FSHud 1.3. Beta Wow!!!!

[Axis3600 50]

I love your software, but I don't understand why when I use FSHUD with FSTL, I have much less traffic than if I use FSTL outside of FSHUD.
However, I have parameterized in the FSHUD menu, I have read the manual, but I very rarely come across planes in CRZ.

And another thing with FSTL and FSHUD the planes on the ground don't stick to the same gateway if I use FSTL outside of FSHUD there it works.

Otherwise can't wait to try the new version, it's a very good software!

[anden145 2,302]

1 hour ago, abennett said:

Thanks so I would only need the base packages from FSLTL and then I can inject via FSHud and FSHud would also control the spacing etc?

Correct. You need both the FSLTL airplanes/models installed and the injector running. When running FSHud first, the injector will startup in 'FSHud mode' and inject traffic for FSHud to control.

The new voices in the beta is definately an improvement (at least in my opinion). They're faster (you can actually control the speed) and other variables related to them. They're not as robotic as the 'older'/previous ones. But there's definately still room for improvement.

Also - on my latest flight - I had an issue with ATC not taking terrain into account, when descending me. This was descending into Frensno in California. I had to stray off altitude, to avoid crashing into a mountain.

Edited April 11, 2023 by anden145

[Virtual-Chris 682]

6 minutes ago, anden145 said:

 

Also - on my latest flight - I had an issue with ATC not taking terrain into account, when descending me. This was descending into Frensno in California. I had to stray off altitude, to avoid crashing into a mountain.

So it’s got the same issue as the default ATC? Sheesh 🙄 

[anden145 2,302]

9 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

So it’s got the same issue as the default ATC? Sheesh 🙄 

Yearh I guess. I don't know if this is a shortcoming with API or something. One thing to mention, though, is that it didn't 'bother' me about being higher for a shorter time, because of the terrain, which was - at least - nice. One solution to implement, which would be nice (the one that Radar Contact did) was to simply check a box, when loading the flight, that the arrival airport had terrain obstacles. Radar Contact has such an option, which meant that, when checked, ATC simply said something to the extend of: "This airport has NOTAM of terrain. You may descend on your own discression. etc...". It would (as far as I remember) still give you altitudes, but how fast you descended and when, was your call. Simply put.  

[FSHud 218]

4 hours ago, abennett said:

Thanks so I would only need the base packages from FSLTL and then I can inject via FSHud and FSHud would also control the spacing etc?

No, you need the FSLTL injector as well, it communicates with FSHud to inject traffic (look in FSLTL manuals)

Edited April 11, 2023 by FSHud

[FSHud 218]

2 hours ago, Axis3600 said:

I love your software, but I don't understand why when I use FSHUD with FSTL, I have much less traffic than if I use FSTL outside of FSHUD.
However, I have parameterized in the FSHUD menu, I have read the manual, but I very rarely come across planes in CRZ.

And another thing with FSTL and FSHUD the planes on the ground don't stick to the same gateway if I use FSTL outside of FSHUD there it works.

Otherwise can't wait to try the new version, it's a very good software!

Traffic amount and injection issues were fixed in version 1.3

And another thing with FSTL and FSHUD the planes on the ground don't stick to the same gateway if I use FSTL outside of FSHUD there it works.

Do you mean Jetway? Or isn't properly located at parking?

[FSHud 218]

1 hour ago, anden145 said:

Yearh I guess. I don't know if this is a shortcoming with API or something. One thing to mention, though, is that it didn't 'bother' me about being higher for a shorter time, because of the terrain, which was - at least - nice. One solution to implement, which would be nice (the one that Radar Contact did) was to simply check a box, when loading the flight, that the arrival airport had terrain obstacles. Radar Contact has such an option, which meant that, when checked, ATC simply said something to the extend of: "This airport has NOTAM of terrain. You may descend on your own discression. etc...". It would (as far as I remember) still give you altitudes, but how fast you descended and when, was your call. Simply put.  

Regarding terrain - please open a ticket from application and provide detailed flight plan - this shouldn't happen.
Again - it's still BETA 🙂

[Ray Proudfoot 9,115]

3 hours ago, anden145 said:

One solution to implement, which would be nice (the one that Radar Contact did) was to simply check a box, when loading the flight, that the arrival airport had terrain obstacles. Radar Contact has such an option, which meant that, when checked, ATC simply said something to the extend of: "This airport has NOTAM of terrain. You may descend on your own discression. etc...". It would (as far as I remember) still give you altitudes, but how fast you descended and when, was your call. Simply put.  

It is a NOTAM option used where there’s high terrain near the airport. You have more latitude with altitudes both at departure and arrival airports. Typical examples include Innsbruck, Milan Malpensa and Geneva.

