You’re using the fact that MSFS has poor ATC as ammo against it when it comes to simulation. I don’t know of any sim out there that has had great ATC. Hopefully when Working Title overhauls the ATC it will make those that don’t wish to turn to third-party happy.
I can’t put together how shooting something like this even in the stock Cessna 152 and going missed if need be and holding over an NDB doesn’t qualify as simulation. You’re simulating shooting a VOR approach in a Cessna 152 without DME and using your ADF instead. It doesn’t get more cut and dried than that when it comes to simulation.
Yeah but even the request to alter altitude doesnt always work well. You can be at 7,000 feet, ask for a decent by 4,000 (that’s the wording in the text box of the ATC window, not decend to) and ATC says descend to 4000 approved.
I’ve never had that happen. I always get assigned a new lower altitude by the amount of the decrease. I’m not at my computer but I’m pretty sure I’ve always been able to continue at a reasonable altitude after the request. And I only fly piston GA so I have to request lower quiet often.
With the ATC being unpredictable/wrong and using Jets it makes you think more about preparing the aircraft for landing, distance from airport, altitude, speed. Get those right in your head and if ATC doesn’t agree with you, then ignore it.
At my local airport, when I fly in from the north I am at 4000ft the ATC always says " go to 9000ft" and I am only 30-40 nm out, so impossible.
There’s a question buzzing around inside my head - even if a Cessna 172 could fly at 21,000, 18,000 or even 12,000 feet what would happen to the pilot? The answer I keep coming up with is ‘Hypoxia/Hypoxemia’ - unless you’ve packed your oxygen in the flight bag
I don’t know of any sim that does, even certified. Is the ATC bad? Yeah, that I agree on but that doesn’t mean it’s just a game not a sim. With many, many top sims out there ATC isn’t even much of a concern.
No it is supposed to be a sim and the developers and Jorg are quite adamant about that. We cannot expect the world from ATC but for starters:-
Aircraft including AI not taking off at one end and landing at a different end of the same runway is not much of an ask. And this isnt a change of wind issue, aircraft are taking off with a tail wind.
ATC knowing the capabilities of each aircraft would be nice. Dont tell a Cessna 172 not to exceed 220 knots for example and dont expect rapid altitude increases in GA.
It still can be, just because stock ATC is appalling doesn’t mean it falls under a game and not a sim. It really boils down to the person who is using MSFS. There is literally nothing I can’t do in MSFS that I can do in XP and P3D loaded with addons. The ATC in both XP and P3D is nothing to write home about. In all three sims I use an online network dedicated to ATC. I haven’t touched stock ATC in over 10 years because I know how terrible it is. Is the introduction of the ATC revamp by Working Title going to be the switch that turns this from a game to a sim? If so I find that rather strange if that is what it’s going to take.
Well lets put it like this, Laminar are putting quite a bit of effort into ATC for XP12 and a lot of people want to see ATC improved in MSFS too. I would say a reasonably good ATC system is a must in a flight simulator. We dont all want to use Vatsim, pilot to ATC etc.
I’m very much aware and it’s something I can understand and this is where Working Title comes in. Having said that the fact that MSFS has terrible ATC doesn’t mean that MSFS is just a game and not a sim, you can fully disable ATC and simulate a bunch of stuff.
That’s because the ATC doesn’t use your current altitude as a reference point. It uses the “assigned” altitude as the reference point.
So in your example, even though you’re in 7,000 ft. And you request a descent by 4,000 ft. The reason why ATC approved you to 4,000 ft is because you were previously cleared to fly at 8,000 ft instead.
So even if you didn’t change your actual altitude at 7,000 ft, if you decided to actually climb to 10,000 ft instead after that. You would actually request an altitude increase of 6,000 instead of 3,000. Here’s why:
You’re flying at 7,000 ft.
You request a altitude decrease of 4,000 ft.
Since ATC previously cleared you to 8,000 ft, they now clears you for 4,000 ft (8,000 - 4,000).
You stay at 7,000 ft. But you want to cancel the descent and wants to climb to 10,000 ft instead.
