FSX-MS PRO-ATC/X version 1.4 is out

[sbclark 55]

I have ProATC and I really like the interface............like tooting said above, I too have issues when ProATC takes you off a STAR and you end up either being too high,  or in some cases I experienced, was vectored into the terrain. I did report these issues a long time ago along with their respective log files. I was using version 1.4.4.2.

 

I believe as Jarkko reports, it probably depends on the particular airport, and hopefully once this Beta gets released, will fix this issue. I don't currently use ProATC as this is a show stopper for me.

 

I look forward to a release of this update, this is the most promising ATC software on the market!

 

Bill Clark

[HighTowers 1,434]

This definitly should be called Euro Pro ATC. I made a comment of this on their FB page. Most of the Euro airports work far better yet in NA its very sketchy. Example was leaving KDEN for KPSP. Filed my FP with a south runway departure and a southwest SID. Well clearance kept refusing it and gave me the PLAIN7 SID which would send me far east right after takeoff. Didnt make sense and no matter what I did thats what logic it wanted.

 

This is simply because programming logic bases it all on the SID STAR per weather as already mentioned as opposed to the direction and traffic flow we use in NA. Its a conflict of interest. I think the transitions get it all confused.  That said, if you fly mainly in Europe, then you will enjoy PATC for the most part.

[fluffyflops 1,845]

Results with ProATC are highly dependent on the routes you use. I'm part of the beta team and LFMN is one of the airports I test on each version. I use real world routes that connect to a STAR that flies over the ocean. Then if I'm given an ILS approach, I always request for VOR approach to keep the approach interesting.

Before I started using real world routes, I once had a similar problem in LFMN, where I was vectored over high terrain, but not since. A good rule of thumb is: auto generated routes can cause problems. Real world routes give much better results.

 

This is a confimed bug in the 1.4.4.2 version. The current beta 1.4.4.5 doesn't vector you in loops.

 

Once you turned off 24R, did you run MakeRunways and Aligned Scenery in ProATC? After any scenery changes, you must re-run the "Align Scenery" in ProATC, otherwise ProATC doesn't know that things have changed in the scenery.

 

ProATC has transition level support. Not only regional, but airport specific. This data is included in the AIRAC that can be updated from either Aerosoft or Navigraph.

Support for SIDs/STARs and transitions is included. Works best when flying in Europe, where SIDs/STARs are assigned dynamically based on weather. Works somewhat OK in the US if you can accept the fact that you might not get to fly the exact SID/STAR you had in your flight plan (if multiple connect to your en-route segment).

Jarkko I dispatch for easyJet and I'll it's a real world route I used for the Flight, I use real world routes for all of my flights

 

I'd say 75 percent of the time pro atc is great but the other 25 it's a nightmare!!

[Jarkko 59]

 

 

Jarkko I dispatch for easyJet and I'll it's a real world route I used for the Flight, I use real world routes for all of my flights

 

Excellent! Can you please PM me the route? Next week, I should have time to fly the route and see, what is going on.

 

Thanks!

[Capt Speirs 52]

 

but the other 25 it's a nightmare!!

 

Maybe they should do a 25% off sale.  :rolleyes:

[fluffyflops 1,845]

Fl230 MEDAM4N MEDAM UM623 VEVAR VEVAR6R LFMN/

 

there you go and remember you need to do the full approach over the bay (water)  and onto the 4s

[Jarkko 59]

Fl230 MEDAM4N MEDAM UM623 VEVAR VEVAR6R LFMN/

 

there you go and remember you need to do the full approach over the bay (water)  and onto the 4s

 

Ok, so I just completed the flight. I think I found the source of the problem and on my system it isn't ProATC. Do you happen to use Navigraph for AIRAC data? Here is the reason I'm asking:

 

1) I was cleared for STAR VEVAR6C and VOR22R-A approach with NERAS transition

 

First problem: I flew the route with Aerosoft's A320 and it failed to load the NERAS transition for the assigned approach. Aivlasoft's EFB and ProATC contained the NERAS transition.

 

2) As the aircraft didn't have the needed transition, I requested RNAV22R from ProATC and I was cleared for the RNAV approach with NERAS transition.

 

Second problem (and this is a big one): Navigraph's 1508 cycle's LFMN is corrupted for all programs I have. I loaded RNAV 22R with NERAS transition in Aivlasoft's EFB and also in the aircraft. The "good" thing is that all the programs show the same data. The bad thing is that they all now showed the 04L/R approach, instead of the requested 22R approach  :blink:

 

So I flew the whole "22R" approach which left me west of the airport at the FAF for runways 04... I had to circle the airport to land at 22R. Also the altitude data for the approach was corrupted. First a hard limit of 3000ft followed by hard limit of 2000ft followed by hard limit of 3000ft. No such up and down jumping required in the approach charts.

