Watsi

As far as I know, stairs do only appear (when stairs are disabled), if GSX doesn't recognize that a jetway is available at that position. And that is often caused by a wrong/offset stop position - either by the pilot (stops at wrong point) or by the GSX profile (stop position is set wrong).

I don't see that coming. At least not in the near future. Maybe there will be separate versions for consoles at some time. But if the PC goes, many users will go. Expecially the hardcore ones, who buy many many addons.

I'm even not motivated to comment on this anymore... 😄😄😄

I wouldn't mind, if BATC will become a bit more strict at some time in the future. But right now, BATC is officially still in development. So one thing or the other - for example proper descent paths in all cases - still needs to be worked on. Until then, it is a good decision (and I think that's what it is) to have wider limits. Else you would get frustrated as a user.

Not with descent > alts. Thank god - until BATC is figuring this out and it works kind of reliable. But BATC monitors your route / lateral navigation and your alt during crz.

Interesting. I even had strong winds (landing in Hamburg) and it gave me quite reasonable vectors. Three or four maybe for the whole approach. I would assume, it depends on how one arrives at the airport (from which general direction/heading) in accordance to the landing runway heading. Some of these 'situations', BATC can handle quite well, and with others it struggles. So it could be interesting for bug reports, to explain the arrival situation a bit more detailed, so they can reproduce it more accurate.

Since 1.8.21 I only had one flight with vectoring, and that went pretty well. Have to do some more.

You can't destroy a whole addon industry. So many addon devs living from MSFS. You have to see MSFS (and any other sim) more like an operating system. Just like Windows. You can buy Windows and have everything you need right in it. You want to write, use notepad. You want to work with images, use paint (🤣). Etc. etc. But if you want to go deeper into any topic, you'll need to buy Office or Photophop, etc. etc. The same with MSFS. You actually have everything out of the box. But if you want to see Heathrow, like it really is, you have to buy it. If you want to fly a more realistic A320, you have to buy it. Etc. Etc.

Yeah, the most senseless thing for an ATC tool is, if you use it and then have to ignore ATC. 😄 But you're right, I do the same regarding descent alts.

You still have to bring you own money though. In fact, if I remember correctly, you have to bring in at least half of the given gov money from your own wallet (or was it even the same amount? Don't know anymore). Anyway, you only have a chance, if you have some money by your own. Really low budgets poductions don't even have a chance to request that.

BTW, the A340 also was sponsored by German government. There's a governmental initiative to push German software/gaming production to make it great again at some time in some future. This is, among others, were the money goes. For me (bought the A340 as kind of a last chance): no more Aerosoft planes. The A340 isn't that bad. But still has many bugs and no update/patch in sight, no communications, no (promised) freighter version....

You're right. That could have an effect. I fly with a CI between 24 and 36. Depends on the airline I fly ...and also on my mood. 🙂 The low cost world isn't mine... Yesterday I had a pretty good descent (with STAR), also a quite in time initial instruction (LICR). I don't mind if BATC isn't 'by the book' all the time. In the real world, controllers tend to not care about your spoilers 😉 and respect their airspace-traffic first. That's ok. But with BATC it is kind of intentional / programmed and all the way. Today I had a flight into EDDM (without STAR). I tried again, for testing reasons, to do exactly what ATC tells me. Was too high all the way down. I even 'spoilered' all the last third of my descent to get ready for approach. But then, BATC actually kept me on 6000 until after the turn to final on 26R (which was very short to GUDEG). Had to intercept the 26R ILS too high and deep dive under the slope. EDIT: and yes I do call for descent where it fits me. But all I get from BATC is a runway and no descent instructions. That happens also often, even when BATC already told me to call, when ready for descent. When I then call ready, I only get the runway but no descent. That was also 'fixed' with 1.8.14 and came back with 1.8.18 (and later).

Even when flying in ICAO land most of the time, I like to leave the STAR 'open' and get vectored into the approach from time to time (about half of my flights). So these bugs appear very clearly to me. Using STARs, yes I agree (I said that all the time), this works much better. At least most of the times. Still, also with STARs, I would say the initial descent instruction is too late for the 737 (with the latest BATC EA version again).

I actually can't remember. Can you show me that? For sure I didn't "jump on you".

You fly 320s, don't you. Try a vectored descent / approach (no STAR) with a PMDG 737. Or another 'more slippery' plane. You'll see what people complain about... I was so glad when 1.8.14 came out. The descent instructions came earlier. The controller was more flexible, had more of a 'situational awareness'. And for the first time ATC monitored your descent not only at the next waypoint but through the whole route/process of descent and gave you the next, lower alt at any point. And you didn't have the constant feeling of, how should I get my plane lose alt and speed in time. You didn't have to use full spoilers for nearly the whole descent. Even descents direct to a rwy heading (when you already came in around the same hdg the landing runway is) worked kind of. And then came 1.8.18. And all is back to bad. ATC asking you, if you're ready for descent, you say yes, and then... nothing, no descent instructions. Initial descent is way too late. Most if the descent phase is 4000, 6000 feet or even more above. RIght now, I get speed instructions to slow down to 250 right after initial descent on every descent (a new one, so it is actually getting worse). And no time and space to get settled with your aircraft before final approach. If you actually would follow BATCs instructions you would have to fly one or two racetracks before final to get your plane to the correct alt and speed. If there's some development in that matter and it get's reverted back to the old... (yes I know, 'word not alowed' 🙂), you get frustrated. Why not keep the good move and work forward from that on... (and don't tell me some developer babbel-buzzwords. I'm in that business myself for living) You said earlier, sometimes it is two steps forward, and one step back. Well, I understand that. That's how developing works sometimes. But regarding the non-STAR-approaches (vectoring), it is actually one step forward and one step back. In another words, BATC is standing still for years now (at least in this regard).