ARGH! Another FS ATC complaint

[Plane Nuts]

I made a night flight from St. Thomas to St. Maarten/Princess Juliana last night and FS ATC vectored me for a visual RWY 27 landing.
Well, anyone who flies at TNCM will know that there are large hills right near the end of the runway on the east end. I tried to make it let
me land on 9 over the beach, but ATC then vectored me on the visual to 9, circle to land 27.

There was too much traffic to just land however I wanted, so I tried the 27 approach in the dark. Using the GPS terrain mode, and
memory, I cleared the hill tops, and then the runway was 1,500' below me. I cut power, and dropped the nose and made for the center of
the runway, not the end like usual, to give myself more descending room. I still ended up landing at -650ft/min and damaging my freakin'
landing gear! Oh, and my stupid sarcastic FO of course broke in with, "Wow! What a landing. I sure hope we didn't bend the struts" or
something like that. I punched him in the face and then went back to slowing the aircraft down.

So now I have of course changed to TCNM AFCAD file so that 27 is closed for landings.

[SaVas]

Well, as I see it, a messed up default ATC is better than no ATC.

But seems that new program thats payware that is on the horizon might just be what everyone is looking for

[Plane Nuts]

I agree that what we have is better than nothing for sure. And this was partly my fault because I never double checked the AFCAD file for
the freeware TCNM scenery I use to make sure the runway usage made sense. It was just aggravating to realize all this mid-flight when
San Juan Center gave me my approach vectors.

[SE-TMA]

Yup....Radar Contact v4 is long expected...

[AKLupine]

Having been active with FS since 3.0, I am quite impressed with how far the thing has come. Every once and again when I get a little steamed at
something, like being called EXPERIMENTAL, I remember back to the days of polygons in the Chicago area and looking for the "Red Baron" over some lime
green field were the only options. That being said, as a RL Controller, I am more than a little disappointed a lot of the time with some of the
things the program does, and every once and again when it gets to be really bad, I put on my headset and make my own sequencing calls. When ATC first
came out it was cleared for take off/ cleared to land and now at least one can cancle IFR or change routing or TRY to talk the controller into another
approach. Perhaps with the next version MS will continue the trend and the controllers will start to listen, or at least the "penalty box" will not
consist of being vectored to intercept the ILS at 27 miles.

[SWAFO]

I remember flying KSLC-KMDW the other day, and being with "Denver center" all the way from near Falcon VORTAC into approach at
Midway! They just forgot about me! That was a strange one... I had never had that happen!

[jboweruk]

Hmm, only one problem for me with RC4, it won't support FSHS, it supports every (expletive to your choice here) thing else but not my co-
pilot addon,,,,,,

[AeroJim]

im am really lookin forward to that RC4, i mean it will be the best add-on for FS9 in its category, if it works correctly.