Well if you think that the current system is correctly handling SIDs and Stars, and is an improvement on the old system then I think you are mistaken. The current system doesn’t really handle anything correctly, and I doubt it ever will. The old system managed to correctly vector for ILS or Visual approaches which worked reasonably well in the majority of cases. In the real world the majority of IFR flights are radar vectored onto the ILS, as its the most efficient method of expediting aircraft movements at busy airports.
All Asobo need to do is to add a fourth option to the approach selection,
1 VFR
2 Radar vectoring to the ILS as in FSX
3 Radar vectoring to Visual Final as in FSX
4 Pilot Interpreted Instrument Approach, (STAR, VOR, NDB approaches)
Yes the old system needed some tweaking at certain airports with non standard approaches and terrain issues, and those special cases could be designed for individual airports, but there is no way that the current system is ever going to correctly provide ATC services for every airfield. Its too complex a task. Adding live traffic makes it virtually impossible to operate at busy airports because the current ATC system is far too verbose and less efficient at handling traffic than a trained Air Traffic Controller. Its almost impossible to obtain a clearance at many airfields because of the number of aircraft requesting pushback etc. Live traffic should be restricted, dependant on the number of runways in use, to allow users to take off and land.
The system needs simplification.
1 Move the ground handling and pushback system away from ATC involvement, as in real life.
2 Don’t try to control taxiing aircraft, make pilots responsible for ground separation from other aircraft and simply clear to the holding point. Stop giving a list of taxiways and runways to cross, as these are normally completely incorrect.
3 Reduce ATC chatter to the absolute minimum,stop nagging aircraft to expedite climb or descent and clear the runway.
4 Airborne traffic info is almost universally provided too late, and often unnecessary as the aircraft is separated by more than the minimum 1000 ft or 5 miles. Provide the information only on traffic which has less than 1000ft separation and will become less than 5 miles laterally.
5 When you check in on a new frequency there is an instant response, then a pause before ATC rethinks what instructions to give and a further reply. As this is a computer based system I’m sure these two transmissions could be combined when necessary.
6 As an ATCO I was always advised by the regulator to avoid unnecessary politeness and stick to the essentials. So can we dispense with the universal ‘good day’ after each change of frequency. It doesn’t even sound as if its sincere.