Is RC4 any better than Proflight Emulator Delux? Options

[Flamin_Squirrel]

I recently bought PFED and quite frankly I'm extremely disappointed.

Confused by STARs, rubbish ground handling, occasional failure to recognise radios being correctly tuned, and sometimes refusal to work altogether are just some of the negative experiences I've had with it.

Ranting any further isn't going to get my money back so I'll stop there.

Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone had tried both PFED and RC4, and if RC4 is any better?

Thanks.

[jimh]

I recently bought PFED and quite frankly I'm extremely disappointed.

Confused by STARs, rubbish ground handling, occasional failure to recognise radios being correctly tuned, and sometimes refusal to work altogether are just some of the negative experiences I've had with it.

Ranting any further isn't going to get my money back so I'll stop there.

Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone had tried both PFED and RC4, and if RC4 is any better?

Thanks.

I have both. RC4 is a terrific in depth program, I've used it for years. It's well worth while learning the procedures thoroughly, or the RC4 controllers will be on to you.

I find PFE nags you less, if that's a good idea, and on my system it does what it's supposed to. Groundhandling to the runway works well for me ( the program closes soon after leaving the runway on landing), so I have FS Commander help me with parking. In PFE I let the copilot handle all the comms, and he hasn't failed me yet.

I think both are very good, but quite a bit different.

Jim

[psolk]

Hmmm, Went back to June over at the PFE forums and funnily enough I don't see a single post under your user name. What user name do you go by over at thel PFE support forums? (which happen to be excellent btw) I use PFE on every flight and have none of the problems you are talking about.
http://www.ocs-support.co.uk/forums
-Paul

[jd]

I recently bought PFED and quite frankly I'm extremely disappointed.

Confused by STARs, rubbish ground handling, occasional failure to recognise radios being correctly tuned, and sometimes refusal to work altogether are just some of the negative experiences I've had with it.

Ranting any further isn't going to get my money back so I'll stop there.

Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone had tried both PFED and RC4, and if RC4 is any better?

Thanks.

let me propose a deal. send me an email at jd@jdtllc.com, and i'll send you the download link information, and you can try rc. if you like it, purchase it through the normal channels, and report back here your findings.

if it's not what you were expecting, uninstall it, and report back here your findings.

jd

[psolk]

let me propose a deal. send me an email at jd@jdtllc.com, and i'll send you the download link information, and you can try rc. if you like it, purchase it through the normal channels, and report back here your findings.

if it's not what you were expecting, uninstall it, and report back here your findings.

jd

Talk about an offer...
Nice job JD,
-P

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Hmmm, Went back to June over at the PFE forums and funnily enough I don't see a single post under your user name. What user name do you go by over at thel PFE support forums? (which happen to be excellent btw) I use PFE on every flight and have none of the problems you are talking about.
http://www.ocs-support.co.uk/forums
-Paul

I've not bothered with the PFE forums. If it was one problem then I'd be trying to get it sorted, but quite frankly I generally find it to be an awful program - not something you can fix.

Like earlier I was flying into a busy international airport:

I got ######ed at for being off course while flying the STAR, which it obviously didn't recognise.
On approach it; gave me decent until 9,000, then gave up clearing me to a lower alt. Then told me to expect a visual approach, but it only gave me a single vector that didn't bring me anywhere near into visual range of the airport.
Never handed me over to tower.

It doesn't even do the simple stuff like tell you to line up and wait after a departing aircraft - even FSX default ATC does that.

let me propose a deal. send me an email at jd@jdtllc.com, and i'll send you the download link information, and you can try rc. if you like it, purchase it through the normal channels, and report back here your findings.

if it's not what you were expecting, uninstall it, and report back here your findings.

jd

That's very kind, I'll do that.

Thank you!

[Drumcode]

Radar Contact = The best investment in my flight simulation experience, EVER.

[Tim_Capps]

I dont' always fly with canned ATC, but when I do, it's Radar Contact. Three greens, my friends.

