We need the ability to ask for a different runways for takeoff. To many times the wind sock is showing wind direction and one way and ATC is clearing traffic for a runway that doesn’t give the best headwind. This happens sometimes at smaller fields in the real world. Pilot’s have the discretion to ask for a different runway for takeoff. This should be the same in the sim.
3 Likes
You probably don’t want to hear this but I’ve turned off both ATC and traffic until they get fixed.
ATC tries to crash your aircraft (or instruct you to climb to 20k feet as a C172 on final approach) and turning on traffic tries to crash your computer/Xbox. Bad ATC instructions and CTD outweigh any immersion they bring at the moment.
If I remember correctly, I think ATC overhaul was on Working Title’s to-do list from the Q&A but we’ll have to see when that happens.
3 Likes
yep…never used it yet either!
You can choose a different runway for takeoff by adding a different departure pattern from the world map flight plan.
But that being said, in terms of the wind sock direction. The Wind sock is actually wrong at the moment. The actual wind and the ATC is actually the right one. So if the ATC instructs you to go to a certain runway, it’s most likely the correct one since that’s the direction of the actual wind.
From what I read a few months ago, the Wind sock isn’t necessarily pointing from the actual direction of the wind. But it is relative to the orientation of how the wind sock is placed in the first place.
For example: Let’s assume that the wind is blowing from 90 degree direction. The ATC will assign you RWY09 for example because of this wind direction. If the wind sock is placed correctly with a default orientation to 360 degrees (again, assuming this is the correct orientation), the wind sock will receive the wind information and points away from the 90 degree direction (pointing towards 270 degrees).
However, if the wind sock is placed at an orientation of 180 degrees by default, when it receives the wind information, it would turn towards the 270 degree in relative to its default orientation, and since the default orientation is 180 degrees, it’s actually pointing “towards” the 90 degree, even though the wind is coming “from” the 90 degree.
There was a few mods out there that mitigate this weird issue by reorienting the default direction of the wind sock, so that once the wind hits them, they would point to the right direction. But this needs to be done for each wind sock object through the dev mode. And since the default airport don’t have the same modifications, they would all be pointing to the wrong direction.
4 Likes
I find the in game ATC to be most accurate on what runway should be active and wind direction. I use it for ATIS but use Pilot2ATC for ATC.
Rex Weather Force lets me sync the sim weather it generates with Pilot2ATC. But its weather is still not as dynamic and well done as in game.
During the last Dev Update the developers mentioned that they are going to redo how METAR data is digested into the weather system so this should lead to more accurate weather near METAR sites but still remain as dynamic as it already is.
I’ve also found visually so many analog gauges are off when it comes to setting pressure so I have quit trying to do it “for real” and just press B.
The runway selection is also determined by airfield preferences - some fields have “preferred runways” enabled which means you’re going to get those assigned more likely for arrival and departure operations, wind direction notwithstanding.
You can see if the field has such a preference by looking at the field information using an EFB like LittleNavMap.
I think this is what is happening. The wind from METAR and ATIS will confirm it is coming from one direction, but then you are instructed to take off with a tailwind. I just ignore the tower in these situations and head into the wind.
The best way I can think of is to use a 3rd party ATC program, I recommend pilot2ATC.
1 Like
That makes sense. The ATC is systemic, but the windsock is merely a visual artefact.
The windsocks are correct if 3rd parties have updated their addon airfields with the latest SDK. Default airports should already be ok. Previously they were 180 degrees out.
Pilot2ATC had an option to force pilot runway selection. You can also edit the criteria on p art airport basis as to what runway is active.
Correct. But you also have the option to request a different runway. Like real life, they won’t always say yes, but in my experience, most of the time they will.
I’m a big fan of what MS/Asobo has pulled together with MSFS, and unlike so many others on this board, I don’t have most of the problems I keep hearing about over and over and over again. I think the reality is that most people don’t have them either, but they don’t bother coming here to relate their experience they have nothing to complain about.
Having said that, one of the things that I am very disappointed with is the default ATC. Heck, when I first got the sim I just figured given the time it took between the release of FSX and this one, and specifically considering Microsoft’s use of voice technology (see: Cortana) I was downright shocked to find I wasn’t talking to ATC.
And the more I used it, the worse it got, because those guys don’t know how to vector for squat (I’m at a total loss how they even graduated ATC school), they don’t assign SIDs or STARs, I’ve yet to ever once hear a change from what I filed, a request to enter a hold and dozens of other things that as a real life pilot just made me cringe. It has improved, but not nearly enough. If they don’t have plans for a MAJOR overhaul, they need to follow the advice from the phrase “If you can’t beat 'em, join 'em”, and just buy one of the 3rd party ATC providers and get it over with.
I fly airliners mainly, and find that the ATIS winds are normally correct for direction, in line with the latest METAR, but the wind speeds are always different. However ATC, which in this case stands for ‘Awful Terrible Control’, always allocates the opposite end of the correct runway, 180 degrees out. It makes life very interesting for a heavily laden B787, but you can always ignore ATC and take another runway. ATC will still clear you for take off if you taxi and hold at the opposite end. Hopefully all this will be fixed, eventually.
Eventually, we need to be able to:
Request a different runway for departure (including intersection departures)
Request a different final altitude (from a list of altitudes, not 5000 higher/lower, just ‘Request FL310’ is much more realistic) - this, in the menu, could be selectable by 0-FL99/FL100-FL199 etc, then FL310.
Request a further climb/descent if they have not climbed or descended you yet
Request a heading due to weather etc
Request direct tracking
Request holding (and then onwards clearance)
Request a particular approach type (ILS/RNAV/VOR/NDB/Visual Approach, etc)
This would make things much more realistic.
And PLEASE, support ICAO phraseology (the US does almost EVERYTHING differently in this world)
1 Like
The bottom line is the option to select a different departure runway was there and they took it away, even with the Simbrief imported plan. There should be an ability to request a different departure runway, period. Then again we all know how much the current ATC sucks and how much work it still needs.
Everything that’s being suggested reminds me of Radar Contact from my FS9 days. That ATC program was well ahead of its time and affordable!
1 Like
It is a real shame we can’t use it in this platform or I’d use it in a heart beat. Too bad JD never got to version 5 and be around now to try and squeeze it in to 2020. 
I do not experience any sim/computer crash issues having live (AI) and online (live players) traffic enabled. Perhaps you have one or more non-compatible liveries installed?
Yeah, I know. It’s got some issues from here to there, but overall it’s a well made product that I really am glad I purchased. I wish MS would purchase it too, but not a single copy, rather I wish they should buy them out, hire the developers (which I think is only 2 guys), have them do some tweaks to the software, and then either make it a part of the base product (preferred), or at the very least release it as a paid, optional Marketplace product.
Unless MS/Asobo are already working on something at least as good and are fairly close to being finished, but if that was the case, we probably wouldn’t know until it was essentially in the can and they were within weeks to a month or two from releasing it.
I haven’t heard that they are working on it. But I would imagine that if they are going to step up flight simulation ATC to the next level they will leverage Azure and it will be done server side.