What is wrong with ATC Specifically

Now that you mention that, I seem to remember this happening to me once quite some time ago as well. I probably should have added this to my list near the beginning of this thread, but had forgotten about it.

Pressurization is not a requirement to fly above 10000 feet. O2 is and that you can carry in portable bottles from one aircraft of another or have installed into the aircraft and charged at a service station / FBO.
And even if youdon’t have O2 10000 feet is still not the limit, at least in FAA airspace. You can fly there for 30 minutes without O2 as the PIC :slight_smile:

§ 135.89 – Pilot requirements: Use of oxygen.

(a) Unpressurized aircraft. Each pilot of an unpressurized aircraft shall use oxygen continuously when flying—

(1) At altitudes above 10,000 feet through 12,000 feet MSL for that part of the flight at those altitudes that is of more than 30 minutes duration; and

(2) Above 12,000 feet MSL.

EASA = between 10 and 13k is limited to 30 minutes without oxygen.

1 Like

I made this thread to discuss whether we should go for “real world” or “by the book” ATC. I did add the above discussion regarding oxygen requirements above 10.000 ft as well to the list.

Yup. but FL220??? or anything over 15000ft for that matter when hypoxia is highly likely? The whole reason for identifying aircraft type to ATC is so they know your basic capabilities and shouldn’t ask you to do something you couldn’t, at the moment this information is being ignored. At the very least we should be able to reply saying we can’t comply. A similar situation is being told to keep speed under 200kts or 250kts when you’d be lucky to get that in a vertical dive :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

Agree on the oxygen issue.

Regarding the speed not above issue, they should completely delete that phrase, its part of the procedure you are flying, not something ATC would remind you of in real life.

1 Like

I do understand your point, I just wanted to point out that just because an aircraft is not pressurized ATC can still ask you to climb higher than 10k and not break any rules.
Or you as the PIC may ask for higher and be perfectly fine doing so if you carry supplemental O2 in the green bottles.

Having an “unable” option would be really nice, I just don’t quite see how they could implement that in the canned ATC.

I have flown our Saratoga to her certified ceiling on 2 occasions
just to try on one and to get out of some really bad winds on the other. We always carried the O2 bottles in the airplane since W&B in a PA32-301 is basically the “fits through the door—it can fly variety”

And on night flights I would typically use the bottle at least for the last 30 mins or so if we were higher than 8k on the flight since it does significantly improve your night vision.

But of course a normally aspirated engine as out IO-540k is not exactly what you want to drag up to the high teens.

1 Like

My son sent me these screen shots of his ATC interaction on approach into Vancouver last night


I have that as well, most of the time, and have complained about this too. While on an approach or preparing for an approach in altitude of about 2000/3000 ATC instructs to go back to 8000/10000 ft. which is far more than the transition level of 5000 - mostly with IFR. I’ve also never heard ATC giving instruction to turn to a heading as in FSX and XP.

Absolutely, I get that too. They just cannot decide on an altitude.

That is a deliberate but most unfortunate design choice. Vectors are available “on demand” from the pilot
 But how would you know when to demand a vector to turn to intercept the localizer!

I find the FS ATC to have very little in common with real world, it lacks even basic flexibility. For instance, my experience is nearly all military and police helicopter flying, both heavily day night VFR, but crucially the ability to change to IFR at little notice to recover to base (or destination) and carry out an IFR approach to minimums.

As far as I can see there is no option to file IFR during a VFR flight.

Many VFR GA accidents are caused by pilots getting caught out by worsening weather and trying to carry on using VFR in IMC, ATC will always offer an IFR option when asked, but MSFS doesn’t offer this.

If you set up a flight plan but are flying VFR, I think you are given the option to switch to IFR once you leave the airspace controlled by the local tower.

image

I can’t see how to change it while near the departure airport, though.

2 Likes

Great, thanks very much, i’ll try it.

I think we should make a list of what ISN’T wrong with the ATC. That would be a lot shorter.

Let’s start.

  1. It talks.
  2. I can’t think of anything else.

That is hilarious and indeed a good one!

No it doesn’t. Talking implies speech, it doesn’t, it just plays sound samples in order
with pauses in the wrong places. Every plane I fly is referred to as, for example, “Beechcraft Golf
” and then the rest of the tail number.

That’s not speech. It is splitting hairs though, I’ll grant you that.

Talk = using words.
Speak = say something in order to convey meaningful information

Kind of a like a parrot talks, but it doesn’t speak.

I know. It’s splitting hairs, but I chose my words carefully. :stuck_out_tongue:

So we’re in agreement then, we’re a couple of hairy splitters.

3 Likes

So it’s not just the ATC which can’t do numbers - even generic traffic make it up as they go along:

image

No wonder ATC gets annoyed with them at times!

3 Likes