First let me say that ive been an avid RC user since its very first version and i am a true fan of this product (all versions) and its author. John is a true professional who really cares about his work and knows how to release a finished product out of the box...he's truly a rare breed and deserving of much praise for all his pioneering efforts in this series.While I am using (and getting used to) this newest version I just thought id like to bring up a few points of interest and give some very basic feedback after my first 5 or 6 flights. Although some of these points i bring up are negative (to me at least), let me make it clear that i think this is still a terriffic product and will continue to enjoy all it has to offer short of the "live" atc experience.The way the voices were thrown together for this release leave something to be desired as compared to what i thought was better overall atmosphereics/suspension of belief in version 2.2, so in that respect it has been a let down for me personally (the speech sounds way too robotic, slow and unatural). The speech using the default ms atc is MUCH more realistic sounding to me.That being said i also feel that the added feature of the controller just "clearing you" for a "type" of approach, yet not knowing what the actual approach IS or what ROUTE of flight this apparoch will put you on, to me, is just fluff and not substantial since after being cleared the controller will just ignore you and let you fly anywhere you please (at least thats how i understand it to function from reading the forum).As far as runway assignments, today i received the wrong runway for landing...winds were 310@15 yet i was assigned rwy13 for landing?...dont understand why that happened (and i was using fsmeteo as usual...on other flights with rc3 ive used a differnet weather app and it assigned me the correct rwys though).And now for my last gripe :-) (drum roll please)...i really wish the team would do away with this advdisp dll thingy and go with something more like microsofts clear background default atc window. For me, i prefer not to have to dock the advdisplay to my panels, besides the fact that theres just no room on most of my panels to dock it properly...it sits there on my screen sticking out like a big eye sore....something at least translucent that can sit in the upper left hand corner would have been a better choice and much slicker looking.I must say that i DO like a few of the new added features in version 3 such as being able to change your destination on the "fly" and the fact that your "flight" doesnt end anymore after shutting down rc...and also we can now view normal replays after landing without having to stop and record a video while on final approach :-).All in all the improvements made in this new version are a step in the right direction and hopefully ill be able to get used to hearing foreign robotic controllers in Boston and New York (hehe)....still it would be nice in the future if we could have "true" support for SIDS/STARS and precision/non precision approaches instead of just being ignored by atc and left to fly wherever we wish....VFR would also make my next wish list.With all these added features though, itll be quite a while before im even ready for a version4! hahahaDave

RC3's Chatter does not seem as smooth and realistic as RC2.2, I agree. In addition to your observations I have noticed that the controller and pilots will no longer wait for an appropiate 'break' in the background chatter as would happen in real life to avoid stepping on a communications exchange. I really enjoyed this feature with RC2.2 as it increased the immersion factor dramatically, seamlessly integrating pre-recorded real-world chatter with adventure generated controller and pilot exchanges. Everything flowed nicely together.RC3 as a stand-alone application does not seem to be able to replicate this integration as of yet. Granted though, the standard .wav formats used in RC3 are very flexible in accomodating add-on/custom chatter files, a big bonus factor. I am speculating that in order to make it easier to add additional .wavs to RC3's chatter libraries, the sound format formally used in RC2.2 was altered in such a way that marker's in sound files (used to specify the beginning and end of a chatter exchange to avoid interupting background communications) was dropped for the aforementioned reason above.The new features of RC3 are great for sure, I'm certainly not complaining as I love this program. I feel that constructive criticism is a healthy process that aids developers in enhancing their product to greater degrees of fidelity, a very good intention to be sure. The service and support from JDT is nothing short of phenomenal; I certainly appreciate their collective willingness to listen to user observations and suggestions.

I was parked at katl earlier today and called atis, and the voice was real slow. I did something wrong in FS, and decided to quit and start over. so I closed FS, and all of a sudden the controller started speaking 'normal'. His speech sped up to what it should be. It looks like being on the ground, with lots of ai around you (I had maybe 8 delta planes in front of me waiting ot get airborne) RC and FS slows to a crawl. Once in flight, the speech seems to be much smoother. I had the same controller voice for ground and approach. He sounded much better during approach.I might have to install RC on my laptop and run it from there, along with fsmeteo if that also works and advdisp (does that work also?).I think I read somewhere a while ago that advdisp was originally going to be transparent, but the performance hit was too much. So it was decided to keep the window opaque. Either that, or it just couldn't be done.

Hello Dave, Let me quote one of your statements:>That being said i also feel that the added feature of the >controller just "clearing you" for a "type" of approach, yet >not knowing what the actual approach IS or what ROUTE of >flight this apparoch will put you on, to me, is just fluff >and not substantial since after being cleared the controller >will just ignore you and let you fly anywhere you please (at >least thats how i understand it to function from reading the >forum). If one considers all the possibilities I feel, for me at least, that this is the best way the programmers can handle a very complex problem. I like this idea. What is the alternative?Regards

Hi Blais - there are 2 alternatives (speaking strictly from an end-users point of view and NOT a pogrammers)1. Have rc follow your plane and make sure you are really following the correct waypoints as per your IAP clearance. (rc can either come with a reasonable set of pre-defined IAP approaches OR a user editable database can be implemented with an interface that allows us to easily add/change/delete approaches manually...this way JD wont have to spend a year and a day typing/researching the database data entry stuff)2. Have "otto" be able to fly all/part of the approach if the user wishesDave

