1 hour ago, Noel said:

Some folks don't notice this. Our friend from Norway, Cpt Piett, said he never noticed this until I showed him a video, at which point he noticed this low quality animation in his own use of BATC. I'm just starting a fly from LIPZ>EBBR w/ BATC traffic and will see shortly if this persists. I've got high bandwidth internet as well.

Shortly: at LIPZ, just one plane taxiing to parking, and one plane landing on 4R, and both were very smooth, so hopeful. I say that because there were times in the past when animation was smooth, but more often than not, herky jerky. We'll see on the arrival side how things are. Of note, using FSLTL much more traffic parked, taxiing and flying in and out. I have BATC parking at 10, other sliders at 5. Hopeful though ;o)

What FPS setting have you set in the BATC settings? Set it to at least 60 FPS (even more if you have more FPS in the sim). It affects the traffic smoothness.

I ignore about 80% of BATC instructions. It’s basically a plussed up traffic injector.

36 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I haven't had to do that for half a year at least. Before that, yes descents were sometimes bad.

Merely looking at this thread. :-)

24 minutes ago, chapstick said:

I ignore about 80% of BATC instructions. It’s basically a plussed up traffic injector.

I feel sorry for the Pilot 2 ATC bloke.

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

I wish - but Navigraph has only bought live traffic from FR24, so you should rather ask Navigraph, because BATC just uses the Navigraph API :)

I have created a topic in their wishlist forum - in case anyone else wants to throw their support behind the idea.

24-hour historical live traffic using Flightradar24 data - Wishlist - Navigraph

1 hour ago, chapstick said:

I ignore about 80% of BATC instructions. It’s basically a plussed up traffic injector.

I disagree.

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

What FPS setting have you set in the BATC settings? Set it to at least 60 FPS (even more if you have more FPS in the sim). It affects the traffic smoothness.

Thanks but I have tried every possible solution and my guess is it comes down to latency issues with Simconnect. It's not bad if you don't observe closely.

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

I haven't had to do that for half a year at least. Before that, yes descents were sometimes bad.

It's definitely improving but still has some odd issues as it simply does not appreciate your plane's altitude relative to distance from the arrival runway when it instructs to turn 90 degrees to capture a localizer or what have you and you're way too high to be doing that.

1 hour ago, The_Flying_Potato said:

Merely looking at this thread. :-)

Merely looking at my own daily experience with BATC. I can guarantee you I would not touch it again if I had to ignore its instructions all the time. I'd rather fly on Unicom then

48 minutes ago, Noel said:

Thanks but I have tried every possible solution and my guess is it comes down to latency issues with Simconnect. It's not bad if you don't observe closely.

Yes in the end Simconnect is often the limiting factor. For example when there's little AI traffic / small airport, it's often very smooth (because little simconnect traffic per second). On big hubs it's the opposite. I see the same when using Vatsim by the way. Very lagging on a Frankfurt Friday at EDDF. Although that's the least problem on a Frankfurt Friday....

33 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Yes in the end Simconnect is often the limiting factor. For example when there's little AI traffic / small airport, it's often very smooth (because little simconnect traffic per second). On big hubs it's the opposite. I see the same when using Vatsim by the way. Very lagging on a Frankfurt Friday at EDDF. Although that's the least problem on a Frankfurt Friday....

Good points. What I will do is when using smaller airports will use BATC's traffic, and for big terminals revert back to FSLTL.

When I asked about other accents in the Premium voices I am pretty sure you said more were coming, more Capt's voice options for different languages. I'm not seeing it yet but I'm on the EA version. Any more news on that?

16 minutes ago, Noel said:

Good points. What I will do is when using smaller airports will use BATC's traffic, and for big terminals revert back to FSLTL.

When I asked about other accents in the Premium voices I am pretty sure you said more were coming, more Capt's voice options for different languages. I'm not seeing it yet but I'm on the EA version. Any more news on that?

There's the "dynamic auto respond voice" which will use the accent of the country of the airline you are currently flying, so you always have something fitting automatically.
I don't know whether they will make that manually selectable; not sure how many people need a e.g. Vietnamese copilot on a British Airways flight or something like that :)

6 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

There's the "dynamic auto respond voice" which will use the accent of the country of the airline you are currently flying, so you always have something fitting automatically.
I don't know whether they will make that manually selectable; not sure how many people need a e.g. Vietnamese copilot on a British Airways flight or something like that :)

Thanks for that, saw it, never tried it ;o) Flying out of Bilbao just now it was pretty good--I like that traffic is well spaced, not so busy as FSLTL has been with my settings, and as one plane landed it was quite smooth.

The offline voices are a lot better than the last time I used BATC 6 months ago.

Edited Friday at 08:16 PM5 days by Tuskin38

14 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Merely looking at my own daily experience with BATC. I can guarantee you I would not touch it again if I had to ignore its instructions all the time. I'd rather fly on Unicom then

You fly 320s, don't you. Try a vectored descent / approach (no STAR) with a PMDG 737. Or another 'more slippery' plane. You'll see what people complain about...

I was so glad when 1.8.14 came out. The descent instructions came earlier. The controller was more flexible, had more of a 'situational awareness'. And for the first time ATC monitored your descent not only at the next waypoint but through the whole route/process of descent and gave you the next, lower alt at any point. And you didn't have the constant feeling of, how should I get my plane lose alt and speed in time. You didn't have to use full spoilers for nearly the whole descent. Even descents direct to a rwy heading (when you already came in around the same hdg the landing runway is) worked kind of.
And then came 1.8.18. And all is back to bad. ATC asking you, if you're ready for descent, you say yes, and then... nothing, no descent instructions. Initial descent is way too late. Most if the descent phase is 4000, 6000 feet or even more above. RIght now, I get speed instructions to slow down to 250 right after initial descent on every descent (a new one, so it is actually getting worse). And no time and space to get settled with your aircraft before final approach. If you actually would follow BATCs instructions you would have to fly one or two racetracks before final to get your plane to the correct alt and speed.

If there's some development in that matter and it get's reverted back to the old... (yes I know, 'word not alowed' 🙂), you get frustrated. Why not keep the good move and work forward from that on... (and don't tell me some developer babbel-buzzwords. I'm in that business myself for living)

You said earlier, sometimes it is two steps forward, and one step back. Well, I understand that. That's how developing works sometimes. But regarding the non-STAR-approaches (vectoring), it is actually one step forward and one step back.

In another words, BATC is standing still for years now (at least in this regard).

Edited Saturday at 07:51 AM4 days by Watsi