You request an altitude increase of 6,000 ft.
Since ATC previously cleared you to 4,000 ft, they now clears you for 10,000 ft.
And you can continue the climb.
Now, you might be thinking that since you’re at 7,000 ft. If you want to climb to 10,000 ft then you should request a 3,000 ft increase. But if you do this in Step 2. The ATC will clear you for 11,000 ft instead. And if you request this in Step 5. The ATC will clear you for 7,000 ft (which is where you are at the moment anyway).
So any altitude increase/decrease through the ATC is NOT using your current altitude as a point of reference. It’s using the previously/currently cleared altitude by the ATC as the point of reference. You can actually do multiple increase/decrease back-to-back if you want to do huge changes. Like for example:
You’re cleared and flying at 40,000 ft, and you want to drop to 15,000 ft. You can request a decrease by 10,000 ft (which will clear you for 30,000 ft), then you can immediately request another decrease by 10,000 ft (which will clear you for 20,000 ft), then once more after that, request a decrease by 5,000 ft (which will clear you for 15,000 ft). You can do this whole 3x request before you even start your descent from 40,000 ft.
Mind you, doing this, the ATC might still assign you with a Step Descent procedure, where you might still be cleared to descend to only 30,000 at first and continues to be cleared to 30,000 even in your 2nd or 3rd request. But for each of those request, the ATC will tell you to “expect FL200” or “expect 15,000 ft” which will confirm that you will eventually be cleared to descend to those altitudes.
Sorry for the long post, but I hope this explains what the ATC does in regards to your confusion.
Thanks for explanation. Question now as I had similar situations: is this really meant to be this way? Key point is that obviously ATC assigns hight in reference to cleared hight. Now cleared hight is a virtual number. The problem with a virtual number is that it can not be easily checked and verified. It might be ambiguous as there are two parties here: ATC and the pilots. For me this boils down to one question: what do I do as pilot (or ATC controller) if I need to check the hight I’m cleared to? That number would be mandatory when a hight change would be required and obviously cannot be retrieved as easy as the real current hight. The latter I could see on the pfd as a pilot and the ATC controller on his (radar) or other equipment…?
To be honest. I don’t have enough credibility with me to answer what the ATC “should” do. That question is above my pay grade, so someone far more qualified than me should answer that.
I’m merely explaining what MSFS ATC is doing (at the moment).
ATC controllers have a basic understanding of aircraft performance capabilities, climb rates, cruise speeds, approach speeds etc. there is a “Eurocontrol performance database” where you can find basic performance info per aircraft type. If you fly some uncommon GA aircraft type there is a big chance ATC isn’t familiar exactly what the aircraft limitations are. If you would file FL350 on a TBM, there is a big chance ATC does not know that this is a few thousand ft above what the aircraft is certified for. Usually you’ll file your cruising level in the ATC flight plan, you will never be cleared higher than filed level unless specifically asking for a higher level. And in real life you could always respond “unable” when you do get cleared for a higher level.
Nowadays, ATC can see your selected altitude with ADS-B and “catch” if you make a mistake. In real life, if you would ask for a different “final level” this would be referring to the filled level and NOT the actual cleared level. Although, in real life you won’t ask for “… ft higher / lower” but rather “Request flight level … as final level”.
I get it It is a game but to be honest…I never had an issue with default atc in fsx. It’s at a point now where I just don’t use it because it becomes more annoying than beneficial
Not necessarily in the US. The aviation knowledge level of controllers varies widely. This is why required climb rates and approach speeds are part of the FAA charts. Or the difference between a PA-30 and a PA-38… Basic categories of aircraft are used for wake turbulence separation. But it is up to each pilot to determine if their aircraft can meet minimum climb rates, approach speeds, or any other aircraft limitations.
US ATC does not use ADS-B for traffic control. That is, today ADS-B is not integrated into the US ATC radar system. Other countries have different implementations. There are some issues with ADS-B like misidentification and privacy that need to be resolved. ATC continues to use altitude reporting transponder information to determine aircraft location (simulated in MSFS).
