russianspd

BATC will just add additional enhanced ATC audio/voices in correlation with what the AI traffic under the control of MSFS is doing whether from MSFS Live Traffic, FSLTL, or Just Flight. So while BATC does bring a lot of much needed ATC "improvement" it's only in the form of ATC/audio. The control of the AI itself will still be under the MSFS engine. So that can have a lot of problems related to that as well. This has been directly confirmed from the developer Captain on their discord channel. Having been an AI nut for a # of years and seeing the different products out there, so far FSHud has been the only 3rd party ATC product that doesn't rely on MSFS itself to control the AI. The control and injection of AI are handled all singularly through FSHud. And since it seems that Asobo has little to no plans to really fix their AI/ATC system the same way that they've been neglecting weather I think that FSHud offers a kind of "all in one" package. It not only provides the ATC but the aircraft are doing exactly what ATC is telling them. Not just a ballpark result. BATC just reads the state of the AI in the sim from MSFS and gives an appropriate more realistic transmission based on that state. Again, confirmed by the developer. BATC will definitely pump the immersion factor up a lot but it's not going to have any control over what AI are doing which is the standing problem. I'm excited to see what BATC can do like everyone else it but I have a strong feeling a lot of people are going to be "disappointed" when they realize that BATC isn't the one controlling AI and they start seeing inconsistencies between what AI are doing and what BATC is saying. But then again, since BATC is reading the AI sim state I guess the ATC would generally match up but it'd still be a bit of an issue since the AI engine is still bonkers.

Correct, in a later discussion myself and another lead member discussed based off of someone's reply that those things didn't exist. Well they do. They do because developers are doing what Asobo has failed to do. To do that you need to go outside the lines. REX/Xenviro both do this and their weather depiction is what MSFS should be.

VOX seems promising if they do control the AI. People don't want flashy voices. They want AI control to match and work into what they're doing. If you want flashy ATC use VATSIM (but the "AI" and ATC are actual people but not the point but is included in the ATC realm) or ATC Chatter or BATC when it comes out. No one product will have EVERYTHING. But the two runners who currently are bridging the gap are VOX/FSHud.

And BATC's problem is that it doesn't control AI. So, on that figure alone, FSHud will survive on through since it's the only currently in development option that controls AI where every other product simply reads the AI state from MSFS and adds realistic ATC based on the MSFS state. This has been confirmed by Captain the main developer. BATC doesn't control AI. It simply enhances ATC but ultimately the way AI behave will still be at the mercy of the MSFS engine. See my response and Captain confirming: Me: In the original showcase video you can see aircraft landing halfway down the runway. This would allude to being under MSFS control. Same with the immediate departure turn instead of flying straight and then turning. Being under MSFS control which we all know is quite bad ATM, I'm wondering how the wonkiness of it all will factor into the ATC communications. Are the communications going to be based on what the aircraft is actually doing or being told to do or based on what the MSFS engine is doing. The thing about FSHud is that it's its own engine. So because of that, what ATC is saying is reflective of what the aircraft is doing or being told to do and will do. How well B-ATC can match what MSFS is telling aircraft to do will be the question. This is where the two programs start to split off. Do I think B-ATC will be verbatim, not yet. Ballpark, more than likely. As more information comes out it'll be easier to get a better idea. But if you're wanting full and complete AI and ATC synchronization, B-ATC has yet to show that. For now it seems more user oriented with "relevant" chatter based on what's happening around the user by pulling the airline/callsign info and phase of flight within the sim based off of MSFS. Captain: This is a very accurate measure of what BATC is doing. It's worth mentioning that if I could control the traffic with any degree of reliability I would, but with the current way MSFS is set up it's not possible. FSLTL and FS Traffic have made long posts to that end explaining why it's so difficult so I won't repeat it here. But think of us as a small unintrusive layer on top of the traffic. Just like TUGs will pull out onto the runway right on your takeoff roll, airplanes will still get in the way and do silly things. No one can fix that at the moment. So we do the best we can with what we have. So, BATC will not control AI. Only give added voices with procedural and varying enhancements.. Since BATC does not control AI good luck with proper procedures since MSFS is running the show. BATC reads the state of AI from within MSFS and enhances the ATC you hear. You can say I'm wrong all you want, but again, I've talked with Captain about this and he confirms everything with how BATC will function and operate within MSFS and it's relation to AI. Swing and a miss, sir.

