This piece of software is absolutely hilarious

[Rasta_Dude]

Hello,

I just wanted to say: GET YOUR STUFF WORKING PLEASE!!!
This software is actually full of bugs and you're not able to fix even the most essential ones. You come with an announcement that PATCX will gonna be released for MSFS but haven't even fixed the most important bugs in your existent product for P3D and for me it feels like sometimes you actually dispute that your software is that much unfinished - how hilarious is this??!

With the current state of your software (1.9.2.5) other developers would release this as an "early access" if you haven't heard from this before.
I mean I heard that the developer had an accident and I don't know what happened there, so please take your time, yes, but also please don't take us customers for fools. You're even not able to inform your community about anything related to updates within 2 or 3 years.

PEOPLE PAID 50 € FOR YOUR PRODUCT AND GET NOTHING RELATED TO UPDATES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I have to say I'm really pi**ed for paying that much money for such an UNFINISHED PRODUCT - that's so uncool. So please HURRY UP!

[alpha117]

Well, were is your long list of issues then?

I need to see at least 50 items that are wrong not what YOU think are wrong.

Yes there are some items that are wrong, agree.

Again, if you read you would have noticed that currently there is a new update in BETA testing and has been for sometime.

Give me FACTS not your rant, as that has no meaning at all.

Can you tell me why you do not read anything before posting?

Also attach your logs of your flights so WE can see what has gone wrong.

No log then it never happened

[Rasta_Dude]

I don't gonna provide any logs on this because it would be extremely time consuming to reproduce this things again. These "bugs" are too many which appear under very different and specific conditions and locations (for example RNAV 10 approach in TNCM, departure from UUEE, etc...). Further I don't know what your logs gonna keep and how PATCX is collecting log-data.

• ON GROUND:
- controller permanent tells aircrafts around me to 'hold postition' and 'continue taxi', even if I'm not in "dangerous near" of those aircrafts and also when I'm standing or parking (for example on the gate) or taxi on a whole nother taxiway.
- almost everytime wrong taxi- or at least partially wrong taxi-instructions
- in P3Dv5 (in the forum you claimed in one post that PATCX is compatible with v5): missing taxi instructions on departure (for example: "Air Canada 7, taxi to rwy 26L via ...") (maybe wrong MakeRwys version? - If yes, which version for P3D v5?)
- sometimes missing taxiways on PATCX map


• AIRBORNE:
- sometimes waypoints get left out, even when passing them correctly (this happens a lot, especially on specific places like VHHX, TNCM or UUEE)
- altitude is given twice by ATC (I think it was only on approach and when you change your runway/STAR/... manually)


• BOTH:
- random ATC chatting from british airspace for example which is also hearable in non-british areas (for example Heathrow chatting in Singapore)
- missing gates and parking stands in the flight plan menu (always not even the half of all stands are selectable and missing, but in the airport menu of P3D nothing is missing)
- random ATC chatting depending on airlines (for example Frankfurt ground chatting in an aircraft with Lufthansa callsign currently located in foreign airspace) --> chatting depends on airline and not on airport - why (logic)?
- sometimes no answer to previous radio transmission in chatting
- some specific transmissions are hearable very often and are not alternate enough
- a lot of miss-spelling and gramatical errors, especially in the scrolling text on the top of the simulator window


Most of these listed things simply kill the immersion so much and make the whole thing unrealistic. These are not all items for sure, those are only that ones which came in mind right now.

So that you need to see at least 50 items, which are not working properly, shows your moral and effort about software development for this product (I KNOW these are not at least 50 points here in my list).
You only have to look in your forum - I think there is a special reason why so many people are not amused about different things related to your product and if they critisise it you get unpolite.
My thread here is indeed unpolite as well but only because of people like you who are sitting behind this product reacting like small grumpy childs.

And YES, I've read your announcement about an upcoming update BEFORE I opened this thread. But it seems like this fizzles out again because we hear nothing further about it like the past 3 years.

You should stay in constant contact with the users to improve those things and not releasing one update within 3 years and not even inform your other forum admins about the current state.

[alpha117]

I don't gonna provide any logs on this because it would be extremely time consuming to reproduce this things again. These "bugs" are too many which appear under very different and specific conditions and locations (for example RNAV 10 approach in TNCM, departure from UUEE, etc...). Further I don't know what your logs gonna keep and how PATCX is collecting log-data.

