This one might help too: " Official MSFS: Beginner’s Guide to MSFS [ATC Basics]" https://www.twitch.tv/videos/763526177
Yeah it still does that. But at least you have the option to get rid of that hidious 121 POINT 1 and make it a proper DECIMAL
@BarbedJungle585 & @anon50268670
The idea ATC has no control over the pushback is simply not true at all. This probably comes from the US centric system of airlines having control of their ramp, with ATC (ground freq) taking control of the aircraft after the pushback is complete.
Almost everywhere else in the world, ATC actually has complete authority over all the aircraft movements on the ramp, including pushback. Pilots simply relay the ATC instructions to the ground engineer conducting the push.
For instance, in HKG, every pushback clearance contains a direction, coded as a color, red blue green etc. Most other airports will give you a push direction, tail south, face east, or a spot number that is marked on the tarmac.
Also, ATC can and do amend these clearances all the time, such as “ extend the push to keep gate XX clear”, or “stop the push there”.
Not trying to be argumentative, but just clarifying that ATC involvement in pushback direction, distance etc, is completely normal all over the world.
2 Likes
Sure some airports give specific pushback directions, direction to face, specific pushback spot etc. But in FS2020 the pushback truck is controlled via the ATC window, thats complete nonsense obviously.
Most airports I regularly fly in an out of have no communication with the tug anyway and rely on the crew to relay info. No clue how it works in the US, never flown there.
1 Like
If you think of the “ATC” window as the “Communications” window, then it makes perfect sense. Especially as crew use the same comm panel and mics to talk to both. The title is just semantics.
How else should it be implemented?
1 Like
Not exactly, since the prefix “ground” or “tower” is used when asking to start pushback. That part isn’t realistic. I would opt for a separate groundhandling window for intercom ops or something like that.
But we are highlighting a small part of the whole ATC system. I think its much more important for them to change to standard ICAO phraseology. Get rid of the made up FS9/FSX phraseology and fix the altimeter setting system…
I wrote a whole manual on standard ICAO phraseology when I was a RTF instructor. Maybe I should send it to them 
.
I agree, this is at the bottom of the list in terms of ATC improvements.
I was merely trying to give some additional info to others who may be interested in how pushbacks are conducted in the real world.
No harm no foul. 
1 Like
That would be 100% OK with me…
For anything more nationalized, there would need to be a much more elaborate By Country ATC systems… maybe one day, but not tomorrow !!!
Thats not just UK, what you are describing is proper ICAO phraseology. The ICAO way is:
“Climb FL200” (the word TO is never used in relation to flight levels)
“Climb TO ALTITUDE 2000 ft”
The only difference between ICAO and UK in this respect is that in the UK FL200 is spoken as “flight level two hundred” while according ICAO it is “flight level two zero zero”, this is only done for whole hundreds. The UK does this to prevent confusion between flight levels and headings. So:
FL200 = “Flight level two hundred”
FL210 = “Flight level two-one-zero”
Thats also why the phrase “degrees” is commonly used (or should be commonly used) behind a heading ending with a zero, to prevent confusion with flight levels. The phrase “degrees” is not standard ICAO phraseology but rather an Eurocontrol recommendation.
Heading 200 = “heading 200 DEGREES”
Heading 205 = “heading 205”
Thanks Nijntje91. I only have the CAP413 doc, so I wan’t sure, but I should have checked near the bottom of the doc, as that gives the differences between UK and standard ICAO.
CAP 413 is really good actually. Pretty close to ICAO except the “pass your message” instead of “go ahead”, all the weird services such as basic service, deconfliction service etc.
The Britsh generally have very good RTF skills and discipline. The rest of the world can learn something from that (I’m not from the UK to be clear 
).
That is a bit harsh! Look, the ATC on this sim is not totally real world, and we all know it. To achieve that would require a tremendous amount of resources (time, developers, researchers and even computational power). Think about it, its a standard dev team, building an app, making planes, doign weather, and everythign else in the SIM, Do you REALLY expect them to also have the time and ability to research all 10000’s airports, taxiways, with all their procedures, and be able to create a supremely brilliant AI subsystem that can acurately handle not just your plane, but also all the other AI and Live traffic, as well as multiplayer traffic (from other computers) with the AI talking correctly to other computers AI too?
And all runnig on normal “home” PCs?
They may be able to do it with a large enough team, and a huge amount of time, but dont expect to be able to get the game for $59 without any form of subscription!
As a devloper myself, and for the size of the team they have, and what they are trying to create, and in the time they had to create it, they have done a fantastic job. Yes there are bugs, but that was inevitable with the circumstances.
In the time they had, they have created a fair system that is not too complecated for beginners, and casual users (very important, to generate sales, and keep this project alive), and usable, if not accurate for other simmers.