I checked out a video of PF3 on YouTube out of curiosity. Sounds horrible.@ 00:30 the order of the clearance is non-standard. Cleared to airport, altitude, squawk, frequency. Listen to any ATC clearance delivery and it's airport, route, altitude, frequency, squawk. You MAY get some controllers who decide to do it differently but that's not the way it's taught. @ 7:30, sounds like someone running a teleprompter in the background with a dying frequency at the end of the transmission. @ 9:30 United says clear of the active runway. Commercial aircraft wouldn't use that because it doesn't designate which runway which is kind of important. More applicable for GA aircraft. @ 10:50 tower can't make up its mind which direction to clear the aircraft, north departure approved...northeast departure approved. If you like listening to 80's based distorted ATC transmissions I can see why you would like this product. Unimpressive for supposedly 8 years of development.

Nope. I don't care what people ultimately use. I'm just point out the flaws that I see in P2ATC, the biggest one being no ATC support for other traffic which by this stage in the game of FS should be a standard feature of any ATC product. I can give examples from FSHud if it would make you feel better.

Wait, 8 years of development and it can't recognize or include traffic other than the user? Looking at the user guide for how to operate the program it's 129 pages. Nobody is going to read 129 pages on how to use an ATC program to go from A-B. Even looking at the interface of the program and all of the different tabs and options immediately makes it look user unfriendly. Should be short and sweet and straight to the point.

Nope. Just someone passionate about AI/ATC. So I have high expectations for AI/ATC. Doing this for over 20 years as a simmer tends to give you a good idea of which products are most likely to deliver that. Everyone has different needs to fill within their FS experience. There's not a one shoe fits all solution. Don't let that Georgia humidity get to ya Bob!

You do realize that FSHud is not JUST a beta? There's already a public version out. So it's two fold. You get to try out a program that in all sense of the term "realistic and immersive" to all air traffic is above P2ATC AND you get to partake in using the beta if you choose so and being apart of making it even better. But, if you prefer a more archaic way of interacting with ATC by yourself in a more up-to-date manner, enjoy!

No there is no trial. Of course there aren't any videos showcasing the beta features, why would you want to let other developers know what you're doing that they may or may have not done? That's silly. If you were working on improving something within an industry and had spent many hours working on it, would you freely showcase it to all the other competitors within the industry? Talk about protecting your intellectual property. As I said before, as someone seeking a realistic ATC program that interacts with not only myself but surrounding traffic, P2ATC would be at the bottom of the list or probably not even on that list since it doesn't do that. I'd even go back to the FS2004 version of Radar Contact if I had to before P2ATC if it somehow could work in MSFS2020. That doesn't build very much confidence with P2ATC. If you want realistic ATC procedures for yourself, great. But I doubt that's what the majority of the community wants. They don't want partial ATC interaction, they want the full experience and that includes everyone in the sky.

In some cases yes there may be a reduction in traffic from just FSLTL versus used in conjunction with FSHud. But like Tup61 said, FSLTL has made some changes to their injector and with anything, when one developer changes something the other has to also catch up. I can tell you that both FSHud and FSLTL are in communication with each other consistently.

Haven't used P2ATC but given that both products use FS based logic I'm sure it's relatively the same. But as I mentioned, vectors with FSHud also take into consideration the surrounding traffic. RC also took into consideration AI/surrounding traffic which is what made it so unique and more "realistic". I haven't followed up on the development of RC and haven't used it since WAY back so I have no idea how things are with it now. But as someone who has been looking for the most realistic solutions out there and virtually using every product in relation to AI/ATC, I can tell you from what I've seen, P2ATC falls short of that mark when you compare it to FSHud.

How so? Pilot2ATC doesn't even recognize AI traffic. Most recent video I saw a user had to use MSFS ATC in the background just to get AI interaction while P2ATC only controlled them. Sounds like P2ATC is a user based solution but not an all inclusive solution like FSHud. The interface and the amount of "learning" required to setup and use P2ATC just from looking at their manuals is a nightmare. For a user solution, sure it works fine. But for someone who wants both user and AI interaction (everyone but you?) and a product that takes both sides into consideration, FSHud is the way to go.

Will give it a go. How have you been? I haven't been around since your previous betas regarding simple SID/STAR transitions with the IAF/FAF. Looks like things have progressed really well. Probably your parking codes for the Lufthansa aircraft .cfg entries specify parking type as cargo and not as gate. Have you installed your own AI or did you use someone's already put together package?

Hey Rolan, So after a long time I installed the latest version with full hot fix 8. The first time I ran it everything worked. Now when I try to run the program I end up with AIMONITOR crashing.