Hello there Michat and thanks for your support and interest in Red Griffin ATC.
Michat wrote in Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:07 am:Do you have an standard for radio compatibility to /instrumentation/comm property set ?
Red Griffin ATC tries to provide a fairly good simulation degree also in relation to radio use and operational procedures. As of Version 2.2.0 - which is under development - Red Griffin ATC uses and relies on the following radio properties for each COM radio:
• /instrumentation/comm/serviceable
• /instrumentation/comm/signal-quality-norm
• /instrumentation/comm/volume
• /instrumentation/comm/volume-selected
• /instrumentation/comm/power-btn
• /instrumentation/comm/airport-id
• /instrumentation/comm/station-name
• /instrumentation/comm/frequencies/selected-mhz
• /instrumentation/comm/track-distance-m
• /instrumentation/comm/true-bearing-to-deg
The above properties all have a more or less important role in Red Griffin ATC although some are used as alternative and mutual data source, such as /instrumentation/comm/volume and /instrumentation/comm/volume-selected
The same, of course, applies to comm[1] and comm[2].
Michat wrote in Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:07 am:I wonder if RGRadio does have compatibility issue, like something related with freq digit hz step factor or bias,
can you confirm you can operate full macro and micro steeps ?
Red Griffin ATC reads and uses the values provided by FlightGear properties and uses them "as they are". This mainly depends on how the aircraft implementation copes with those properties, including frequency step factor and bias.
Michat wrote in Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:07 am:Watching so much differences among and within aircraft files and folders of both Cessnas, i wonder again if there is some standard. Because we got crazy
comparing code.
As for standard radio implementation, my reference aircraft is Cessna 172P which seems to have - as far as I can tell - the most complete and functional radio implementation. Having said that, I can tell there are a lot of aircraft having a good and reliable radio implementation and those provided by the main hangar usually have.
As far as I can tell and according to my experience in developing Red Griffin ATC, many aircraft available in "external" repositories have buggy or incomplete radio implementation and, of course, do not work with Red Griffin ATC because one or many fundamental radio properties are missing or have wrong data.
Michat wrote in Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:07 am:Do we have an aircraft relation list estimation of how much official hangar and possible other third party hangars aircraft are involved on this issue ? I guess we don't, In some automatic fashion, we should check them all, creating a report.
As far as I can tell, each aircraft is a "world on its own" and radio implementation is anything but standard procedure. Some aircraft have very good radio implementation, others have quite an incomplete or buggy implementation.
Thank you for suggesting and sharing those sites. As for vfrflight, I too use it for planning my flights and it very good. It is not the only one I use, though, but it is one of my main options in planning a flight.
openaip too is a site I frequently use and IFR support in Red Griffin ATC is planned for development. Like I said in other posts, I want Red Griffin ATC to be both a complete and reliable ATC plugin although, at the moment, it is mainly focused on VFR, although it is already using and considering data entered in the route manager.
As for pilot2atc, it seems it is a quite different project and with different goals from Red Griffin ATC, however it can certainly be a good source for ideas and of course any idea and feedback from users and friends here are equally important.
Thank you for using and supporting Red Griffin ATC!
Kindest regards.