ATC should be proactive and divert or change altitude to aircraft that might get too close instead of just asking “report them in sight” (and most of the time is imposible to see).
Agreed! (5% of the time, you’ll never see them coming and when you do, they are in sight for only seconds. ATC should advise precautionary actions, ascend/descend 500 feet is collision is possible…
always with the “Traffic at 6 o’clock, report them in sight”
and there’s no “Negative, I have no rear window” option 
3 Likes
I’ve given up and simply use the transponder without the TCAS.
- You are asking for a three course meal from a service that’s barely a burger joint at this point.
- You are confusing traffic advisories with a traffic alert.
“N808XX traffic on 1 o’clock 4 miles” is not the same as “N808XX Traffic alert 1 o’clock advice you turn heading zzz immeadiately”
Yes traffic is very hard to see sometimes. It is that way in the real world as well. And of course traffic on your six is hard to see in most airplanes
IRL some controllers would give you a heads up where to expect the other airplane to pass you and the rate of closure. Others may be indeed more pro-active and “suggest” a heading to decrease the conflict potential.
The only time you are not expected to look outside is when you are in IMC.
In busy airpace and with lots of chess pieces ATC can and will delegate separation to the PIC when possible.
Traffic in sight = maintain visual speparation.
1 Like
This forum is my school for new sayings.
As for the topic, take a ticket and join the queue.
1 Like
Do you mean to say that in real life, a response of “traffic in sight” can legitimately mean “I cannot see the traffic and never will be able to see it at the angle it’s at”, and that a response of “traffic not in sight” would always be followed up by a second request to look for the traffic, third request, ad infinitum?
(I think you mean more like that if you respond with “traffic in sight” you’re confirming to ATC that you’re responsible for separation, while if you say “traffic not in sight” you cannot do that, so ATC is still responsible? And thus it may be legit for them to keep asking you every several seconds in case you can see them now?)
No… how do you read that in what I wrote?
As soon as you as PIC confirm traffic in sight you also assume responsibility to maintain separation from that traffic. Nothing else. I think that is pretty clear from what I wrote.
In IMC or in case you can not see the traffic you tell ATC “negative on that traffic” or in case if IMC you tell them that.
ATC may in the first case give you another pointer a little later or they may give you a recommendation to alter course or altitude to avoid a conflict.
Obviously in IMC you have no chance to see the other aircraft from a safe distance so ATC will have to ensure separation by radar observation.
Remember we’re talking about a game here, and the actual implementation in that game. If you say you don’t have the traffic, it just asks you the same question again a few seconds later.
Is that correct to real procedure?
(Anyway, I apologize as I don’t think I’m being very clear; suffice to say I am suspicious that the current ATC implementation should be treating a lot of these cases differently but it’s a much lower priority issue than things like bad descent instructions that send you into mountains. :D)
1 Like
Talking of ATC does anyone get given an ILS approach on 3rd party scenery all i get is visual approaches but ils on default airports
Now you made me quote myself…. I did say IRL or in real life as the opener to the statement you keep misquoting or misunderstanding.
The real ATC controller would not just sit there and keep asking you the same dumb question until you and the other airplane share the exact same space of airspace which we all know causes problems and lots of paperwork.
He would however repeat the question with an updated position if there is time and space.
Usually followed as I said with something like “if not in sight I suggest change heading to…”
And no I am not expecting MSFS ATC to get all that right anytime soon.
1 Like
Thanks for confirming that the current behavior is wrong, and that I understood you correctly the second time. Have a good day. 
You too. Not sure how one could misinterpret that but glad it’s all cleared up now.
1 Like