Pete Dowson

Yes, of course. Which is in fact exactly why I said "Most recent applications would be okay with the FSX SP2/ACC version, but there are some which still need the FSX SP1 version." Thanks for the additional details. Pete

But SP2 itself was also released as a specific separate free update. The SimConnect version for both SP2 and Acceleration is the same. I am surprised that folks wouldn't take advantage of that as it does fix some problems. SP2 is still available. For example, here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/download/details.aspx?id=8986 Yes, and in fact that is what FSUIPC does. Then it links to a chosen version directly (dynamic linking), all to get over the sorts of problems you mention next: The whole WinWxS system along with manifests and probes drove me potty with the various problems folks would get into, which is why I abandoned it all and went to the DLLs directly. Pete

Yes, coincided with a much earlier booked steam train trip elsewhere in Europe. I also meant to go to the FS Weekend in Lelystad this weekend just gone, but missed that too due to other commitments. Oh well, there's always next year! ;-) Pete

If you mean on the P3D PC, then SimConnect is part of Prepar3D and there's no separate installation' unless you've opted to install one of the FSX (or ESP) Legacy versions from the "redist" folder in your P3D installation. You may do that for compatibility with an add-on application originally designed for FSX. Or maybe you already had one or more of them installed from using FSX beforehand on the same PC. On a Networked PC, to run a SimConnect application there, you'd need to install one of those legacy packages on that PC. You'd need to install either all three FSX versions, or just the one the application needs, if it is stated. Most recent applications would be okay with the FSX SP2/ACC version, but there are some which still need the FSX SP1 version. Following Jeroen's advice will show if you have any legacy versions installed on any PC, but it won't show any Prepar3D versions because there's no separate installation for those.. Pete

I have installed DWVAC for use with ProATC/X (only -- no need for cockpit controls through voice as I prefer using my hardware directly). But having read here and elsewhere about MCE I thought that might even be better. However, it appears that, despite having a separate DLL which sits in P3D (fine) and presumably the application which is a separate process, (I think?), I can't run the latter on a Networked PC. That rules it out. my cockpit intercom is inextricably tied into the PC which is running ProATC/X (and previously Radar Contact) and is also running other sound programs too -- Prosim oriented. Or has someone here found a solution for this? Normally external applications which also use a DLL inside FS/P3D interchange information between them using something like SimConnect's Client Data facilities, though I know that Aivlasoft's EFB does its own Networking as do a few others. But the Client Data facilities seem ready made for this, so it is a shame they were not taken advantage of. Pete

They should work, exactly the same -- though if you've also updated the 737NGX you'd need to re-make the mouse controls. However, all of the NGX switches and dials are assignable to their own "custom controls", as listed in their 737 SDK documents. That would be much better. You can assign directly to <custom control> in FSUIPC. For more help you can visit my FSUIPC support forum. Pete

I'd turn that option off as well if I were you. If you want an artificial copilot giving you prompts there are much better alternatives. ProATC/X is a good ATC program. The rest of the facilities have tended to fall a bit by the wayside in pursuit of good ATC. And that's what I bought it for in any case! ;-) Pete

You seem to have got excellent support, and the answer! I think you should publish a retraction here! What ProATC/X is now doing in this area is realistic! It wasn't before. Maybe you need to learn a little more about using your CDU? ;-) Pete

That offset shows free memory in kilobytes, so that is only 93 Mb! That is very low. FSUIPC gives it's beep warnings, unless you switch them off, when it gets below 250 Mb. You should be getting pretty worried much past that! Pete

Also, many flights are operated under a variety of different Flight Numbers, one for each of the partners in the group sharing the route. In these groups like "One World" and "Star Alliance" one of the group only actual operates the flight, but it is sold to passengers according to whichever airline they booked with. And although it usual is, it isn't necessarily the same operator every time, depending on resources, positioning and other assorted factors. You can see this would be no good for unambiguous identification for ATC purposes. Pete

Deleted

Yes, you have. Convention is x dimension (width) first, y (height) second. Where there are 4 values these are x, y, cx, cy, where x, y is the position of the top left corner and cx, cy are the dimensions. Pete

You might be able to change their size, or even move them, using a Lua plug-in to FSUIPC, via the ext.position function -- see the example "TileSix.lua" in the installed batch of Lua examples. All you need to know is the name of the Window -- "SimConnectWindow", in P3D3 (It was "SubMenuDialog" in P3D2 and "SimConnect Choices" in FSX). I've not tried this, so I can't guarantee it, and it's past my bedtime now. I may try it over the weekend. Pete

Thanks. Please see my replies there,. I've analysed this in depth, and I'm sure you are getting a symptom of memory corruption caused, most probably, by bad WX or wxstationlist.bin files. Please follow my suggestions in my replies to you in my Forum. Pete

I see these reports, but one one ever comes to my support forum and does so. I cannot possibly fix things in a vacuum! Why on Earth spread all this stuff here without bothering to report back to source? :-( Pete

