RC 4.3 tower men drunk like default MS ATC ones

[Guest Emmeth]

The default FSX ATC it is ridicolous then I tried RC 4.3 out on FSX Deluxe SP2.Well, despiting it is better in terms of realism and precision it has the same catastrofic issue of FS ATC : Approaches. Like default ATC it completely ignores your FP and during an IFR approach it fires you here and there , of course several nm away from the choosen runway and it let you experience Shuttle climbings and Tomahawk falls without following your FP. It also force you to turn like a snake just to lead you far over the runway. I also suspect someone in the tower smiles seeing the scene.I imagine RC is fed by FS ATC cause it behaves the same.Question : is it so difficult to get a grip on the reality avoising cosmetic and useless tricks ?If my IFR FP states : from A to B and it directs me straight on the choosen runway xx why the #### RC tower has to fire me everywhere but where I stated I want to go ??? Of course no traffic neither bad weather were involved.I hope someone in the future will develop a tool ( better if freeware ) that follows the simple aviation logic not tools to massage own ego only. From point A to point B through a defined and precise route MUST be like that and not like the original fake M$ ATC that fires you everywhere just to justify or simulate a tower activity.The father of my cousin is a retired pilot and initially said that RC was really close to reality, then he saws the " Crotale approaches " generated by the snake engine and added that they are simply " insane " . Insane cause force the pilot to miss the land, otherwise they would be simply useless.This is more frequent on bigger hubs anyway.It's really a pity and a shame that a payware product has excatly the same original ATC bug, well known among internet forums.

[jd 57]

have you read the manual or flown any of the tutorials?if you don't want the vectored approach, which is the default, then ask the approach controller for an iap approach, get out your approach plate and fly it the way the plate says to fly it.keep in mind, the ai may be landing/taking off opposite you.but to your points....standard vectors, downwind, base, intercept to final, and then final. i don't see an issue with that.if you have a near straight in approach, it will be a turn to base directly, and then to intercept.i cna gaurantee you, ms atc is not feeding rc. that made me laughmaybe if the father of your cousin also read the manual, or flew a tutorial or two, he would understand.but the bottom line, you wanted to fly a specific approach, you didn't know how to tell rc you wanted to fly a specific approach, and you were vectored. hardly necessary to say rc is lipstick on ms atc (my words, not yours)and if you are still unhappy, drop me an email at jd@jdtllc.com and we'll talk about getting you a refund for what you consider a buggy payware product.jd

[Guest Emmeth]

Oh my god, how can problems be fixed doing a iap ? That literally means no assistance fron the tower that is the same of flying without the ATC. That's not the will I dropped MS ATC and that's not the will of RC I assume.Tutorials ? I had a view at them but theory with everything perfectly in place it is not like practice.How can an heavy foggy landing be managed with iap ?I thank you for your support but when the tower vectors you on 160

[bkeske 0]

Wow...........well, for what it is worth, I think RC does a pretty darn good job with vectors vs the MSFS madness, and I am allowing myself to be vectored more often than not since installing/using RC. With the stock FS ATC, I always requested an approach, as 'their' idea of vectoring was indeed madness. I find the vectoring procedures of RC to be far superior. As jd stated; downwind, base, intercept to final, and then final. Pretty basic stuff, and what I have come to expect from RC, but certainly not the default ATC.

[ronzie 21]

Is this happening at all airports or just a few complicated situations.Where an IAP is suggested is airports surrounded by difficult high terrain providing narrow corridors of approach. If this requires a steep descent you may have missed a crossing restriction and you received delay vectors. Under this condition is best to use the NOTAMS feature if you take vectors to modify without ATC complaint any altitudes (you become responsible for terrain clearance and ATC becomes advisory). An IAP is suggested if a procedure turn or descending racetrack pattern is used.Both FS and ATC RC see the airport MSA restriction as equal in all directions. For now, requesting a runway (where terrain restricts landing direction) should help but no guarantees on AI direction conflicts.If you are describing all airports then something is amiss. If your arrival direction is within a certain wedge limit, RC should point to a LOC intersect without using a pattern. I think the limit is twenty degrees or so. If you are outside this limit then you will get vectors simulating a base or downwind entry.The only prior complaints I've seen in this forum had to do with very short high speed flights at too high an altitude which resulted in a difficult approach.If all of your approaches are a problem and you have rebuilt the scenery database (make sure you are using the latest makerwys.exe as noted in the pinned topic), then RC should be correctly vectoring you to an intercept. In other forums users have found incorrect avionics heading readouts for a variety of reasons. Sometimes world wide magnetic declaration files have been erroneously replaced by scenery installs. Some users forget to set via FS or their avionics heading readouts to magnetic. These can result in off course vectoring and final approaches.I work under one of the approach zones for KMSP and I also note them comparing charts and following the aircraft either visually or on flightaware.com. At home I have listened on a scanner to KMSP approach and pilot acknowledgments. They all seem to be following the techniques demonstrated by RC ATC.On technique with RC communications it is recommended that you handle the comms with pilot autoreply turned off. As soon you have the aircraft starting to manipulate according to ATC's command, promptly acknowledge ATC. If you do not RC can "stall" and fall behind in correct vectoring.There are some FS bugs which can give false information on LOC/ILS approaches. If an airport shares the same LOC frequency at both ends of a runway, in FS by default both are active with backcourse on and you have to ident the localizer during the intercept process to insure you are following the correct one. This fix is to use AFCAD to correct the scenery by turning the LOC backcourse off where this conflict occurs.This is all very generic comment but I hope some of this relates to the difficulties encountered.

