Hi, folks-I'm a new RC user and absolutely love this product. The only (significant) problem I'm having is with the go-around bug- I'm told to go around when I'm on short final almost all the time. I know this has been noted before, but the circumstances there were Windows XP and RC running in real time due to the slow speech behavior. I want to add that I'm running Windows XP and RC as only high to get around the slow speech behavior and still getting constant go-arounds. This is a show-stopper- it totally prevents (legal) landings. Otherwise, I'm extremely happy and agree completely with Andrew's review on FlightSim.com.One question- does anyone know how to turn off RC's ATIS before requesting clearance delivery? I find the only way to stop ATIS once I've selected it is to hit the request clearance button- what I really want to do is return to nothing between ATIS and clearance until I'm ready.Thanks,-Simon

we have uncovered a problem with increasing the priority, in the go-around determination routine. since the code is executing so many more times per second at the higher priority, the once miniscule chance of getting a go-around, is quite common.it has been fixed on an internal build, and no beta tester has gotten a go-around since they started testing it. widefs or non-widefs.atis is a loop, it will play as long as you are on atis's frequency. change the frequency, he'll shutup

I am so pleased that I read this thread. The last two flights I had . Manchester to Dublin in the PSS Dash-8Q300 and from Dublin to Gatwick in the Eurowings ATR-72-200 resulted in Go-Arounds at 3-400 feet after the AP was off and I was so pleased that a good landing appeared imminent ... hahahahaha ... I am sure you know what I mean.As troublesome as a GA is, this was the first GA with either aircraft, and it was a great learning opportunity and gave me some great satisfaction to finally get on the ground. I don;t get yelled at very much any more, and I haven't seen Mr Bill for quite a while .. hahahaha.When I first got RC3, I had lots of go arounds and the issue was ascribed to landing config ... gear, flaps, speed, g/s angle ... so I have tried religiously to be a better pilot and overcome these problem.Well, Gentlemen ... I do have to THANK YOU and the RC team for a VERY SUPERIOR product ... really SUPERIOR in every way. At 54 years old, i have seen lots of products come and go, but this is a true keeper and an answer to my dreams of "as good as it can get ATC" I can tell you that it has increased the immersion into the experience considerably and made me aware of many things I have missed.I have a old PIII/866 with 512mb, and a gforce2mx400/64m video card running W2000 PRO and have never experienced the slowdowns people have related here. Every now and then RC and FDC collide, as I suppose flight deck talking and ATC coincide all the time. But I run always with FS_Meteo, RC3 .... NOW (Thank you!!), FDC, FSNAV in the background for Map peeking, and many times with the FSAvionics Garmin 530/430 for those aircraft without FMC/MCDU ... and I have never had an issue.The documentation is excellent also!!!!Congratulations on the great flightsim.com review and for a really fine product!!!!

Paul,I'm pleased you find RC a valuable tool and that you are enjoying it. From the Team, I can say, Thank-you. We do appreciate these kinds of posts as well as the problem reports. ;-)

Yikes, two go arounds at Gardermoen tonite after an hour and a half flight from Gatwick in a PIC 767 .. but great fun, it does take a bit out of you though ... hahahaha. Must have been Ice on the runway or a flock of gulls or something 8-)=totally excellent ... I persevered and avoided the temptation to land and go watch Law and Order CI, I'll catch it on the repeat cycle.did not want to speak with Mr Bill ... hahahahahaha.I'll be happy to help you with some testing if you would like.Thanks again .. time to relax for tonite!!

Paul,The GA problem has been solved internally, so when the RC update is released, you will find that you can actually land 99.1% of the time without a problem (9 out of 1000 chance of getting an "unprovoked" GA).

Why is it that the user can control the likelihood of holdings, but not of go-arounds? Both seem like something you may want to practice at certain times and absolutely avoid at others.Consider this a suggestion for future versions.

I second that ...Dirk

Since you can declare a Missed Approach, it isn't necessary to adjust the GA setting.A GA given by Tower and MA declared by you do mostly the same thing, so you ca practice Missed Approaches to your heart's content. The main difference is that you have a lot more options declaring a MA.

Hi Scott,I thought that Hendriks suggestion was meant in the way that you should have an option to completely disable Tower generated GAs if you dont want them at all. And thats what I would like to see also ...Dirk

That is correct, but I also find it strangely unbalanced that here we have two scenarios happening at random of which you can control the likelyhood of one, but not the other. I'm sure that when the bug fix has been released, there'll be people complaining that they're never instructed to go around. Point is, people will want to influence this, just as you have anticipated for holdings.I don't buy the argument that you can always call a missed approach. Part of the fun is that you have to always be prepared that it might happen, but you don't know when. And the immersion value comes largely from the fact that you can lead yourself to believe that the ATC does exist as an intelligent player with real powers. Calling a missed approach has a totally different, almost embarrassing, feeling to it.