I started using PF3 about 4 years ago as a replacement for Radar Contact and used PF3 exclusively for a couple of years. Have since purchased another 2 ATC add-ons for P3D and all have their pros & cons. Only recently moved back to PF3 and was a bit surprised at how many pros PF3 has over the other add-ons I have in particular the way PF3 controlled speed during descent with a lot more ATC interactions than the others, was something I had forgotten about.
I also thought PF3 gave better vectoring to FAF when setting this as the type of approach required not withstanding PF3 not being aware of local terrain.
However, it is how you have to edit a PF3 specific flight plan to trigger realistic vectoring to FAF that is my biggest gripe with PF3. In short I have to download a flight plan from (Simbrief) that includes the STAR and load the flight plan into PF3 to select a waypoint in the STAR that is about 40 miles from FAF, then manually editing a copy of the xml file to delete all the subsequent waypoints and it is this manually edit copy of the plan you have to load into PF3. You do not get a realistic vectoring approach if the last waypoint in the plan is too far away or too close to the FAF.
This hassle would be removed if when the STAR checkbox was left unchecked, PF3 started vectoring at a specific distance from FAF say at 40 miles regardless of last waypoint in the plan. Then as far as I can see you could use the flight plan from whatever your preferred flight planning tool was without having to worry about the distance form the last waypoint.
As there has been no updates to PF3 for a couple of years now and no announcement of any major enhancements or PF4 in the pipeline I appreciate that PF3 is regarded as a stable product and what you see is what you get. None the less I would appreciate your views on the points I raise and of course there is the distinct possibility that I am missing a trick here and that I actually do not have to edit flight plans to get realistic vectoring to FAF
Thanks in advance