I seem to remember Working Title saying they were going to tackle the ATC after the many other items on their list.
If the task has indeed been passed onto WT, then Asobo will probably mark the problem as “solved” (in ZenDesk speak), and ignore it.
There is no doubt there are many problems with ATC. It’s so unrealistic hitting B to get the correct pressure, but what else can I do when ATC tells me to descend to 8,000 ft (from an hour at high altitude) without giving me the barometer reading? Just the optiion to request the pressure reading would be a step forward. I ignore unrealistic jumps in altitude from ATC (which I certainly have had over flat areas), but again so unrealistic.
Not using the ATC may be an option for some, but not for me - the contact with the world flight system, and the restrictions imposed, are a vital part of the flight.
I think you’re over exaggerating the amount of calculations. The flight path is known, you’re following a filed IFR plan. The game needs one calculation, a ground height profile of your route. ATC also knows what plane you fly and thus the desired descent rate. Last there are the height restrictions as set in the chose approach route. (Which is should confirm/assign a lot sooner than it does currently)
From those three things, height profile, descent rate, target altitude points, it’s quite easy to set a couple minimum heights along the route plus slopes to determine when to issue a descent instruction to that target altitude.
It only has to do all that once and the game has plenty time during cruise to analyze the approach path. Once you cross one of the slopes, ATC tells you to descent to the next altitude point. One instruction is enough, no need for continuous recalculating and issuing up and down instructions. The route doesn’t change, the plane doesn’t change, the height of the terrain doesn’t change. It’s not a difficult to solve problem. Pilots have been doing it for ages with paper maps!
Are you sure of this? Think again! This is precisely where calculations have to be made again and again to ascertain that you will make the “gates” on your trajectory, your descent rate most of the time is far from stable, hence the necessity to adjust. I am doubtful that ATC "knows " what plane you fly and its characterics (see example below).
Once again, I am not saying this is acceptable at all, only that it is not an easy fix.
Now it is my turn to say that you oversimplify, a computer is not a pilot or a human being, it is rational only within parameters defined by man, as a pilot I calculated my descent trajectories according to safe altitudes, weather predictions including winds and of course STAR when applicable, ATC just had to get me at an altitude and location they wanted and did not have to bother about my rate of descent which was under my control. MSFS ATC "thinks " according to your inconstant rate of descent and minimum altitudes.
In the sim, recently over the Andes for example, I was given an altitude for my initial descent of 15’000 feet and I descended at 2’200 feet/mn, suddenly ATC corrected the altitude to 17’000 feet because I was going down too fast and had a a peak on my route. That calculation was done AFTER I started my descent and it concluded I was not going to be safe - which was correct, a slower rate of descent could take care of that, but also the instruction was untimely given the plane I was flying. In mountainous areas ATC simulation is a challenging task.
So I found something REALLY interesting last night. I was short on time and I could only do it once, so I need some help to confirm.
Next time you’re flying, and you get transfered over to a new frequency:
-You contact ATC
-they give you an updated altimeter setting
-Don’t manually set altimeter
-Before you hit any options in the ATC menu, hit B
-If the altimeter setting is DIFFERENT than what ATC just said, hit the “Say again” option
-ATC’s response is now edited to reflect the number you have set in your altimeter
It knows the ‘normal’ descent rate based on the type of plane you fly. If you descent too slowly it tells you to expedite your descent.
Descending too fast should not be possible. In that case, ATC set the targets wrong and should add extra steps. (Which it does on plenty approach paths, guiding you down on RNAV approaches) Instead of telling you to go directly to 15,000, then correct to 17,000. It should tell you to go to 17,000 until all peaks are cleared and then tell you to keep descending to 15,000.
It’s not a difficult problem if you work it backwards. It should never go 15,000 - 14,000 - 15,000 - 14,000 for 10 minutes or more. A simple solution is to stick to the higher value until 14,000 is safe for the rest of the way. Working it backwards, the minimum height only increases. There is never a need to go back up again (unless for traffic/weather avoidance but the game doesn’t do that anyway)