Improve stuck traffic due head to head taxi routes
Stop aircraft holding for ever to takeoff because of another aircraft is waiting to cross runway
Further turnaround fix for mismatches in tail numbers that was very prevalent outside the US
Fix low traffic volumes after you press Esc to load a new flight
Improvements
Improve handling of WinWing SimAppPro ghost events in binding and input control, should now be 100% reliable and no longer requires the 2 second button press process during binding. Thanks to @Belsdont for assistance with that!
AIRAC 2512 pronunciation data
Latest airline updates from pilot portal
Bug Fixes
Fix very old METARs potentially being loaded when using MSFS2024 24 hour historic weather.
Fix GSX arrival integration not working after the recent 3.7.2 GSX patch, that changed various menu names and flows
And do non experimental customers have to wait very long for the low number of parked aircraft fix to be released in the standard version? I feel this should be made available as soon as possible.
Last week we were told āprobably early next weekā. It it is now āmid next weekā and weāve heard nothing since. Got my fingers crossed. Itās really frustrating having little to no traffic at the airports. That was the reason I bought the product!
Is anyone using Superspudās EGNS (or even default) in FS2024? Iāve noticed since the last EA update that runway 08/26 is missing in action for BATC and it always assigns 03/21 which is like Courchevel for an A320 lol, can anyone concur? Just before I enter the world of Discord to report.
D-ATIS: Added D-ATIS and METAR endpoints (ready for aircraft devs to implement)
CPDLC: Added BGGL, DNKK, FNAN, FCCC, FYWF
CPDLC: Changed FAJS to FAJA.
CPDLC: Changed CDQX to CZQK for GANDER CENTER (125.075)
CPDLC: Added support for PDC omitting non required information (ie. stand)
CPDLC: Added logon code LBSR and LIBB
CPDLC: Changed logon code EYVL to EYVC for VILNIUS CONTROL
CPDLC: Changed logon code LEBL to LECB for Barcelona center
CPDLC: Changed UM 117 CONTACT message response from āRogerā to āWilco/Unableā - fixes issue where handoffs donāt work correctly in Ini A350
CPDLC: Fixed request direct script triggering verbally when CPDLC request direct is denied and player doesnāt respond. [#70584335]
Traffic
Further fixes for taxi routing focusing on taxi direction score improvements
Improve stuck traffic issue by allowing traffic to cross runways more readily rather than following the same approaching aircraft distance rules as takeoffs.
Improve deceleration calculation for landing traffic to reduce turn offs that are too early and over safe speed
Improvements
Frequencies: Changed callsign of center frequency 131.100 from Brindisi Radar to Rome Radar
I just payed the extra to get into the experimental releases and tried to fly from Liverpool to Dublin in the Fenix A320. Simbrief set me up to land on 10L but Iāve learned my lesson and do not program the MCDU for the destination runway until I get instructions for descent. BATC moved me to runway 16. Programmed it in, descended and on final approach, good localizer and glide slope and I get this stupid go around (which have been annoyingly frequent lately). Normally I ignore them because Iām over the allotted time I wanted to fly and want it over with (might be a clue to BATC that many of us have limited time and canāt extend our flights in a simulation) but tonight I pulled up and followed instructions to fly runway centerline at 3000ft. 20 minutes later Iām still flying away forgotten by BATC. My menu choices are limited to asking for a new approach or runway. Both of those are denied because it says Iām already on an approach which Iām clearly not. Go arounds in real life are rare and so they should be in the sim. Most of the go arounds Iāve had thrown at me, there is no obvious reason why. No traffic, great approach, weather acceptable enough for a Cat III auto land. Is the code masochistic? lol
This is certainly an aspect that should be worked on. Iām not quite sure if this falls under the āemergencyā part of BATCās roadmap, which has not yet been implemented, but in any case they are definitely present in BATC as of today and must be improved.
The one time Iāve done a go around using BATC, I did it myself because I was not stabilized. BATC handled my user-initiated go around perfectly.
That said, in your instance, did the approach include missed approach instructions? If so, did you follow them? It could be BATC was waiting/expecting you to go to whatever hold point might be listed, or to have acknowledged things in some different way - just spitballing here.
For what itās worth, on the rare occasion that BATC seems to have ālostā me, I have been able to quit and restart the program and then select the correct phase of flight after BATC starts back up. Perhaps in your case, when you had been lost by the program, you could have worked around back to the initial approach fix and then restarted BATC and selected Approachā for the phase of flight? Just a suggestion in case it happens again.
I have to plead ignorance to the missed approach part of my flight plan. I see the additional waypoints past the airport but Iām not sure what to do with them. I was a bit too busy trying to climb back up to the altitude BATC told me to go to with full flaps and gear down and staying on the runway centerline. By the time I got back to 3000 feet and got stabilized, none of the waypoints made any sense to get back to that approach. You have to remember that my initial flight plan was set to go to another runway originally and it was at descent that I finished programming the flight plan into the MCDU so who knows if the missed approach info was correct.
Iāll try next time to stop and start BATC and see if that helps. I wonder somewhat if all my problems over the last few days had to do with the intense weather at the airports I was flying to and from. UK got hammered and I was flying from Liverpool to Dublin. Landing crosswinds were intense. Will BATC issue a go around if crosswinds are too high?
That is something I do not know. I have heard BATC issue go a rounds to other (AI) traffic during my final approaches in the past. I always presumed that was the programās way to deal with its own issues maintaining spacing on arriving aircraft, landed aircraft vacating the runway, etc.
I know that they do that but I left out another thing I experienced during my flights. My flight out of Liverpool I was instructed to hold at the runway prior to takeoff. No other planes were approaching. I waited for 15 minutes and silence. The windsock however was flying straight out cross the runway so maybe that was the issue. I eventually just took off and got scolded by BATC. Maybe their go-around later in Dublin was them getting justice. lol
Maybe you were not at the correct holding point. Iāve seen some runway ramps (is that the correct term?) get ignored by BATC but others are fine. Usually the optional shorter runway ramp (or whatever the correct terminology is for it, sorry Iām not a pilot) is the one not recognised.
Other runway ramps Iāve had to go right up hard to the hold line to be recognised as being there. Not always though.
I tend not to all the time and it doesnāt seem to matter. I usually go for the longest point though. But I do go right up to the hold point to the extent that (depending on aircraft type) my nose might be over the line.
Iāve only ever had no response from tower at those shorter hold points or if Iām slightly short of the main hold point.