[Paul J]

And another three greens here. PFE sits "somewhere" on on of my "FSX backup" disks... somewhere... I found it to be the most confusing addon ever written, and now use RC4 all the time. You da MAN, JD!

[mwilk]

I've been a Radar Contact user from the start, but sometimes I get bored with the the voices. I had been doing research on PFE and decided to try it. Set up is not that big of a deal once you get used to it. I really like the variety of voices you get and the fact that you get the accents for the region you are flying in. Everything is pretty good until you get to the approach phase. Where RC gives you descent instructions at about 150-160 miles out, PFE will start you down much later. It's really based on what your flightplan calls for. I know I can manually adjust it. I was on approach last night to DCA. My initial vector was to runway 15. Pretty short for an A319. I don't believe there is any way to request a runway change. On I go placing the autobrake on maximum and planning to peal my face off of the windshield. I am then told that there is a runway change and now it will be runway 33. Three minutes later it changes again to runway 1, which is what I would have preferred in the first place. Now I'm lined up and configured for landing, when a Delta 757 approaches the end of the runway. I keep going thinking, don't do it.He does it, he taxis onto runway 1. PFE doesn't give me any instructions to abort my landing, so I land anyhow, right over the top of the 757. As I said, there are some aspects of PFE I really like, but for fidelity to the ATC process, I don't think anyone beats Radar Contact. I almost wish there was a way to merge the two programs.

[Drumcode]

I've been a Radar Contact user from the start, but sometimes I get bored with the the voices.

I believe once JD is ready for the voice recording phase in the development of RCv5, he will announce it publically asking the willing to participate in the project. I believe RC customer base must be rather large at this point and I can guarantee there will be plenty of people willing to participate, including myself. I just wish that in version 5, the controllers would change automatically once you cross a certain geographical region, which would make this add-on superior to anything else out there, well it already is imo.
I'm not sure how time consuming the recording process will be, but I sure am in the coalition of the willing. If rather large amount of people will participate, version 5 will be the sweetest thing available for FSX.

[Thralni]

Yeah, I was planning to ask much the same question: I'm getting entirely fed up with default ATC, because I want to fly SIDs and STARs, but obviously, default ATC doesn't give you that. So, I have been looking around for some trime, and usually, it's RC4 that people recommend. I also know that v5 is on the radar, and now I'm not sure what to do: buy v4 now, or simply wait for v5...

[Drumcode]

I also know that v5 is on the radar, and now I'm not sure what to do: buy v4 now, or simply wait for v5...

I don't think it's anywhere close to be released yet, like I said earlier the voices are not even being recorded yet. So go get v4 and you'll most likely get a discount on v5, check with RC forum first regarding it.

[psolk]

I've not bothered with the PFE forums. If it was one problem then I'd be trying to get it sorted, but quite frankly I generally find it to be an awful program - not something you can fix.

Like earlier I was flying into a busy international airport:

I got ######ed at for being off course while flying the STAR, which it obviously didn't recognise.
On approach it; gave me decent until 9,000, then gave up clearing me to a lower alt. Then told me to expect a visual approach, but it only gave me a single vector that didn't bring me anywhere near into visual range of the airport.
Never handed me over to tower.

It doesn't even do the simple stuff like tell you to line up and wait after a departing aircraft - even FSX default ATC does that.



That's very kind, I'll do that.

Thank you!

Quite frankly I find your assessment of it to be way off the mark and I put that on user error, not the "awful program" Obviously, you don't get it and if you aren't willing to put any effort into even going to a forum where the developer himself is ALWAYS ready and willing to help then you have no one to blame but yourself, not the program... BTW, once you are cleared for the STAR you are supposed to fly the vectors yourself... That is why it is an Approach procedure... Once established depending on your co-pilot mode he will automatically contact tower for you.
Yes, it does do line up and wait, it even regionalizes it to position and hold or line up and wait with a regional accent based on where you are flying along with a lot of other things. To compare it to default ATC just goes to show how little time or effort you put into PFE. To me it seems like a big fat case of RTFM but to each their own and I wish you the best with RC4. Just don't come and bash a program when you clearly aren't interested in getting help or even understanding your problems...
-P

