Tesch Macher

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. after clicking to 'hi' (hi enroute airways) map mode, the application became so busy trying to display that data that it didn't let me switch back to 'sat' or 'ter' mode at all, it resulted in permanent hang without letting me access to anything else i used my phone to take a picture of this situation because it made half of my system to hang and remain P2ATC unresponsive ;) if the application is unable to properly display the content, then why that 'hi' feature button is even present? i recommend to disable and/or remove that button
  2. hi is there a way to attenuate the way how the ATC is handling the climbing to final CRZ altitude ? in certain situations, the TOGW & GW of the aircraft does not allow it to sky rocket fast enough in order to reach the final cruise altitude as it was planned after validating & filing the flight plan in P2ATC. in my case , i was flying CYYT/KEWR with an A320, the aircraft was heavily loaded to near limits of its TOGW and i have let it climb to the planned cruise altitude of FL340 in "managed mode" . it took about 50 minutes for the aircraft to climb and reach the crz altitude of FL340, in the mean time i have experienced constant ATC hammering "maintain & expedite to FL340" for several dozens of times, switching from one 'atc center' to another.. -at some point, it became even annoying doesn't that 'atc people' understand that in such situation the aircraft just can't climb fast enough because physical laws are not allowing it to do so? while issuing ATC guidance, vectors and instructions, can P2ATC take in count and make difference from GA, fighterjet and a heavyloaded jumbojet and issue appropriate ATC instructions accordingly to the aircraft type and its flight performance constraints? -- (have been experiencing this before v2.4.0.0)
  3. i have just experienced this, while being enroute (UUEE/EDDF) , everything was just fine till i was getting closer to EDDF, the ATC continued giving instructions despite of this error message, (i have updated p2atc with airac 1712) aaand also, one more thing: is it possible you implement a feature telling the application windows to remember their positions and sizes as when they were left ? that will be really handy, because in my case im using a dual monitor setup, every time i start p2atc.exe app it will open up and position by itself on the main monitor using its default, every time i need to drag it to the second monitor, resize it and rearrange it , same does applly to the "?+" floating window.. telling that because, many other applications do remember their main window position and sizes when you launch them. TIA
  4. Tesch Macher

    another awkward occurence

    this is what happened to me after a more than 5h long flight from Alaska to Hawai, with less than 4tons of fuel on board, lol never ever i received approach guidance (descent) as i was getting past the 'green arrow' (TOD), the ATC made me change from center, to tower then to Honolulu approach, within less than 50nm of the destination airport, the atc kept barking at me to keep 'FL360'.. , i even tried to 'request' radar vectors for ils, nothing.. i had to turn off P2ATC and keep doing my approach manually
  5. i was wondering if it was possible to use pre-selected grammar ATC (TTS) phrases without the need of using your own speech/voice/mic to request the following: -i have often faced problems due to over estimated final crz altitude i have set during preflight; so the ATC is keeping word not allowed-hammering at me to expedite climb to FL380 as filed crz altitude, but the physical performance of my aircraft was unable to get past FL350; since it seems Pilot2ATC does not feature 'unable' response, - and apparently cannot react with adequate ATC guidance; in that case, i wanted to request ATC to descent to a new altitude (FL340) and went clicking 'Request>RquestedAltitude>': <CallSign> request descent to <Altitude> ; after selecting this phrase, it has displayed as "You can say: <CallSign> request descent to <Altitude>" without offering any option to make it speak as the TTS voice system i have tried to type/tamper some text in there to make the ai ATC reconsider and allow me to keep flying my crz altitude at FL340 (instead of FL380 as filed), but it never worked, it seems you can't edit out the pre-formulated atc phrases by changing its variables, such as <altitude> and/or <ICAO> wpts; same applies for DIRECT TO <ICAO> i would love to simply type/insert the leg/wpt in between < > so the TTS voice will talk instead of me and request DIRECT TO as i click on 'say it' button instead of me having to use my own voice with the mic. im not using any microphone or speech recognition stuff, and would like to keep using Pilot2ATC to make it say atc requests using TTS voices from my system instead of my own voice, by simply selecting appropriate phrases that are displayed in the grammar menu, please implement this feature. saying that, because so far what i could see in P2A Configuration>Speech tab>Speech Output device, you can set there you audio device/channel as output to hear the TTS voice; i have another question: WHERE do you set the INPUT audio interface/channel for the MIC ? it is something i really didn't get and couldn't set up at all.. the only what i could have set in the PTA Configuration>Speech>Speech Output Device>(..) - as general audio output device ; but how P2ATC does know which audio interface/device of my system is being used as INPUT audio device to which my mic is connected??? i haven't found such a setting neither option; - is it 'automatic' and attached by default to the audio device you have selected as 'output' device? what in case you have several audio devices on your pc , and not just the one that is built in on your motherboard ? if it is the case, then that is something not right for such an application of this advanced level, please implement an option that allows us to choose what audio device is being used as INPUT audio device for the MIC.! so far, as i was flying with Pilot2ATC for more than two weeks, it seems it is doing very well from A to B 'normal flights' (except when the airport you are approaching has mountains etc) but as further as i progress and do something unusual, i see some limitations, as soon as i seem to get out of something ordinary, such features as 'unable' and the whole range of 'emergency' procedures are simply not there..
  6. Tesch Macher