 

----

 

So my conclusion is that my problems were caused by broken 1508 AIRAC data from Navigraph. How does this compare to your flight? If you are interested, here is the whole flight (including me positioning for a landing on a taxiway instead of the runway => terrible landing): http://www.twitch.tv/virtualfreightdog/b/681710105 or here

[fluffyflops 1,845]

Jarkko my friend do you honestly think Lfmn in the real world would give you a circle to land. They wouldnt mate

[Jarkko 59]

Jarkko my friend do you honestly think Lfmn in the real world would give you a circle to land. They wouldnt mate

 

Go back and read my post again. No one gave me a circle to land. (if my english is hard to understand, then watch the video I recorded)

 

The question was: are you using Navigraph or Aerosoft for the navdata? I have filed a bug report to Navigraph about the corrupted AIRAC.

 

EDIT: On a second though, with a comment like that, you sir are on your own. Shame on me for spending couple of hours trying to help a fellow simmer out...

Edited August 6, 2015 by Jarkko

[Pete Dowson 558]

So my conclusion is that my problems were caused by broken 1508 AIRAC data from Navigraph. 

 

Looking at the charts themselves, the 22R approaches involve at least three of them. First the STAR you mention, which takes you to NERAS. That STAR is a general one for approach to any of the runways, from the North or East. Chart #40-1.

 

Then you use one of the "initial approach" charts (charts #50-1, 50-7 or 50-10). These start at 4000 or above, and go down to 3000. Then you go to chart 50-6, 50-8 or 50-11, all Circling approaches ro 22R or 22L.

 

I think in an attempt to try to provide automation for this, maybe the missed approach procedures are mixed in. These are shown both on the initial approach ones AND the circling ones, and take you back UP to 2000 feet, thence to DERAS, holding at 3000.

 

Looking at them it is difficult to see how the complex sequence can be encoded in ONE approach "package" for the A/P to follow Quite honestly I can't see how exactly you could really do it properly without having the charts in front of you!

 

Not trying to excuse the data, if it is bad, but looking for the explanation. If it can't be fully automated it should have suitable DISCOs where you have to work out what to do (looking at the charts probably) and attempt to join them up appropriately.

 

I'll have to try it one day! The runways are very seldom used from that direction as the winds are almost always favouring the 4L 4R ends, and their ILS's.

 

Regards

Pete

[fluffyflops 1,845]

I've been a qualified dispatcher for 8 year's. Trust me they mainly use 4l and 4r for arrs and deps in Nice

 

On the rare occasions When they use the 22s everyone In the office knows about it trust me, as they restrict the flow rate going into Nice causing slot delays all the pilots ring up and tell us and have a moan.

 

As I said before if you had an option on pro atc to request the full approach and not be snatched off the star it would be excellent.

 

Lfmn is one of those funny airports where if you get given a trick approach like the VOR onto 22 ir just doesn't like it.

 

Same with the visual onto 23 in LDSP

[Jarkko 59]

Trust me they mainly use 4l and 4r for arrs and deps in Nice

On the rare occasions When they use the 22s

I don't trust anyone who talks down on me, you can be sure about that. For future reference, I'm not your friend, pal or mate.

 

Yes, the 04s are used up to 6kts of tailwind (and maybe more). Yesterday I would have had 6kts of tail wind and would have been happy to land on the 22s (and that 04 ILS isn't used much as it goes over Cannes).

 

The problem is, that there is no way for ProATC to know that, as info like this isn't included in the AIRAC data. It might be included in the scenery, but Pete Dowson would know much more about that, than I do.

 

FWIW. There isn't anything stopping you from asking for runway 04 if you were assigned 22 for landing. Just do it the same way I requested RNAV instead of VOR approach.

 

As I said before if you had an option on pro atc to request the full approach and not be snatched off the star it would be excellent.

ProATC already works the way you want it. If you get vectored during arrival or approach, you are doing something wrong and ATC is trying to correct you. You can check the video. No vectoring during the whole flight.

[fluffyflops 1,845]

calm down, i merely said when they use the 22s in Nice everyone gets excited dont take it personally..*******

Edited August 7, 2015 by Jim Young
Banned from topic; inciting offensive remarks. When someone tries to help, one should be thankful

[pete_auau 1,152]

edit  found the answer I was looking  for

[red259 31]

How is pro-atc X now? Specifically I want to use it for IFR with te 737ngx, 777 etc and I am wondering if it is still a work in progress or if it has reached a stage where its worth spending the money for and is functional without a lot of hassle. I've been holding off for awhile. Thanks.