Hi Dave,>As far as runway assignments, today i received the wrong >runway for landing...winds were 310@15 yet i was assigned >rwy13 for landing?Was that the only ils equipped runway? I believe that if there is only one ils runway, RC will give you that one regardless of the winds. Of course you can simply request any other runway you want.>...still it would be nice in the future if we could have >"true" support for SIDS/STARS and precision/non precision >approaches instead of just being ignored by atc and left to >fly wherever we wish. If you include the SD waypoints in your flight plan, you will not be allowed to fly wherever you wish...you will be expected to cross within 2 miles of those waypoints. Otherwise, what you say is correct. >...VFR would also make my next wish list. If all I wanted was vfr I'd just use the ms atc. :)Sidney Schwartz [KPDX]Horizon Pilot--flight plans and scenery for FS2002http://sidneyschwartz.homestead.com/index.htmlhttp://jdtllc.com/images/RCsupporter.jpg

>Was that the only ils equipped runway? I believe that if there is >only one ils runway, RC will give you that one regardless of the >winds. Of course you can simply request any other runway you want.Yes Sidney, thats exactly what happened...and thats another feature that would be nice to see changed for the better...RC should'nt JUST assign ILS eqipped rwys...it should assign rwys and approaches according to the RC ATIS being reported, and in this particular case the wx was above vfr minimums, therefore either a visual or vectored approach to rwy 13 by default would have been proper, without me having to request it.>If you include the SD waypoints in your flight plan, you will not >be allowed to fly wherever you wish...you will be expected to cross >within 2 miles of those waypoints. Otherwise, what you say is >correct. well then its not functioning correctly as it was programmed to because i had all my departure waypoints in the plan...i received clearance from CD to fly the departure procedure then as filed, however after takeoff my route of flight was simply ignored by atc as i purposely flew many miles off course by staying on the rwy heading for about 10 minutes after departure...noone ever noticed i wasnt following the waypoints in the plan, which is how version 2.2 works basically.Dave

Dave, If you were still within 30 miles of your Dep airport after this 10 minutes on rwy heading, then RC is still assuming you're proceeding to your first check point of your DP.Best, Rob

As for the realism of "cleared for VOR approach...", our local airport has a tower but no radar. That's the way you are cleared for IFR approaches.David

Hello again Dave, Gee it seems you are almost duplicating my sentiments exactly as far as ATC guidance goes. Unfortunately the RC folks did not take my statements lightly and I think, without meaning to, I offended some of them. All those posts may no longer be available to the reader now. So, in default and really not wanting to beat a dead horse, the solution, for me at least, is the option to file NOTAMS and fly my own SIDS and STARS, as published. This way we don't get upset and I can still fly safely. Maybe, some day in the future, ATC will, at least, use published Vectored SIDS and APPROACHES. Thus I am satisfied for the time being until something better comes along. Try to make hay while the sun shines.Regards

it's early, i haven't had my first coke yet, but i wanted to respond.i'll let scott answer about the wavs. he did a tremendous job editting everyone of them, and he should be commended. i guess i haven't run 2.2 in such a long time, i can't say whether i agree with you or not.the beta testers will tell you that i made them suffer through months of robo-controllers (speech synthesized), and we all agreed to go back to human voices. i think you would have hated it worse.the clearance for approach. doug and larry (both controllers) were in on this development. i can't speak for them, but if you ask for a vor approach, they expect you to fly the vor approach. they aren't going to be watchdogging you to see if you do. if you don't, in real life, i guess you don't get to fly anymore.we talked about doing dumb stuff after being cleared for approach. of course you can fly anywhere you want. but is that the idea. no. if you leave the 30 mile radius of the airport, you will be yelled at.another reason for leaving you alone, is so that you can practice multiple approaches. you can do a flight plan with all possible approaches into an airport. only one. but what if you want to practice? first fly a vor, then an ils, then an ndb. by letting you do what you want to do, without being critical, lets you practice to your hearts content.for departure procedures, we do watch you like a hawk. any checkpoint inside 30 miles is going to make it a dp. now if you choose flex dp option, you can fly anywhere you want inside 30 miles, and join your plan when you want. that stuff is in the manualon the runway thing. as long as you can change to another runway, we didn't think giving you the ils equipped runway first would be an issueand now for the last (drum roll please). advdisp is more flexible than that translucent thingy. you can put advdisp on a different monitor. you can size it, change the fonts, change the colors, etc. we had this debate while testing. the pros outnumbered the cons. a lot of testers hated the translucent thingy. we went with what we thought was the best option. i asked peter to think about making translucent an option. the complications of running in full screen mode or window mode was too cumbersome, and he declined. that's not to say he might change his mind.ps. appreciated the comments.

>noone ever noticed i wasnt following the >waypoints in the plan, which is how version 2.2 works >basically. Did you have notams or flex dp checked?Sidney Schwartz [KPDX]Horizon Pilot--flight plans and scenery for FS2002http://sidneyschwartz.homestead.com/index.htmlhttp://jdtllc.com/images/RCsupporter.jpg

John-As we have discussed earlier, using AdvDisplay completely prohibits the use of the 3D glasses from E-Dimensional, as 3D only works in full screen mode. Isn't there any way to get the ATC instructions without having to have the AdvDisplay window on the screen?Howard

Howard,I only fly full-screen mode. In the e-mail you sent me, and presumably to Peter, you didn't say whether you are docking AdvDisp or not. Make sure it's docked, then click anywhere on the panel. That should fix the problem.

"My Feelings about the New version...please dont hate me" :-sword BURN THE WITCH...BURN THE WITCH!!!!!!!! :-vuurhttp://www3.telus.net/dport1/Radar_small.gifFS2K2 = The best add-on for RADAR CONTACT ver.3http://www3.telus.net/dport1/Radar_small.gifhttp://www3.telus.net/dport1/dansig.jpg