The instruction to descend is preceded with “If able, descend to xxx ft”. You don’t get busted for descending later than the instruction.

[FSHud 218]

39 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

It is a NOTAM option used where there’s high terrain near the airport. You have more latitude with altitudes both at departure and arrival airports. Typical examples include Innsbruck, Milan Malpensa and Geneva.

The instruction to descend is preceded with “If able, descend to xxx ft”. You don’t get busted for descending later than the instruction.

Regarding Radar Contact:
The main question is how did it handle AI Traffic in mountains area?

Because saying "If able", means ATC doesn't completely know what is going on with you.
It is possible issue whatever instruction is - but for FSHud it is also necessary to pilot AI Traffic aircraft in such case.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,115]

4 minutes ago, FSHud said:

Regarding Radar Contact:
The main question is how did it handle AI Traffic in mountains area?

John Dekker tried to control Ai in FSX but the aircraft really had a mind of their own. It was a continuous fight between RC4 and the sim engine.

In short he couldn’t. To be honest I’ve never paid much attention to the behaviour of Ai in P3D when on approach because they’re only there to fill the skies and airports for me.

The “if able” prefix only applied to your aircraft, not Ai. RC4 gives them Clearance, taxi instructions, take off and landing clearance but that is probably reacting to each aircraft status. There are no instructions for altitude changes for them, just your aircraft.

I’m not sure how FSHud is going to control multiple inbounds to large airports. That could be challenging to put it mildly. 😉

[tup61 1,667]

I think it's rather funny how most simmers don't seem to care that their Air Traffic Controller addon isn't actually Controlling Air Traffic...! I am glad FSHud is at least trying to do just that. Imagine a weather addon not controlling the weather: everyone would jump on it and bash that addon. But an ATC addon that doesn't do ATC... well, no problem, apparently. 😉

And I also think it's funny how each simmer (including me) says their preferred ATC addon has good voices and that the voices of other addons suck big time. Perhaps is has something to do with being used to what you have...? I personally like the voices of FSHud a lot (as they are already) and really can't understand why someone (who is using an ATC addon with stitched together pre-recorded snippets) can call them robotic... Very odd.

[regis9 4,090]

Does FSHud work with AIG as well?

[ConstVoid 112]

5 minutes ago, regis9 said:

Does FSHud work with AIG as well?

Yes - even FSHud 1.2 injects and controls the AIG traffic, so you don't run the AIG TC at all. I haven't tried 1.3.

[FSHud 218]

50 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

John Dekker tried to control Ai in FSX but the aircraft really had a mind of their own. It was a continuous fight between RC4 and the sim engine.
In short he couldn’t.

But it FSHud does it...

Regarding this:
John Dekker tried to control Ai in FSX but the aircraft really had a mind of their own. It was a continuous fight between RC4 and the sim engine.
In short he couldn’t. To be honest I’ve never paid much attention to the behaviour of Ai in P3D when on approach because they’re only there to fill the skies and airports for me.

In MSFS - this fight is even worse - you don't have privilege to make aircraft follow by waypoints - the only way is control the aircraft by yourself (simplified autopilot) - which also already works.

The “if able” prefix only applied to your aircraft, not Ai. RC4 gives them Clearance, taxi instructions, take off and landing clearance but that is probably reacting to each aircraft status. There are no instructions for altitude changes for them, just your aircraft.

I've mentioned in one of our forums our vision about ATC program: 
https://www.simforums.com/forums/ground-traffic_topic65289.html

Purpose of ATC - from Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_traffic_control
As it says:
"The primary purpose of ATC worldwide is to prevent collisions, organize and expedite the flow of air traffic, and provide information and other support for pilots."

To understand - the program that simulates proper "ATC" by definition will require those core capabilities of the environment where it runs on:

1. Ability to vector aircraft to a specified location (airborne).
2. The ability to make aircraft follow a specified path by locations or taxiway names (ground, airborne).
3. The ability to make aircraft keep at a specific altitude.
4. The ability to make aircraft land and takeoff at a specific location (not only runway name).

We are not interested to create chat agent that will just give you instructions without any basement - and if it's still a requirement, I guess porting ChatGPT is a good option - it will spit out all possible phraseology that ever exist.

And last mention about nostalgic stuff - I guess FSX times was simpler, life was simpler and user's requirements was simpler.

Edited April 11, 2023 by FSHud

[FSHud 218]

11 minutes ago, regis9 said:

Does FSHud work with AIG as well?

Yes it is.
FSHud is able to read AIG Database schedules files - something we've implemented almost year ago