We all know that RC's Co-Pilot will not controll PSSAXX's heading, only the comms's. My problem is that RC asks for enroute course deviations for traffic and what if I must stray away from the computer at these times?? The controller will get all bent out of shape if I am not right there to implement the course change requested. This is not a problem, obviously, with aircraft panels other than PSS's AXX series. What do you all suggest??? Is there a check box somewhere in the RC software that will suppress enroute course deviation requests by the controllers? I have not been able to find one in the manual or in the software, but I could be simply missing the obvious.

I dont have that panel but I cannot believe there is not a way to do this in the panel AP itself. There has to be capacity for the pilot to take control? It would appear to me that this is a basic precept and therefore as a minimum it should be available in any payware (or freeware for that matter) panel at least?I will be interested in following this post to see how it is resolved.

with that particular panel for ages, it's well known. It's not a matter of the "pilot" taking control. This is a problem of the RC Co-Pilot NOT being able to take control and the pilot, me, having to leave the computer console while enroute and not suffer the enroute controller's wrath about course deviations for traffic.

go to options in rc, and turn traffic vectors to zero. you won't get any more traffic vectors

of my nose!!!

well JD, yes that eliminates the oncourse deviation for virtial but non AI traffic, but not if any FS2k2 AI is comming too close in range to me. Than you still will order me a course alteration for as long and as wide as it is nessesary, cause you cant controll AI traffic. Am I right?

RC does not vector to miss AI traffic. AI Traffic is too unpredictable. We might actually turn you into it because we have no idea where it is going.Larry

---

http://www.jdtllc.com/images/RCbeta.jpg