Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,453 Excellent

About tup61

  • Rank
    Member - 1,000+

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. Actually, to be more precise, B-ATC is using external addon voices. That's what you have to pay for every now and then. They aren't creating their own voice service or something like that. They are using various existing paid online services and simply forward the cost to the user.
  2. As has been posted numerous times before: B-ATC will NOT have a subscription model. How hard is that to understand...? You only pay for a certain amount of 'voice time' if you want it and need it. Subscriptions always are regular payments regardless of how much you use the service. This will not be the case with B-ATC. You only pay for what you actually use and and need and for a lot of people this may mean they might have to pay a reasonable fee once a year or so while some other will never have to pay anything (because of for instance low usage of the addon). With a subscription you pay every month even if you don't use the service. It's also been made clear the dev will NOT benefit from these payments: the only benefit will come from selling the addon. The payment for the voices will simply be what those voices cost and nothing more.
  3. I do wonder what ChatGPT would come up with... 😎
  4. I do hope you have a comfortable pillow to sit on because it will take a while before B-ATC will be released. In the beginning I followed their Discord almost daily but when they announced they will be implementing AI traffic I decided to not wait for it anymore. I'll look at it again once it has been released. Hopefully in Q1-2024 but I doubt it. B-ATC looks great and I understand the hype but I personally can't stay hyped for longer than a few weeks. 😉 Yes, you can.
  5. Some people simply have waaaaaaaaaaay too much time on their hands and tend to post the same useless 'information' over and over again in every topic that concerns certain subjects which they apparently have a pet peeve with. Better get used to it. Or simply visit this forum less frequently (like I've been doing lately).
  6. I think the OP doesn't have a Navigraph subscription as he is asking for a free tool. Would be very odd if the OP does have a subscription but doesn't know about the advantages it offers. 😉 Not exactly a free tool. 😉
  7. Nice but far from complete and nearly not as easy and convenient as LNM. Last time I used it (before I got a Navigraph subscription) it simply was a collection of charts found online, right? Still very cumbersome to figure out a proper approach with just charts you have to wade through... With LNM you can simply click on each and every available procedure and see it on the map instantly. Way more convenient. Having said that: if you just like to check charts without a subscription Chartfox is nice indeed and a great free option. But for planning etc. LNM beats everything.
  8. This. Don't let the interface (specially after the first install) scare you off: you can remove a lot of the default screens from view and only keep the screens you want to use. The same goes for every part of the ribbon bar. It's extremely easy to check which approach (including transition) will suit your STAR (or route) and it offers ALL relevant information at a glance. Best flight simming freeware tool ever imho. Could be payware easily. (EDIT And btw it of course also shows you all SIDs and STARs and whatever there is in the sim!)
  9. Agreed. I do think discussions about flight models often derail because people aren't talking about the same thing. The OP should have posted his definition of 'flight model'. I think most people are talking about the feel when they talk about flight models but that's indeed very dependant on your controller and also your settings (curves). Which makes a discussion about it a real problem since no one has the exact same setup. And even if people had similar setups... it would never ever feel like the real thing because of all the real world input you are missing. So a discussion about which addon plane feels most realistic is rather useless. Which should lead to the conclusion that it's all about the numbers (which hardly anyone talks about). If the numbers are correct the flight model is correct too. That's simply a fact. Any discussion about flight models should be about the numbers and not the feel. And this should make it rather easy (and objective instead of subjective) to decide which planes are realistic and which aren't.
  10. Nothing. At least not for your kind of flying. It all depends on what's important to you. I myself like to operate a plane as realistically as possible. I always start cold and dark on a parking spot and end cold and dark too. However, I also like my flights to be short and sweet. A year or so ago I mainly flew the Fenix A320 and used SimBrief for each and every flight. I picked a departure and destination (usually using LNM), entered both in SB, set everything up as I wanted, created the plan, started the sim and did the entire prep (entering fuel, weights, calculating vref, loading the plan into the MCDU, the whole lot). However... doing the complete setup (so using the entire checklist) at the start of every flight became tedious, a chore, boring. And doing a complete flight simply took way too long for me (even when I did the prep as quick as was possible). I could of course skip the setup part and start a flight on the runway... but I just can't do that. That doesn't satisfy me. I somehow HAVE to start cold and dark and do things properly according to the checklist. If I skip a few parts I often end up not completing the flight. So... how did I solve my problem? Well, I ditched the A320 as soon as the Vision Jet was released. The VJ feels like a (very) simplified Airbus to me. (With a GREAT view outside!). I also ditched SimBrief and started to use the MSFS planner. I made EVERYTHING as simple and basic as possible (I even stopped using FSHud and went back to the default ATC!). Since my flights always take around 30 to 60 minutes I can't care less about weights and fuel or winds or step climbs: I simply load one pilot (that's me!), no pax, and keep the default fuel (which always is more than enough). That's it. I use the MSFS planner to set the dep (parking spot) and arr and let MSFS pick the route all procedures. I then manually select the approach I want and often delete the SID. And quite often also the STAR. I start the flight and can do the ENTIRE checklist in a few minutes (including the tests, setting FOB, etc.) so it really feels VERY 'realistically as possible'. I ONLY do the things that satisfy ME. And I still get my 'realistically-as-possible-fix' but in a lot less time. I can do an entire flight (including the entire prep) within an hour. Or sometimes 45 minutes. PERFECT for my needs. Since I use the default ATC (which works great for my current kind of flights) I even use the taxi ribbon (have it enabled by default LOL)!!! So I simply do what I like to do. I might change my habits in the future but that's the great thing about this hobby: you CAN change everything anytime you want to. I skip some parts but do everything I need to keep myself satisfied and to ME it feels very realistic, as if I actually own a Vision Jet. I fly it by the book. I am having the time of my life. I am SIMMING even though I use the MFS planner, default ATC, the taxi ribbon and don't care about W&B LOL In short: the OP is missing nothing by not using SimBrief because his way of flying clearly satisfies him and suits his kind of flying well. (And btw I have to agree the MSFS planner is not cumbersome at all: it's actually pretty darned good! Just as default ATC is btw, with all its quirks. Even FSHud can become cumbersome and a chore and quite annoying.) Everyone should decide for himself what works well and what doesn't. And everyone should not care what others think of it. The goal of it all is to have a good time!
  11. Luck indeed. The very few aircraft that do have an autoland option ONLY have it for emergencies, like when the pilot is incapacitated. There isn't a single GA out there that can and may do regular autolands. Only the big jets can and may do that. I also 'autolanded' a GA in MSFS once or twice just to see if the plane would survice it (which it did btw) but in real llfe this an absolute no go (and so it should be in sims 😉 ). There aren't.
  12. If you are talking about the example I linked to (including time): that was just a clean example of an AI generated voice without any distortion. As you can hear in the rest of the video the ATC voices are slightly distored and sound more 'radio-like' and in fact there is an instance where the voice is quit distorted due to atmospheric interference. (I will post a direct link if I can find it.) EDIT Here it is: https://youtu.be/QHluE8R1wyI?t=2859 The clear beeping sounds you hear after 'you' talk and when ATC replies to you (or when the frequencies are automatically switched) can all be turned off. They are there for your convenience (and not your annoyance 😉 ) so you can instantly tell if what you said has been transfered correctly. Those are all optional. The 'click' you hear after ATC or AI has talked I don't know if that can be turned off. Doesn't really bother me (like indeed those clear beeps do!).
  13. This is getting ridiculosly good...!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHluE8R1wyI Check this part (for instance) which is AI trained and generated TTS! Sounds totally real to me! https://youtu.be/QHluE8R1wyI?t=175
  • Create New...