    atc gives up on request for radar vectors

    hehehe glad to hear this issue will be fixed, but i made the landing at CZST RWY36 anyways (was a bad one though) lol
  7. hi i have experienced this bug during approach to CZST , when i have requested for radar vectors to the visual straight in at CZST, the atc did not respond and a few seconds later, this error message has popped up: the ATC remained silent after this.. :( this similar bug happens for the second time on me. you may notice that my flight would seem a bit bizarre, (ie: why DELTA would fly an airbus A320 from KGEG to CZST ?), the thing is, since we are simmers and because of that, i prefer to fly something else, more challenging and out of the ordinary. no matters what is the situation, the ATC must work.
  8. Tesch Macher

    FF 320 U (beta) + P2ATC = alt always std 29.92

    "On 11/4/2017 at 2:09 AM, Tim/Rodeo314 said: Out of curiosity, could you elaborate on what makes X-Plane's atmospheric model incorrect?" Assert wrote: "It's simply not comply with standard atmosphere model in standard conditions (that's why you can see +1.0 in idle perf on MCDU INIT screen, this is a correction for the wrong XP atmosphere)... but this is not the most problem. XP altimiter function is wrong, it's inconsistent with static pressure at the aircraft point from datarefs... i do not know what Austing doing there and why, but it's altimeter function is not standard. As i know, in XP it is a function of geometric elevation, and pressure correction, but not a function of the static pressure at the aircraft point as it should be. XP itself is a hack above hack... That's why i am using a hack in XP integration, reversecomputing static pressure from altimeter value, to stay synchronized with VATSIM and other plugins... " (...) Once again. I am getting static pressure from altitude dataref, then sensor errors affects this static pressure. IRL ATC should have an altitude transmitted by the aircraft transponder, but in XP there is no separate daterf for this. More over, this datarefs are not writable. The only thing i can do, is to add my own dataref for transponder altitude...
  9. Tesch Macher

    FF 320 U (beta) + P2ATC = alt always std 29.92

    ok, this is the explanation, and it is pretty much of what i have supposed, those guys are just awesome.. https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/132686-showing-wrong-altitude/ sounds legit to me, and we will have to cope with this.
  10. Tesch Macher

    FF 320 U (beta) + P2ATC = alt always std 29.92

    looking forward to get his solved in order to have p2atc + ffa320u work perfectly, thanks what i think is, due to the level of complexity they have modeled their A320, if they are not using standard datarefs for the altimeter that must be for a reason, that means they must be overriding the whole altimeter setting/data that is being replaced by a very custom one of their own in order to flush the altimeter setting to somewhere else where it is being read for further calculations, like for the FMGC etc.. so there is probably very little or nothing we can do about it, even as a temporary workaround. i have brought this up into the FF A320U closed beta group and will wait what the dev (Assert) will say about it.
  11. hi, just stumbled up on this as i was looking to modify the TTS voices to sound more real except that instead MiniHost from image-line.com , i went with SaviHost http://www.hermannseib.com/english/savihost.htm , exact same principle and much more easier to use.