[Dougal]

Quite frankly I find your assessment of it to be way off the mark and I put that on user error, not the "awful program" Obviously, you don't get it and if you aren't willing to put any effort into even going to a forum where the developer himself is ALWAYS ready and willing to help then you have no one to blame but yourself, not the program... BTW, once you are cleared for the STAR you are supposed to fly the vectors yourself... That is why it is an Approach procedure... Once established depending on your co-pilot mode he will automatically contact tower for you.
Yes, it does do line up and wait, it even regionalizes it to position and hold or line up and wait with a regional accent based on where you are flying along with a lot of other things. To compare it to default ATC just goes to show how little time or effort you put into PFE. To me it seems like a big fat case of RTFM but to each their own and I wish you the best with RC4. Just don't come and bash a program when you clearly aren't interested in getting help or even understanding your problems...
-P

Here here. Couldn't agree more. PURE user error.

I have both, and enjoy them both.

[Mower]

RC4 rocks.

The problems described are to be found between the chair and the keyboard.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Quite frankly I find your assessment of it to be way off the mark and I put that on user error, not the "awful program" Obviously, you don't get it and if you aren't willing to put any effort into even going to a forum where the developer himself is ALWAYS ready and willing to help then you have no one to blame but yourself, not the program... BTW, once you are cleared for the STAR you are supposed to fly the vectors yourself... That is why it is an Approach procedure... Once established depending on your co-pilot mode he will automatically contact tower for you.
Yes, it does do line up and wait, it even regionalizes it to position and hold or line up and wait with a regional accent based on where you are flying along with a lot of other things. To compare it to default ATC just goes to show how little time or effort you put into PFE. To me it seems like a big fat case of RTFM but to each their own and I wish you the best with RC4. Just don't come and bash a program when you clearly aren't interested in getting help or even understanding your problems...
-P

Here here. Couldn't agree more. PURE user error.

I have both, and enjoy them both.

I'm not quite sure what help you expect me to get. I'm not an incompetent numpty with no clue - I've tried many flights and really wanted to like it, hell I just paid a load of money for it, I've got an incentive.

At one particular airport I try tuning to ATIS, right at the beginning of a flight, and get nothing. Just that airport, no others (that I've found anyway.)

As for the STAR, well you misunderstand - I had my flight plan routed to fly the STAR as per the instructions (SIDs work ok, so I'm pretty sure I've followed them correctly) and I did fly the STAR vectors, but PFE still told me I was off course. A few mins later PFE pops up to give me vectors (well, ONE vector) as described above, with no decent instructions, which were utterly useless.

Perhaps if I spent more time adjusting waypoint altitudes and general fiddling around with the flight plan I'd get better results. However, the whole point of ATC is to direct traffic, and if all PFE does is take the flight plan I give it and tell me to fly it verbatim then honestly, what's the point - my FMC already does that for me.

[mwilk]

For those of you using PFE regularly, what flight planner are you using? I just flew a flight in FS9 from DCA to Buffalo. I really enjoyed the ATC but PFE still starts my descent phase too late. I even tried requesting a lower altitude but as soon as I contacted the next center, it wanted me to return to my original cruise altitude. How do you guys determine where your top of Descent is going to be? BTW, I'm using FS Build for flight planning.

[JET 1]

I'm not quite sure what help you expect me to get. I'm not an incompetent numpty with no clue - I've tried many flights and really wanted to like it, hell I just paid a load of money for it, I've got an incentive.

You should obviously cool down and give it another try. It seems to me you're not fully understanding what it is even SUPPOSED to do.

At one particular airport I try tuning to ATIS, right at the beginning of a flight, and get nothing. Just that airport, no others (that I've found anyway.)

That may be a one-off that would be resolved if you notified the author about it. Never ran into one myself.