Advanced simmers will soon be able to purchase add-ons, of airports which have all their detail they need, however, i woudl not be suprised if a single ariport ends up costing far more than $59 when it has that sort of detail! Also any pro grade ATC with either require an extremely powerfull computer, or maybe even a second comptuer JUST to handle the ATC!
But seriosuly, whats with the horrible insults towords the dev team? If you think they are so bad (a bunch of kids fresh out of university in your words) why dont you send your CV to Asobo, and see if you can actually make a difference, rather than just talkign here in relative anonymity.
3 Likes
Ground controllers are the people who give you the clearance to give you the pushback and start. While the feature to communicate with the ground crew for the tugs and all is missing, the ATC is what gives you the clearance to do all that and in most airports that is done with the ground controller. IDK how it is where you are at, but that is pretty standard at almost every airport. They are working on a better pushback system the said as it sucks to have to tell the controller on ATC that you need to stop or turn to the left etc. That is not actually done in real life, so that is agreeable, but the commencement of the pushback and start has to be authorized by the ground controller.
Hopefully they bring in a really good system in, personally I would like to see something like better pushback from X-Plane 11. That worked so well when it came to the pushback and how you can plan it.
Who knows, I can be wrong definitely, but that is what I always seen and read regarding pushback. If I am wrong, I apologize for it.
This might be helpful to give an idea - it’s a link to a PDF from Pilot2ATC and runs through some VFR comms.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/vczu6gwbsgllwuj/Pilot2Atc%20VFR%20Scripts.pdf?dl=0&m=
Original source - https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/522455-vfr-scripts-work-in-progress/
I saw a few Videos of Pilot2ATC … looks very interesting.
Something to check out this weekend … I have no problems in turning off MSFS ATC, and using Pilot2ATC, if it works better, – and from the Videos so far, it looks a lot better integrated and more functional than MSFS is now, or – realistically, MSFS will even be able to be – at least in the near future.
In an ideal world, MS/ASOBO might identify a current developer who already has the skills and knowledge to produce a sim ATC system, and the sub-contract them to provide the ATC part of MSFS (like they did for so many other parts of the sim).
Not saying Pilot2ACT should be that choice, but whoever gets an ATC sub-contract from MS/ASOBO should benefit very well, as will MSFS users.
Also, looking at RL ATC in general, and the way technology is going, a prime area for AI is ATC … as AI develops, there will soon become a time when AI ATC is more “safe & reliable” than Human ATC. Then AI pilots … it’s coming sooner than you may think .
It’s certainly worth a look and you can get a 10 day trial to test it out. It’s not perfect, it has a clunky GUI and is a bit of a faff to get setup, but it’s much more immersive than the default ATC. Obviously something like VATSIM would be best but that means speaking to real people… 
I dont know if anyone gave you the actual answer without using a 3rd party addon but I do from a cold start:
turn on bat / use external power
call ground services ask for
fuel
baggage
gate
pushback
tell pushback left right or stop
call ground clearance and ask for clearance to taxi
this is optional - turn on the taxi assist in assists menu will turn on a set of blue arrows to follow
ATC will grant your request and taxi to that point short of the runway (if your using the taxi assist
follow the blue arrows.
Tune the tower ask for permission to leave.
they will grant depart straight out or wait for blah blah blah
turn on to the run way (blue arrows always want me to do a donut to get on the runway)
take off lift gear lift flaps and start following your flight plan etc.
There are check lists to follow on the top menu that can be (shoud be?) run through not nearly as extensive as the real one but .
answer respond to call for handoffs alt changes etc during flight ( can use pulldowns and have copilot do this and or all radio work if you want)
request landing permission when you get to destination, they’ll give you landing runway
fly to your approach, approach and land…
pull off runway when youve slowed enough tower will tell you this
contact ground control
get taxi clearance to park or take off etc
rinse and repeat.
Not realistic but thats about as good as it gets without spending additional money.
If you pull to a gate you can call ground and ask for
gate/fuel/baggage and the catering truck.
1 Like
You are right about this. The only thing is that on most airports the pushback tug is not listening out on the ground frequency and either if they would, it wouldn’t be a good idea for them to start pushback without consulting the crew as brakes might still be set or nosewheel steering not disconnected. In short, you contact ATC for pushback clearance you then relay the pushback instruction to the pushback crew via intercom together with confirmation that you are ready for pushback and that brakes and nosewheel steering are off.
1 Like
This is completely US phraseology and far from what we use on the other side of the pond which is much more in line with ICAO standard phraseology. Although RTF procedures may vary slightly from aerodrome to aerodrome the following is relatively standard phraseology in Europe and close to ICAO phraseology.
1 Like