OnCourse Software

Welcome to our Product Support Forums
It is currently Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:13 am

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 3:54 pm
Posts: 84
Quote:
Bear in mind if there's active AI then PF3 will use the same runway so if AI are not be using closed runways neither will PF3 :)
Roger that, but last time it happened I got diverted to the active AI's runway after I had passed it and had almost reached the one I didn't want! In fact the ACARS request had advised me of yet another runway as being in use so it was a rather chaotic situation!

Still now I know I can close runways through SIDS and STARS life should be easier, thanks.

John

_________________
Stuck firmly in the past - no FMCs and GPSs to guide you in the fifties and sixties . . .


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:21 pm
Posts: 7
Here are a few feature requests from a new user who is deaf:

-Can Remote Text (using Close Captioning) also have options for alternate text colors and backgrounds for:
a) audio from ATC to AI planes
b) audio from AI planes to ATC
FSX default ATC has four different colors so it is clear without reading the text or hearing anything what is the source of radio messages (player, ATC to player, ATC to AI, and AI)

I enjoy having radio chatter on when I fly. The additional color options would save me a lot of time in identifying the source of and target for radio chatter that is not ATC to player. Normally I leave the default colors (black background) for my messages to ATC and I set a yellow background color for messages from ATC to me. I would love to be able to set so that messages from ATC to AI would be, for example, orange, and messages from AI to ATC would be, for example, blue. That way if I am busy at the controls I can ignore the blue and maybe orange messages and focus only on the messages to/from me.

-Can the installer give users the option to check which voices they want and do not want to install? Being deaf I do not need those voices (although I appreciate the hard work that have been put in recording them). It would save approximately 15 minutes if I need to reinstall or update and it would save 4 gigabytes.

Thank you for an actively updated and accessible ATC add-on.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 10:10 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 6:22 pm
Posts: 3180
Nice idea, thanks, I'll look into it. As someone who only has partial hearing I can certainly relate.

_________________
Cheers

Dave March

Email: dmarch@oncourse-software.co.uk

Image


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 9:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:21 pm
Posts: 7
Quote:
Nice idea, thanks, I'll look into it. As someone who only has partial hearing I can certainly relate.
Thank you sir. Happy flying.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 5:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:43 pm
Posts: 27
Hey all,

First of all Thank you for the quick new 3.4.0 Update!
Now there's one thing I consider a step back. The new VFR ceiling altitude. I know somebody mentioned that changes to the VFR ceiling altitude were discussed in the Beta Forum.
I disagree with the reasoning, because VFR flights are allowed in Controlled airspace such as Center. (See also here for some other discussion about maximum altitude: https://www.euroga.org/forums/flying/65 ... vfr?page=1)

Generally, I find IFR with PF3 very realistic but VFR still has quite a bit of potential. I understand that IFR is what the majority of users care about most. The ideal solution would be actually reading the airspace definitions from FS (I wrote a plugin that announces the airspace I enter) and providing mandatory control vs. optional flight following vs. nothing based on that. But this would probably take as much effort as implementing terrain-aware vectoring.

My feature requests would be to: A) either remove the ceiling alt completely or give the option to fix the VFR ceiling alt to something else than Center frequency.
B) Have an option to declare some waypoints as "Controlled". This would mean you have to contact ATC before passing them and they give you a squawk and "clear you into the airspace". Once you arrive at the first uncontrolled wpt after the beginning of Controlled, they release you again ("you are leaving" or "squawk vfr") and you can fly on your own again or request flight following. Ideally, one could have an arbitrary sequence of controlled and uncontrolled points.

Then way lower on the priority list C) An option to cancel flight following.

I think something along the lines of request B) would be a significant improvement to the VFR experience with PF3. But maybe I'm the only one ...

Thank you for all the work Dave and the Testers, because it cannot be said enough!

Best,

David


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 6:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 1:27 pm
Posts: 850
Quote:
Now there's one thing I consider a step back. The new VFR ceiling altitude. I know somebody mentioned that changes to the VFR ceiling altitude were discussed in the Beta Forum.
I disagree with the reasoning, because VFR flights are allowed in Controlled airspace such as Center.
That is CVFR, which is basically "IFR, but you have to see the ground, because you or your aircraft are not certified for IFR", so PF3's IFR procedures are already what you need here.
(just replace the term IFR with CVFR when listening/reading what PF3 says)
Quote:
Generally, I find IFR with PF3 very realistic but VFR still has quite a bit of potential.
I agree with that :)

_________________
Image


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:43 pm
Posts: 27
Quote:
That is CVFR, which is basically "IFR, but you have to see the ground, because you or your aircraft are not certified for IFR", so PF3's IFR procedures are already what you need here.
(just replace the term IFR with CVFR when listening/reading what PF3 says)
That is absolutely true. I've never thought about it like that. So what I want can already be done by switching the flightplan with hotkey 6 to IFR when entering controlled airspace and switching back when leaving :) That gives me already a way to simulate it. I can always learn something new. That's one thing I love about PF3 it is very very flexible!

I'm definitely looking forward to future VFR (and IFR) improvements and what way PF3 goes in particular with regards to VFR. So I guess that already kind of solves request B :)


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 6:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 9:29 pm
Posts: 321
The handling of VFR flights is discussed in the Beta Forum. I just opened a new wishlist entry for that and I am sure there will be further improvements at some point in the future.
For now there are already ways to simulate real world procedures to a good extent with all the flexibility PF3 allows - just like Thomas just pointed out.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 7:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:43 pm
Posts: 27
Quote:
The handling of VFR flights is discussed in the Beta Forum. I just opened a new wishlist entry for that and I am sure there will be further improvements at some point in the future.
For now there are already ways to simulate real world procedures to a good extent with all the flexibility PF3 allows - just like Thomas just pointed out.
Thank you! :) That is true!


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Feature Requests
PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 2:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:33 pm
Posts: 817
Hi. I would like to have an option whereby one can select the likelihood of getting a runway change on approach. I get them too frequently now (since the update before last - it didn't used to happen so much), and not always just one change either. Not sure why this happens, when the runways are parallel (8R, then 9L, then 8L..). :)


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited