Jump to content

allardjd

Members
  • Content Count

    22
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No
  1. "...but why would you?"There are a couple of things that MS ATC does that are helpful.1) The MS ATC ground controller gives you a route, with taxiway numbers (Also the progressive taxi arrows if you care to use them, but I hate them and don't.). For arrivals, it's a little iffy, because you may want to go somewhere on the field other than where it sends you. For departure, it's very helpful. I've gotten in the habit of having printed airport diagrams handy now. You can make them from AFCAD if you can't find the one you want on line. Sometimes the ones on line differ from the FS airports and that can be confusing too.2) The other issue is conflict avoidance. While far from perfect, MS ATC attempts to avoid taxiway conflicts and issues "...hold for the..." instructions as needed. I wouldn't trade away anything RC does in order to get those things back in a million years. If there was a way to have both, well, that would be a plus. RC is so much better than MS ATC in every other way that there's just no comparison.
  2. I use both. I don't know if it helps, but it doesn't seem to cause any problems.
  3. On a couple of my AC, the setting window of the altimeter is either too tiny or the adjustment too coarse to be of much use. I'm stuck with using the B key in those AC.Despite that, I've found that if I'm mindful of the transition altitude where I am, I don't have any problem with RC in descents. (I record the TA from the RC screen during pre-flight.) ATC often provides QNH while you're descending some considerable time before you reach the TA. I just ignore it until the co-pilot says "Altitude Check" and then press the B key. Since few if any places have a TA higher than the 18,000 that FS understands, leaving the B key (and thus the PCA altimeter setting) alone until you've descended below whatever the local TA is keeps you properly set on both sides of the TA while still allowing you to use the B key.Once I figured that out, I've never had another problem with ATC not liking my altitude.
  4. You're confusing course with heading and are trying to make this more complicated than it is. In the RW, if the controller tells you to fly a heading of 090 he means POINT THE AIRPLANE 090. He's probably already vectored a dozen aircraft through where you are in the last half-hour anyway and has as good a handle as you do (or better) on what the wind is doing.If you're flying vectors any offset for wind is the controllers problem, not yours, and will be inherent in the heading he gives you. It all changes when he sends you "...direct to (navaid)". At that point, wind drift becomes your problem again.
  5. Set collision damage off while on the ground. Some AI will go head to head with you and stop. Some will drive right through you as if they cannot see you at all. Having them taxi through you is unrealistic; having them attempt it unsuccessfully is worse.
  6. "2) In other cases, I get a phonetic spelling of the whole airline name. In one example of this I was in a long queue waiting for takeoff with several Air Force types waiting too. As they were cleared one-by-one to take off ahead of me, some were called out by by the tower as "Air Force" and a number and some were spelled out (also with a number). There were several types involved and the JF military flight plans are in different files for different types."I just checked the Traffic 2005 flight plan files for the airport where this occurred. In the flight plan file for one of the types involved, all of the AC had the same flight number.I'm not sure if the issue of duplicate flight numbers could be related in any way to the problem of phonetically spelling the call signs but it's the only oddity I saw in the flight plan files. I checked all of the flight plan files for all of the Air Force aircraft scheduled out of that particular airport.
  7. Not sure you need any more info on this as you seem to have nailed it down. It is not limited to Europe however; I just got a QNH advisory along with an intermediate descent clearance to an altitude that was still above the transition altitude for the area.Mainly because of reading this thread I was aware of the transition altitude and did not change the altimeter setting. This occurred near Providencialles International in the Turks and Caicos - ICAO code MBPV. The transition altitude there is listed as 3,000 feet.
  8. This is probably more of an ATC question than an RC one, though the situation occurred in RC.I was at the hold line of the active runway at a controlled airport in Spain, ready to depart. There was a displaced threshold, so the taxiway entered the overrun area, not the runway proper, though the threshold was pretty close. The tower directed me to, "...line up and wait". I hadn't heard that term used before.Before rolling forward I looked and there was an AC on final, only about a mile out. My question is, does "line up and wait" mean the exactly the same as "position and hold"? If so, is it acceptable for an aircraft to be on the overrun area short of the threshold where an AC on approach must pass directly over the waiting AC?
  9. I,m using FS9 and JF Traffic 2005 and both their Military PlusPaks. In that package "American" is "Merican", because American Air Lines didn't want to play and apparently threatened some kind of legal action. Anyway...I've had two varieties of this issue.1) In some cases, most often with "Merican" the flight will be called by "Mike" and a number. I don't get a complete spelling, just the first letter. I think I've heard this with other callsigns too, but not 100% certain of that.2) In other cases, I get a phonetic spelling of the whole airline name. In one example of this I was in a long queue waiting for takeoff with several Air Force types waiting too. As they were cleared one-by-one to take off ahead of me, some were called out by by the tower as "Air Force" and a number and some were spelled out (also with a number). There were several types involved and the JF military flight plans are in different files for different types.I'm going to look at the flight plan files for missing flight numbers and if that's all it takes to fix this it's no big deal. What I find puzzling is that even when the airline name is spelled out phonetically, I hear a number after it. Is that the registration number in lieu of a flight number?
  10. No, not accelerated time. I must have just hit a window where that can happen. I was just leveling out at the newly assigned altitude. I'm pretty sure it would be difficult to re-produce. Have not seen it beforeShould have run right out and bought a lottery ticket.
  11. This is not a complaint...I was descending and had just reached my cleared altitude and got a frequency change. When I came up on the new frequency my response was, "Santa Maria Control, Night Cargo 3496, out of one one thousand for one one thousand."It must have just been an accident of timing and I got a chuckle out of it.
  12. This is from a user review of RC 4 that I wrote for the Mutley's Hangar web site at http://www.mutleyshangar.com/features/jda/jda.htm"The voice messages are more rough, choppy and patched than those of FS ATC. It
  13. I think there are two issues with this. Finding your way on the airport is the easier of the two and having hard copies of the departure and destination airport diagrams goes a long way toward making this one minor.The more difficult problem for me is AI traffic which acts as if it cannot see the user controlled aircraft. Constantly veering off the taxiway to avoid collisions is not very realistic. I've added "set collision detection off" to my pre-taxi and landing check lists. That's better, but doing a phantom mind-meld with an approaching 757 requires disabling your reality-sensors too. Neither option is very satisfactory.If reaching for FS ATC after landing and receiving a taxi clearance from RC will bring some "control" to Ground Control, I'm willing to reach for it. This doesn't do anything to help at the departure airport though. RC is a great add-on, one of the best I've seen and I'm not about to let go of it. A work-around that provides better reality on the taxiways or an outright fix as an update or in a new version some where down the road would be most welcome and very much appreciated.allardjd
  14. jd,We should both be pleased. For me, RC is working OK in FS9. For you, one more happy customer and one less log to review.Let's just say it was a "nut behind the wheel" problem.Thanks for bearing with me.
×
×
  • Create New...