At last Asobo are working on improving the ATC, for inclusion (at least in part) in SU14.
I think we should help them by pointing out the problems we’ve noted.
Here is my list:
Problems:
Losing Azure voices
Absence of barometric reading,particularly when descending through transition altitude.
Repeated (identical) commands to other planes for altitude changes. Once would be enough.
Useful selectable instructions missing [e.g. request barometer setting, switch to IFR on a VFR flight ]
There should be ~3 sec gap between ATC messages to other planes to allow user to send an acknowledgement etc. Or else, allow the user to “arm” a response, i.e. you can click on a response while ATC is talking, and your response will be inserted when there is an opportunity.
Allow tuning to ATIS before landing
Incorrect spacing of aircraft on approach probably caused by the different speeds.
Go around far too frequent, especially last minute go-arounds.
Altitude command changes occasionally too frequent - often get several contradictory changes within a couple of minutes (should be at least a minute between changes?)
Altitude often too high on approach
Sudden dramatic increase in altitude during approach, often followed by reduction back to a sensible level.
approach authorisation to waypoint sometimes not not matching arrival choices
Stop the continuous interuptions , where ATC start one message, but then interupt themselves with another.
ATC should give the correct response when asked for vector to next waypoint. (The last time I tried this, I was told to turn right onto heading 270. My current heading was 320, which was the correct course.)
Occasionally, I get the nag to speed my descent to (eg) 2000 ft before I actually get the command to descend to 2000 ft.
Occasionally the aircraft type is absent, e.g. the warning of nearby traffic (but without the type) prompts the response “Have the in sight” rather than “Have the Boeing in sight”.
Possible Improvements:
Accent for voice to match location.
phraseology
Authorisation to cross runways? / warning of aircraft on final if crossing runway
Remove “hash-tag” from aircraft IDs (e.g. [11] is read as hash-tag eleven hash-tag)- apart from sounding weird, it takes up more time on the transmission where time is often at a premium (see “continuous interuptions” above)
If ascending/descending to desired altitude via intermediate altitude steps, ATC should advise next step early enough to avoid levelling off unnecessarily.
Related problems:
During taxi, conflict with other aircraft/vehicles
Taxiway markings blank or confusing.
More sensible instructions regarding “. . .stop, caution other traffic”. Often the problem traffic never appears, or you have ample time to move before the traffic arrives.
Similar to your last point, during taxi I sometimes get instructions to hold position due to other traffic. ATC then seems to forget me, only advising I can continue after I nudge the aircraft forward a bit to see what they will do (!)
I hate to say it, but Asobo needs to give up on ATC. (Fixing the recycled FSX ATC is not worth the effort.) They should just hire these guys like they did with the WT team and let them do the ATC.
They need to outsource it to a team similar to Working Title, it’s clear that ATC is not their strong point and anything they come up with will be bettered by another third party team.
They held their heads high by bringing in Working Title, they need to do the same with ATC, Weather & VR.
(Well we will await and see what MSFS2024 brings of course but history shows me they’ll struggle).
Am I the only one that still has the same Azure voice for all radio calls of one ATC (the same voice for controller and all other aircraft)? Or did I miss a fix for that?
Stop telling me to “Exit Runway When Able”, after landing.
Most of the time the taxi-ribbon is directing me to the last taxiway at the end of the runway. Even taxing at 80 knots, ATC is constantly telling me to ‘get off the runway’! lol
I’d like to have the ability to request alternate runways consistently.
ATC at KOAK, for example, will not allow you to request any runway and always sticks you on the jetliner 12/30. This doesn’t really jibe with GA.
I’d also like to be able to request VFR On Top, which is common in the coastal areas of CA due to the marine layer.
I also find ground control pretty inconsistently implemented. Some small controlled airports seem to have clear directions for parking, taxing, etc. and others there are no options to request parking nor taxiing instructions.
Even if it is the aircraft developer at fault (whether Asobo or a third party developer), the ATC code could easily check for a missing type, and insert the generic term “aircraft” if necessary.
i.e: if (what_I’m_going_to_say == “”) then what_I’m_going_to_say = “aircraft”
It would be good if code like this was not necessary, but unfortunately it often is, especially if others are effectively inputting data.
Great compilation, congratulations! They would improve the enjoyment of the simulator a lot. The creators of the program must have completely different goals than solving relatively simple problems. When I was programming, I had to solve much more difficult problems, and I solved them as an amateur. What is missing is certainly the will to address the needs of the customers they have already acquired.
AI planes are sometimes assigned opposite landing runway from other AI planes and the directions given to player by ATC
Frequent up/down altitude changes given when descending towards mountainous areas (flying to Denver or even Las Vegas are often troublesome and result in hitting a mountain if you follow directions)
All those times ATC says it’s gonna give you vectors but never does unless you ask for them, then doesn’t tell you when those vectors change
The option to file for IFR flight plan clearance from the FMS’s flight plan isn’t always available, seems confusing why it is/isn’t visible
ATC doesn’t understand runway length, often assigning KSNA’s short runway to AI jet airliners that need more room, and assigning players with GA planes to the long runway that’s usually reserved for jet traffic.
I’d add that when this happens, I’ve found the Tower seems to lose the connection between me being assigned to land on the opposite runway and they will give takeoff clearance to the oncoming aircraft. I see this as I’m landing or during my roll out prior to turning off the runway.
Equally Ground Control also loses the reference between me and these AI aircraft and will give me taxiing instructions as though the AI aircraft didn’t exist and vice versa.
I would also add that current ATC doesn’t handle low level IFR very well. I fly a GA aircraft, my flight plan is with a cruise level of 10,000 ft, yet the ATC often wants to send me much higher, like 14,000 or more, before descending me back to 10,000. This is not something any GA plane can do easily. They should stick with what I filed. And if I don’t comply then they keep nagging me about expediting my climb. And this is not even terrain dependent.
My workaround is often just cancelling IFR and continue with flight following.