As for the STAR, well you misunderstand - I had my flight plan routed to fly the STAR as per the instructions (SIDs work ok, so I'm pretty sure I've followed them correctly) and I did fly the STAR vectors, but PFE still told me I was off course. A few mins later PFE pops up to give me vectors (well, ONE vector) as described above, with no decent instructions, which were utterly useless.

What are you actually trying to do? There is no such thing as "STAR vectors". In PFE you either to fly the STAR or get vectoring - not both. The idea of is to line you up with the final approach. The way it works in PFE is it will stop following your course after the final waypoint in your flightplan. After that, if you fly a STAR, it's up to you how you line yourself with the runway, you can fly chandelles and lazy eights if you want, PFE will not monitor you until your on final. Why? It's nearly impossible to have all the STARs of the world in the PFE database.

If you opt for vectoring, PFE will vector you to final after your last flight plan waypoint and assign altitudes.

Perhaps if I spent more time adjusting waypoint altitudes and general fiddling around with the flight plan I'd get better results.

Very likely. Also, I'm sure Dave is hard at work trying to streamline the flight plan creation part and make it more hassle free.

However, the whole point of ATC is to direct traffic, and if all PFE does is take the flight plan I give it and tell me to fly it verbatim then honestly, what's the point - my FMC already does that for me.

Not true. The point of ATC is to maintain separation and smooth traffic flow, not navigate airplanes - that is up to you and your nav equipment. What do you expect te ATC to do? Randomly deviate from your flightplan? Of course you need to fly it verbatim. I'd like to see random direct-to's though, now you need to ask for them yourself. But that applies to both programs.

If you mean vertical navigation, you can always ask for a different level or earlier descent.

It's true though that Radar Contact will calculate the zero wind TOD and start talking you down, where in PFE you need to calculate it in your submitted flightplan waypoint by waypoint, which is a bit of a pain.

[WarpAir]

What ever you decide be warned that RC4 does also have a learning curve, and a big well written manual.

If you have not made the effort to get through enough of PFE manual, you may face similar issues with RC4.

I do have to say do, i think RC4 is easier to learn than PFE, but that may be cause PFE offers many more features than RC4 and PFE is an application that seems to do more than RC4 in general.

I have RC4 and happy with it, planning to get PFE when i hav time to read the manual, for now i wait RC5 reviews.

I did not really get to play around with PFE much, but i suspect RC4 is easier to use, and PFE is a bigger application that seems to do more, but a bit confusing.

One thing that realy put me off PFE is this

1 - PFE has two windows, i didnt really have time to find out the difference between the 2

2 - The manual seems to be written for those who have used older versions of PFE , and not new user.


I only played with PFE for a short while, so cant give descent review, still the manual referred too much to proflight2000 the older version of PFE. And i was quite confused about what the other PFE icon you get after install is for.

All in all RC4 does not expect you to know about RC3, but PFE carried way too much bargage from older versions of the product which made it quite difficult to learn, for example buttons that are no longer used are still present in the GUI, that is just not professional.

I think they should go revamp PFE so that all refrences to older versions are removed from the product and the manual.

Its like buying a machine where the manual says, "if you have not used our older versions this manual is not for you"

Plus bits in the manual that keep refering to this and that button being obselete, but the buttons are still there in the GUI, just to confuse you. I think PFE needs a clean up.

Like i said i never got as far as to fly with it, but had a play on the ground. So ill be sticking with my RC4/FsCommander combo for now.

[Andydigital]

Pro Flight EMULATOR, i.e. it helps proflight 2000 which is a FS2000 designed ATC program to work in FS9 and FSX, that's why the manual talks about Proflight 2000 and its limitations ;)

Pro filight 2000 is someone else's work, not Dave's, the original developers abandoned it as far as I remember and Dave wrote the emulator to make it work in FS9 and FSX.

