is fine, but not when it descends into disrespect without evidence. Once upon a time, we had a justice system that was ruled by "innocent until proven guilty". The internet seems to have thrown that one in the bin.

"This does not seem legit" is a response to something in this case. That something is a wall of AI generated text that reads like an incredible sales pitch.

And here's the thing, it may very well be true. In that case fine. But it's absolutely acceptable to respond to what OP has posted with criticism. You're right, we know next to nothing about the product except what the developer has told us. And well... see my point earlier.

Personally, I see this as constructive criticism. Making claims about your product before you're ready to actually show anything does nothing except put you on the back foot. There's a reason why products tend to be developed in radio silence until they are ready to be marketed.

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

"This does not seem legit" is not an acceptable comment to make when you know next to nothing about either the developer or the product. THAT is what I take issue with. As I stated above, healthy scepticism is fine, but not when it descends into disrespect without evidence. Once upon a time, we had a justice system that was ruled by "innocent until proven guilty". The internet seems to have thrown that one in the bin.

Quite the contrary - "this does not seem legit" is exactly the type of feedback a serious developer would when reaching out to the community! It means that from the perspective of the user the presented information and marketing does create an impression of not being true / serious. And again - the "know next to nothing" is also a legitimate and important piece of feedback, because it's caused by the apparent lack of information and clarity over by now 5 pages.

EDIT: Do you remember back in the days when BeyondATC (before release) was being marketed as a subscription model, then a s***storm broke loose here on Avsim, and the devs changed their mind and made it a one-time purchase? This was valuable feedback and BeyondATC is now one of the most popular addons ever in flightsim history by sheer sales numbers.

Edited August 21Aug 21 by Fiorentoni

For all those that are skeptical, (and I completely understand this sentiment given that ATC control in sims has been a woefully underserved capability in most sims until very recently) and feel there is a "proof in the pudding" experiment to be validated here, Anil did in fairness put an offer on the table in his very first post for 10 beta testers to try and break the product. Those were his words.

Now is your chance to prove that Anil's value proposition for the product is actually valid or not.

For me, I am still trying to maintain an open viewpoint and not misjudge what we dont know or have not experienced yet.

AI can do some really clever stuff, but its also has its limitations too. I am genuinely curious to learn what it can do in more detail. Yes I have some reservations how this can be done if I am honest, but I am not an AI expert. I want to know more.

So my suggestion is, lets get the views and opinions from the beta testers on what the ACE solution has to offer and lets chart its progress. If Anil is happy to publicly share that information, we will all be better informed.

Have a great simming weekend everyone!

I hope that Anil jumps back in here and further substantiates things (and selfishly for me, answers my additional questions on traffic handling a page or two back), especially with the system moving into beta. Beta to me means that an initial feature set is locked down, of course with future features to come later after an initial release.

I suspect, yes speculation, that he's pulled back a bit in order to maybe focus on more careful messaging to the public on what precisely is being offered and how from a technical standpoint, but I am happy with how responsive and patient he's been with the community up to this point. The fact that's he's leaning on AI to generate his communications, and the initial philosophical statements were a put off, but he has been able to elaborate on features when asked.

Here's hoping for good things.

I have been watching and reading this thread with interest.

I now see that a mod has presently undertaken to remove comments/posts that do not provide evidence to a claim and/or make unproven accusations.

I find this somewhat ironic because, as far as I can see, this complete thread is wholly and entirely based on claims without evidence and unproven assertations.

Like Mark stated above, Anil has offered ten beta testers the chance to break the product. Sign up, and prove the rest of us wrong....

5 hours ago, KERNEL32 said:

Yes, like many out there, I loved RC!! Not trying to "defend" this developer but that was then, and AI nowadays can really do some amazing stuff including trig ala ATC... so it's just this guy and "Steve"? Hmm - yeah I call scam on this "claim to ATC fame!" (Comment removed by moderator).

"ATC Fame" - going to be a fairly low bar, however a quick search on YouTube will bring up plenty of clips of Kennedy Steve either working JFK or his own YouTube stuff. He's as famous as ATC is going to make anyone I guess, but depends if you have listened to ATC YouTubers such as VAS Aviation etc .. ..

Fame hasn't stretched as far as North Norfolk, England. Although nothing much stretches this far anyway...

I understand both the supportive enthusiasm for this product just leaving alpha testing and the healthy skepticism given the way the developer started this thread. I have a suggestion that may help allay the skepticism.

The developer released a completed project, SimPassengers, in May, and there is a thread about it on AVSIM with very limited comments from a few purchasers. However, I haven’t seen any videos from users reviewing it – the only extended video I could find on YouTube is from the developer, and it is essentially a silent flight that doesn’t seem to provide much information about the product. (The AVSIM thread had indicated that more videos were imminent, but they don’t seem to have been released). There is a Reddit thread that includes the developer, but without any user experience. Unless I missed it, the Sim Passengers Discord also doesn’t seem to have any user videos.

I would respectfully ask if Anil (or anyone) can point us to independent user reviews of SimPassengers (preferably video demos). That would at least help give us a sense of the developer’s ability to deliver a solid product.

10 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

The Radar Contact team (remember that? 😁) comprised a lead programmer who had no ATC knowledge at all and his associate who was a retired AT Controller in the US. There was a second ATC from England covering ICAO rules.

Then there was a mathematician who did the trigonometry, Pete Dowson who helped with FSUIPC and a bunch of unpaid enthusiasts including myself who did the beta testing. We got a free copy and a paid for trip to Washington for a AvSim conference back in 2006. Thank you John and Doug! 👏

The program was highly popular and is still used to this day by us dinosaurs who still use P3D and some with FSX. 😁

For a single person to take on all that work is extraordinary. Where does he acquire ATC knowledge for FAA and ICAO? Is he an expert in trig? The list goes on.

Times have changed since the creation of R/C "BIG TIME", AI has removed a tremendous amount of tedious work that was once done by hand. As far as acquiring the knowledge for FAA and ICAO's, it's all at ones fingertips via internet. It's not like one has to go to the library and use the dewy decimal system anymore. So having one or two working on this isn't so much a surprise to me, with that said... I don't expect to see a stable operational product anytime soon with just one or two on the project, even if working on the subscription based item full time.

Personally I believe they got into the game too late, BATC and SayAI have a tremendous jump on the new commers.