Ron59

There are cirumstances, where it would save time/fuel to take off from an intersection of the runway other then the beginning. Especially with smaller aircraft (e.g. Cessna 172) I wont need a 4000m runway. Normally P2A directs me to the beginning of the runway. Could I just ignore this and take any intersection?

I had a similar error (Beta Version 7C): After reading back the landing clearance this was repeatet dozens of times and stoped only after landing were it now said to clear the runway.

Example: The ATIS Freq. in EDDF are as follows (according to the apt.dat) 118.030 118.730 P2A shows the set to choose 118.025 118.725 wich causes silence on both Regards Ron

Sorry i misspelled "Pilot2ATC" in the title (maybe a moderator can correct that.)

Hello, (this text appears also in Traffic Global Forum) for some years I am using now Pilot2ATC+Traffic Global. It has been centuries(!!), that ATC on MS Flightsimulator's traffic around was recognized, controlled, and included in my own flight. Software engineers, what happened? So much efforts in both mentioned tools to come close to reality were done, but the main part is still missing. One example: When i am ready for departure, and must wait because landing traffic (generated by Global Traffic) is approaching, I want to hear something like this (assumed i am at rwy 25C in EDDF) and after a while. then it will be my turn virtually ALL Data of information are available to realize that. Traffic Global knows its flight details of any flight, can even pick a parking spot, and Pilot2ATC knows the details of my own flight. What would be needed, is some sort of an interface, where both tools communicate. Not an easy task, but makeable 😀 Ideas are welcome.

I am running P2A through my network on separate computer. In the case of X-Plane the connection worked through the XPWideClient. What about MSFS 2020? Do I have to purchase the WideClient of FSUIPC?

It is well understood, that on a gate a truck is mandatory to push back the plane in a position where it can start to taxi. What about roll-out positions? At EDDF there are many of them. Positions V153-V178 for example. Those are all one way. To taxi out straight. Why P2A forces a pushback by giving taxi-clearance to "taxi on N" (to runway 18) from the present position? I skipped the request for pushback, as it is not neccesary, instead reported "Ready to taxi". In the scenery all the above mentioned positions are "one way" facing south. By using the taxi/maintanace tool i could not figure out, how to change this.

Thanks Dave. Yes that is the real problem. There is no XPUIPC or similar tool.

Hi, together with a german forum-fellow we wonder, if that is possible: P2A runs on a machine with Win64Bit, there where it belongs 😄 Over a Network connected to X-Plane, wich runs on a MAC (having an apple OS64Bit). Thinking of it, should be possible. After all, X-Plane is X-Plane. or am I missing something?

Dave, I found the problem! When importing Gates from X-Plane, P2A looks in the apt.dat at row code 1301 where it can find Ramp Operation Type "airline" to read the following airline codes as assignments that eventually appear, wich is wrong. The Ramp Operation Type "Cargo" in Row Code 1301 will be ignored(!!) for airline-assignments, although there can be listed a lot of Cargo-Airlines that will be needed. Suggestion: Change the algorithm like this: If in row code 1301 is stated "airline" or "cargo", read the following airlinecodes for gate assignments (if available)

What about x-Plane. Example: the payware scenery EDDF includes 208 Gate assignments easy to read out of the apt.dat. I can't seem to find any of that Gates in P2A. Or did I miss something? Ron

I twice attempted to file a flightplan VHHH-ZBAD. First all looked normal. Including Sid/Star. Upon pressing the "file" button crash to desktop with no error-message. It might be a coincidence, but the crash only appears when destination is "ZBAD", the new opened Airport in Beijing. Another flight VHHH-RCTP went fine.

As a new (Test-) User of that program a warm "well done". However, questions remain. Yesterday, I was able to perform 2 short flights. For the meantime with voice-assistance of my copilot, who does a good job. Now, on both flights the very far-from-reality-away instruction came from ATC while performing a (previous instructed) descend from FL350. They wanted me to (Quote) Slow to 200 knots or less (Unquote). And I just passed FL290 !! Having 300knots on my B777. Out of the fun of it, I followed the instruction. Glideslope became misserable, as I had to deploy flaps for that speed plus speedbrake before that, to eat up the 300kt down to 200kt wich resulted in more fuel consumption lateron Time consuming of the approach became twice as much I assume, I made some wrong settings somewhere.Cant find it 😞

Appologies I didn't think about that, but correct also.

absolutely, due to the consistensy of the air. Even on very stable conditions where you have the feeling to "glide through an ocean of oil" there will be always little differences between the left and right wing for example. But we are not talking about that ! I have observed the above described problem too. And...speaking of reality, If a 747's level looks like this after 2,5 minutes: it might be returned to Boeing by the customer Anyway, I keep my fingers crossed, this bug can be found.