Yes, but that planner hasn't really been touched by the Dev for about two years, as I said. Virtually all of the work has been on procedures. The planner was what he started with really, and probably actually the easiest part. Yes, agreed. There are ways around that, of course. For instance load up FS with the default sound then change the default and load up the ATC program. Or vice versa -- either way might work, depending when the ATC program opens the sound device. I used to have a little batch program to do this. But nowadays I run ATC and other such things on a Networked PC. The sound goes either to my headset or to the overhead speakers -- there's a switch on the overhead which uses a program to swap devices. Certain cockpit sounds from that client always come from the overhead (courtesy originally of pmSounds, but nowr ProSim's sound facilities. Altogether I have three PCs providing sound in different parts of the cockpit. And of course I divert the ATC menu (whether RCV4 or ProATC/X) to a smally screen in the cockpit, next to a WideClient touch buttonscreen. The GSX menu is handled similarly. Enjoy PF3. I do have it and started to try it once, but to me it still looks too much like that ProFlight Emulator built onto another base. I know it's been extensively revised since then, but it still seems too complicated for me. And as I only fly 737-800 (that's what my cockpit represents after all) ProATC suite me better. I must admit I'm very jealous of those many voice sets though! ;-) Pete

This is history now. The planner was well-developed two years ago when I first saw ProATC/X. I don't think any time at all has been spent on that since then. It's all been on the procedures. I think some parts are quite tricky -- notably for instance the differences between European and USA practice regarding SIDs and STARs (particularly the latter). It is that which tripped up RCV5. I think folks will be really impressed at the progress since the last user release. I am really looking forward to the next release which cannot be far away now. Is that all? Well, so easy, eh? I'm surprised there aren't ATC programs flooding the market! I've never used ProATC/X as a planner. My plans are always imported. Mostly I've found that if a different SID or STAR is assigned to that which PFPX recommended, it is due to some small change or discrepancy -- like the AI traffic using a different runway in light winds. Mostly they do agree, but even if not, I've certainly never found anything wrong with ProATC/X's choices of late. Anyway, to each his own. All I can say is that I do enjoy using ProATC/X more than I did RCV4, even though I did stick to the latter for many years. Perhaps ProATC/X's methods more meet my needs and expectations. Pete

Odd, I've never had such a problem. Pete

Yes, I remember the demise of RCV5 only too well -- dead under the weight of trying to deal with SIDs and STARs in the most realistic way, which in fact ProATC/X actually achieved last year, albeit with some things still to fix. Apart from the online services, ProATC/X is still the only one to assign SIDs and STARs to suit the circumstance, The other are rather like RCV4 in that you either have to include them in your plan, or fly them anyway after getting released from vectors. I remember trying to use the instrument approach request in RCV4, always a job to fit in after contacting approach control before it started vectoring. You'd have to ignore the vectors whilst trying to get your request in, and go off-route anyway in the process! Really, the future of sim ATC is pretty bright no matter which path one prefers. Pete

So, in fact, is ProATC/X. It is just that, for some reason, the developer doesn't like it to go outside the Beta team until he has achieved his idea of the next level. He is most asuredly ambitious and dedicated to getting the procedural and operational side right, and takes all the input on board. It's not a bad deal for Beta testers on the whole, but I do agree a one year gap between feeding users is a bit extreme. Pete

Unfortunately you can't really dictate to AI what they do, only react to it. There are a couple of programs which do try to divert traffic and even force it to go in correct patters and even SIDs and STARs, but this complicated and well outsde the scope of an ATC program -- and it looks complicated to set up too, for each airport separately. With some airport sceneries folks use different airport data according to the winds, but even that doesn't help a lot, because FS doesn't allow one end of a runway to be closed without also closing the other end. This is probably one of the most annoying restrictions there is! The other solution is to make your weather program always force a strong enough ground wind to force the aI is a specific direction. Pete

As with most of these programs as well as others, you can add voice control yourself. Voice Buddy is one such application, as is Its Your Plane and, of course, the famous "Multi-Crew Experience" add-on. I really don't think the ProATC/X folks should divert themselves to such things when it is already possible. They should concentrate on making the ATC as realistic as it possibly can be. I think next, after the current work on the procedural side, must be the voices -- more of them and in some areas better scripted. Pete

I do and have newer had it cause FSX-SE to crash. I don't use P3D at present, though I do have it installed hoping it will one day reach the same level of performance or better. I prefer ATC on a Networked PC so I can have the sound separated -- it is routed into my overhead speakers or headset (switchable on overhead). Pete

The list posted by Clive is of the new or changed facilities. As far as I'm aware all known bugs have been squashed too, including the missed waypoint one. Pete

Yes, that's the EGCC scenery I use. But not that AFD, because I find 50%:50% the winds are the other way, and I don't like having to change AFDs!). You've been really lucky (or is it deliberate selection!) to only ever get Westerly/South Westerly winds! I use Airport Design Editor from Scruffy Duck to close 23L/05R both ends for AI takeoff and landing. My biggest problem aiport is Madrid (LEMD), where the southern runways should only be used for takeoffs with a Southerly wind, and vice versa, and the Northely runways only for takeoffs with a Northerly wind. There's no easy way to configure that except by having two AFDs and swapping them round! I do wish L-M and/or DoveTail would fix the bug which stops us closing a runway for AI TO or Landing at one end without having to close both ends! Not Pro-ATC/X, as that would remove my choice too. No, only AI, via Scruffy Duck's "Airport Design Editor", the heir apparent for the original AFCAD program. Pete