[WarpAir]

Pro Flight EMULATOR, i.e. it helps proflight 2000 which is a FS2000 designed ATC program to work in FS9 and FSX, that's why the manual talks about Proflight 2000 and its limitations ;)

Pro filight 2000 is someone else's work, not Dave's, the original developers abandoned it as far as I remember and Dave wrote the emulator to make it work in FS9 and FSX.

Thank you very much for clearing things up, i am now very unlikely to go for PFE ever.

Cause Proflight2000 is an obselete product, and PFE is based on ProFlight2000.

Like i said, the PFE manual seems to expect you to know how to use ProFlight2000, and the first i ever heard of ProFlight2000 was when reading the PFE manual.

Thanks for clearing up that confusion, i am now far more certain that i will be sticking with RC4. The RC4 ATC design and concept is a stand alone system that is far much easier to understand.

Like i said , seems if you want to know how to use PFE, first go learn how to use Proflight2000, then go read PFE manual, i'd rather just stick with RC4 and read one manual.

Maybe PFE is for FS old hands who are familiar with the ProFlight2000 legacy product, i have only been simming since 2006 so i never heard of ProFlight2000.

In which case maybe RC4 is far much easier to learn than PFE, and they both do the same thing .....ATC, go figure .

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Right, had a chance to play with RC4 a little. So far I would tend to agree with WarpAir's views.

I've only flown one complete flight after some messing around and preliminary impressions are excellent. I flew one of the tutorial flights in a turboprop and everything just... worked.

It does lack some of the functions of PFE, like taxi routing, but since I've not found the PFE taxi routing much good that's not a big problem.

What are you actually trying to do? There is no such thing as "STAR vectors". In PFE you either to fly the STAR or get vectoring - not both. The idea of is to line you up with the final approach. The way it works in PFE is it will stop following your course after the final waypoint in your flightplan. After that, if you fly a STAR, it's up to you how you line yourself with the runway, you can fly chandelles and lazy eights if you want, PFE will not monitor you until your on final. Why? It's nearly impossible to have all the STARs of the world in the PFE database.

If you opt for vectoring, PFE will vector you to final after your last flight plan waypoint and assign altitudes.

What I meant was a STAR routing, not vectors, apologies. A STAR does not take you to the final approach - ATC will at the end of the STAR, or some point before it, vector you for the approach. RC4 did this perfectly for me first time - PFE was useless.

Not true. The point of ATC is to maintain separation and smooth traffic flow, not navigate airplanes - that is up to you and your nav equipment. What do you expect te ATC to do? Randomly deviate from your flightplan? Of course you need to fly it verbatim. I'd like to see random direct-to's though, now you need to ask for them yourself. But that applies to both programs.

That's what I meant by directing traffic. I don't expect random deviations - I expect vectors to final. PFE, in my experiences with it, failed in this regard.

It's true though that Radar Contact will calculate the zero wind TOD and start talking you down, where in PFE you need to calculate it in your submitted flightplan waypoint by waypoint, which is a bit of a pain.

I appreciate you have the patients to sit down and fiddle with software until it performs, and I'm glad you enjoy your purchase. I just happen to have a low tolerance of frustrating software, especially when it costs as much as PFE does and when the competition (as it would seem so far) is so much easier to get on with.

[WarpAir]

It does lack some of the functions of PFE, like taxi routing, but since I've not found the PFE taxi routing much good that's not a big problem.

For sometime i had been looking for taxi routing help besides the FSX progressive taxi, and i found the full answer and much more in Fscommander. Fscommander is a must have, its a swiss army knife compared to defualt FSX GPS.

I have to add that Fscommander Taxi routing is only convinient if you have another monitor on which you can display its screen. Fscommander moving map is superb, but it offers far much more than moving map.

[mwilk]

I wouldn't get too excited about Proflight 2000. That's just the program that creates the adventure file for Proflight Emulator.That technology has been around for probably ten years. My complaint with PFE is with the descent profile and the approach vectors. If you could merge the PFE voices with the Radar Contact proceedures, you'de have almost a perfect program. I'm going back to RC4.3 for now.