A warning about PRO ATC

[RobJC 2,086]

Look at how often the betas are released. To install, download, run setup. No tweaking anything. 

https://pilot2atc.com/index.php/public-betas

 

[Bobsk8 13,064]

2 hours ago, ConstVoid said:

It was written in VB but as far as I'm aware jd never released the source, more's the pity. To be honest, although it was very good at the time, and in some areas surpasses most of the current alternatives, it's lack of true SID, STAR and approach assignment would put me off even if it were compatible with MSFS.

At it's time, RC4 was great, so were 8 Track Tape Players, and Black and white TV's. Not so much anymore.

[Bobsk8 13,064]

34 minutes ago, Sonosusto said:

Pilot2ATC. One of the best offline, speech to text ATCs, recognizes traffic, SID/STARs and updated all.the.time from one of the most supportive developers I've encountered.

Get it. It has a lot of stuff included.

I tried it and the lack of controller voices, for me was a real turn off after flying with PF3 with over 100 voices that come with it. 

[thomasl123 6]

Dear All

....this is a quote from discord of Pro/Atc from "constvoid":

 

With Thomas Drexler (The ProATC/SR Forum administrator moskito-x) indicating that the developer is suffering from burnout, I think it will be a very very long time, if ever, before we see any news/updates for the product. Someone on the forum suggested that the product could be turned into some sort of community driven open source development (like the FBW A320) but personally I can't see that happening. It would require the developer to hand over the source code to the community, and that would be a very big move for him - effectively cutting himself out of any future development/revenue - and in his current state I think he would see that as a very negative option. No - I'm afraid that for the foreseeable future what you see is what you get for ProATC/SR.

 

Here the link:

https://discord.com/channels/1013395312213250068/1019921028316659783

 

 

[GCBraun 2,483]

48 minutes ago, Sonosusto said:

It take seconds. You can even import the plan from simbrief. Interface is pretty simple, really.

Is there something we could you with?

I’ve stopped using it a long time ago. Back then, SimBrief integration was not a thing. Will try to use it again in the next days. 

[MDFlier 2,034]

22 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Nothing to stop you using it now for IFR. No rules about only one sim allowed on anyone's computer.

True, but I truly have moved on. I'm very happy to stick with MSFS.

I tried P3D a few months ago right before I reinstalled my system. It took me 4 tries to get it started up with all of the normal stuff I used to fly with. Seems like I forgot how to use it.  

[Ray Proudfoot 9,115]

33 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

At it's time, RC4 was great, so were 8 Track Tape Players, and Black and white TV's. Not so much anymore.

ATC rules haven't changed. What was valid 15 years ago still is.

[Gazzareth 882]

1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

ATC rules haven't changed. What was valid 15 years ago still is.

I loved it at the time, but for me p2atc is far better and it saves me from having to run p3d....

 

G

[cchiozza 117]

I use PROATC. I like Pilot2Atc but those voices are just terrible. I keep hearing about using AWS voices but have not been able to get work. Has anyone else?

[ConstVoid 112]

46 minutes ago, thomasl123 said:

Dear All

....this is a quote from discord of Pro/Atc from "constvoid":

 

With Thomas Drexler (The ProATC/SR Forum administrator moskito-x) indicating that the developer is suffering from burnout, I think it will be a very very long time, if ever, before we see any news/updates for the product. Someone on the forum suggested that the product could be turned into some sort of community driven open source development (like the FBW A320) but personally I can't see that happening. It would require the developer to hand over the source code to the community, and that would be a very big move for him - effectively cutting himself out of any future development/revenue - and in his current state I think he would see that as a very negative option. No - I'm afraid that for the foreseeable future what you see is what you get for ProATC/SR.

 

Here the link:

https://discord.com/channels/1013395312213250068/1019921028316659783

 

 

That would be me that posted it  😀 . Now I'm not so sure that it's just Mourad (the developer) who's having issues. Maybe Thomas is also suffering the strain of supporting a product without backup.

[Bobsk8 13,064]

5 minutes ago, cchiozza said:

I use PROATC. I like Pilot2Atc but those voices are just terrible. I keep hearing about using AWS voices but have not been able to get work. Has anyone else?

That is what turned me off about Pilot2 ATC. I have over 100 voices in P3D, and the vast majority are pretty good. If you find a few you don't like, you can just eliminate them in the menu structure. Adding voices in PIlot2 ATC seems to be either expensive or involves fiddling with the registry, which I hate doing. And you still wind up with only about 10 different voices. 

[Ray Proudfoot 9,115]

27 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

I loved it at the time, but for me p2atc is far better and it saves me from having to run p3d....

G

That’s fine. I’m not suggesting RC4 is the only decent ATC program.

[Bob Scott 7,795]

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

I tried it and the lack of controller voices, for me was a real turn off after flying with PF3 with over 100 voices that come with it. 

The problem with PF3 is you have incorrect phraseology and procedures in 100 voices.  The inversion of pilot/controller callsigns on oceanic comms is one example that just grates if you know what the calls are supposed to sound like.  I pointed it out to the dev years ago and it was not corrected.  The one that drove me nuts most recently was the callsign would be announced, then a 4-7 sec pause, then the rest of the radio call would come across.

I'm with Ray--Radar Contact has been the most consistent and procedurally accurate ATC experience for me for over 20 years now, and I have just about all of them.  Thanks to the wonder of its standard FSUIPC interface, it's still working well for me in P3Dv4 and v5, as well as in XPlane 11 and 12.

Anyway, back to topic, my experience with Pro/ATC X was sufficiently underwhelming that I wrote off dealing with it and its dev ever again.  Even when the dev was around, updates came around maybe once a year, and some of its implementation was just goofy--like ATC calling every altitude change on a basic procedure turn approach.  I was tempted to key the mike and tell ATC "Hey, if you want the jet, shake the yoke!"  When I called them on it, the explanation was that beginners need that kind of guidance...  Nope, nope, nope.  No more of that.  Life's too short.

 

[Gazzareth 882]

20 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

That is what turned me off about Pilot2 ATC. I have over 100 voices in P3D, and the vast majority are pretty good. If you find a few you don't like, you can just eliminate them in the menu structure. Adding voices in PIlot2 ATC seems to be either expensive or involves fiddling with the registry, which I hate doing. And you still wind up with only about 10 different voices. 

It's definitely a weakness, although for me the benefits of clicking a button on my yoke and asking for clearance or to taxi etc far outweighs the lack of voices. Have added all the MS English ones which helps a bit - but still kind of lacking in that respect.....

 

G

[Bobsk8 13,064]

5 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

It's definitely a weakness, although for me the benefits of clicking a button on my yoke and asking for clearance or to taxi etc far outweighs the lack of voices. Have added all the MS English ones which helps a bit - but still kind of lacking in that respect.....

 

G

PF3 does the exact same thing. One click calls ATC, another button to confirm instructions.