[Guest Emmeth]

First of all I want to thank you about the explanation and the support,this is well appreciated indeed.I will try to follow your hints and I'll be back after more tries in different situations to let you have more feedbacks trying to don't get angry if some vectors force me to desire a Red Bull acrobatic plane instead of fat boys.Quoting you : " On technique with RC communications it is recommended that you handle the comms with pilot autoreply turned off. As soon you have the aircraft starting to manipulate according to ATC's command, promptly acknowledge ATC. If you do not RC can "stall" and fall behind in correct vectoring. " .....It depends on what do you mean for " promptly " ....I think at least 3 seconds are necessary from the ATC order to the activation of the knob and the relative acknowledgment, then you have also to consider the time the plane takes to turn and follow a certain Heading. I also assume a full 30

[ronzie 21]

Most of the beta testers use airliners. jd typically uses the default Lear 45. I use a full range from prop GA through twin turboprops like the Beechcraft 1900D but my major work is done with the PMDG Boeing 737NG series. It all depends on the type of flight. I also do flying in the US and many parts of Western Europe including Spain, Italy/Sardinia, Germany, Portugal, France, and the Scandinavian areas in various sized aircraft. I have quite a few of the Aerosoft scenery titles.What I mean by prompt acknowledgment is that when waypoints and vectors come quite close together, delaying acknowledgment will delay the timing of the next ATC command possibly putting the aircraft in a position to make the approach difficult.In FS we usually do not have the luxury of a co-pilot and the delay in executing a manipulation could cause ATC to become impatient. If this is the case just delay slightly acknowledgment. Use your judgment and use the smallest acknowledgment delay possible. This should result in standard timed turns or milder half standard ones as necessary. I usually experience about fifteen degrees with the 737.

[ronzie 21]

Also be sure the correct type of aircraft is entered (heavy, jet, turboprop, prop) on the aircraft tab.The 747 is a heavy.

[Subs 0]

Emmeth,I know you said earier you'd rather learn by flying rather than reading, but I cannot stress the importance of reading at least *some* parts of the manual thoroughly as a minimum. Flying the tutorials will also help immensely. Perhaps you don't like to read etc, but I guarentee you'll find RC much easier to fly with once you understand how it is supposed to work and what it is doing.Real pilots also read a lot (a LOT) before ever getting in the company sim, let alone a real bird.The RC manual is large, with a variety of topics covered, and it is specifically there to compliment your practical flying.Subs

[Guest Emmeth]

Ok, let's consider it took me few hours only to understand that the default ATC was heavily buggy and this not due to the fact that I'm a genius but cause the bug is so huge that few hours are really enough instead.Then of course , I thought I was doing something wrong therefore I documented myself a lot and I studied and studied on internet but looking into expert forums I just had the confimation of my impressions, MS ATC is heavily bugged when talking about approaches.Then I decided to get rid of that garbage and I discovered RC. But I found the same problem, or at least slightly reduced. Other than that it took to me 20 minutes to master it out.I'm not a genius but it is not necessary a skill to press few keys with few option, even when the taxi help line misses.Weather, altitude, frq changes , type of approach , dev, emergencies etc are self explanatory and very easy to understandand and apply. It took me quite a lot time to understand why sometimes randomly RC doesn't accept key strokes despiting FSUIPC and all the other cosmetic stuff that is necessary. This yes, took me some time and I was also forced to understand why RC sometimes randonly misses the keystrokes in the beginning of a flight, plz bear in mind it costs the double of the original MS game , 44$ ,......... and these bugs are not documented in your precious PDF.When the tower issues 140

[jd 57]

why don't you send me an email, we'll give you a refund, and we can reduce the stress level all the way around.you say the tower gave you a heading of 140. tower doesn't issue headings, unless you did a missed approachi would like to help, and i've tried. but this just doesn't sound like a good fit. you can spend the 44$ on a new plane, or something else.jd

[Guest Emmeth]

>why don't you send me an email, we'll give you a refund, and>we can reduce the stress level all the way around.>>you say the tower gave you a heading of 140. tower doesn't>issue headings, unless you did a missed approach>>jdI think that's the way it should go, thanks.Anyway, talking about tower headings ,every time I try to be vectored I receive clear heading orders looong before reaching the airport but at this point we can say it's useless to go into further details.