• ON GROUND:
- controller permanent tells aircrafts around me to 'hold postition' and 'continue taxi', even if I'm not in "dangerous near" of those aircrafts and also when I'm standing or parking (for example on the gate) or taxi on a whole nother taxiway.
- almost everytime wrong taxi- or at least partially wrong taxi-instructions
- in P3Dv5 (in the forum you claimed in one post that PATCX is compatible with v5): missing taxi instructions on departure (for example: "Air Canada 7, taxi to rwy 26L via ...") (maybe wrong MakeRwys version? - If yes, which version for P3D v5?)
- sometimes missing taxiways on PATCX map

   FIXED IN V1.9.2.7

• AIRBORNE:
- sometimes waypoints get left out, even when passing them correctly (this happens a lot, especially on specific places like VHHX, TNCM or UUEE)
- altitude is given twice by ATC (I think it was only on approach and when you change your runway/STAR/... manually)

FIXED in V1.9.2.7

• BOTH:
- random ATC chatting from british airspace for example which is also hearable in non-british areas (for example Heathrow chatting in Singapore)
- missing gates and parking stands in the flight plan menu (always not even the half of all stands are selectable and missing, but in the airport menu of P3D nothing is missing)

-- Not reading the manual on how to setup correctly background chatter. You have not set any ATC profiles up. You have not assigned any Profiles to Radar sectors

- random ATC chatting depending on airlines (for example Frankfurt ground chatting in an aircraft with Lufthansa callsign currently located in foreign airspace) --> chatting depends on airline and not on airport - why (logic)?

Chatter files are 3rd party and not developed by Pointsoftware

- sometimes no answer to previous radio transmission in chatting
- some specific transmissions are hearable very often and are not alternate enough
- a lot of miss-spelling and gramatical errors, especially in the scrolling text on the top of the simulator window

..Show where these grammar errors are, as the current BETA team are not reporting any

Most of these listed things simply kill the immersion so much and make the whole thing unrealistic. These are not all items for sure, those are only that ones which came in mind right now.

So that you need to see at least 50 items, which are not working properly, shows your moral and effort about software development for this product (I KNOW these are not at least 50 points here in my list).
You only have to look in your forum - I think there is a special reason why so many people are not amused about different things related to your product and if they critisise it you get unpolite.
My thread here is indeed unpolite as well but only because of people like you who are sitting behind this product reacting like small grumpy childs.

And YES, I've read your announcement about an upcoming update BEFORE I opened this thread. But it seems like this fizzles out again because we hear nothing further about it like the past 3 years.....Not read the forum correctly

You should stay in constant contact with the users to improve those things and not releasing one update within 3 years and not even inform your other forum admins about the current state.

BETA Team currently have a version in testing and will get another update very shortly

[alpha117]

Watch this and it might help with your understanding background chatter and how to set it up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5YAERm3fP0&ab_channel=MikeCollins

[wsmeier]

Hi Clive,

There's one thing the OP didn't mention and I'm wondering whether it got addressed for this update. It's in fact two things that can really complicate a descent profile: 1. Descending to and leaving you level at an at or below restriction until after crossing that point, and 2. descending you only 1000ft from cruise and leaving you hanging there for an eternity (something that also happens at other points in the descent).

I have a workaround that keeps me from having to fly holding patterns to reach the FAF at a reasonable altitude, but if I had any pet peeve with the current version, this would be it.

By the way, my workaround consists of busting the instructed altitude and then asking for lower when roughly 1000 ft below that altitude (if you ask for lower before that, the request will be denied). You have to be on your toes for this because, if you wait too long, you'll start getting instructions to climb, and then you will have really made a mess of things.

Notwithstanding the above, this is still my favorite ATC software and I know I'll be enjoying the improvements in the next version!

[alpha117]

Walter that has been fixed in the next update no one in the BETA has reported any descent issues YET!, but I'll get the BETA team to have a look at it.

@BETA TEAM f you read this can you have a look this and lets us know in the BETA forum.....thanks

[wsmeier]

That's fantastic news, Clive! And even better if the beta team can confirm 

[clintferns]

Hey guys... Haven't used this software for a while as I wasn't keeping too well. Can I participate in the beta programme?