Flight1 Ultimate Traffic II

[Javis]

Thats what I was wondering guys, you know Jankees' thread how he always has alot of mustangs or payware aircraft around his shots...

I guess he uses this Recorder program. How many aircraft you want depends on how many times you'd be willing to hit the Record/Stop button...

Cheers,
Jan

[jmig]

So whats better guys - Ultimate Traffic2 or My Traffic 2010? Would either of these programs get patched as airlines make major changes to their networks?

I use MyTrafficX 5b. It has airliner, GS and military traffic. I read on the MyTraffic site that My Traffic 2010 is the Aerosoft version of the program. Yes, they did update the airlines with the latest upgrade and will continue to do so in the future.

[Kiwikat]

Could you let us know the difference between your fps when taxiing around your fav airport without any AI and with ? ( taxiing *towards* the apron, please... ) And what percentage of AI traffic are you using here and on what system ? ( bet it'll be more high then low end... )

Thanks!

Cheers,
Jan

There's a noticeable difference between having UT2 on and off. When it is off, my FPS are locked at 36. When it is on, It usually stays above 30 while on the ground (in the VC). Percentages vary depending what kind of plane I am flying. If I am flying a commercial jet, I'll raise the commercial traffic higher. The same holds true for GA. If I'm using something that is easy on FPS, sometimes I'll crank both higher (like a Carenado plane for instance).

Specs are Q9550 @ 3.4 GHz, 8 GB DDR2 1066 MHz, GTX280 1 GB GDDR3 @ stock speeds. It isn't an i7, but it does what I want it to...

[Bjoern]

Nice vid with some great camera angles. The one bad thing that I noticed was lack of shadows from the aircraft at some of the airports.

That's because not all of the models included there are native. I think only those originally made by AIA, TFS, EVAI and DJC were converted to FSX standards.

And "portover" AI models don't mix well with shadows and scenery ever since SP2.

IMHO, what has always been lacking in the traffic department, and sadly still is, is the announcement of the release of 'Flight1 Ultimate GA Traffic' , or better still, 'Flight1 Ultimate Warbird Traffic' , or even better still 'Flight1 Ultimate GA & Warbird Traffic'. I bet my last Euro *that* would really get the fire going around here !

Markus Brunner's "GA Traffic" will help.

Add any aircraft you want and it autogenerates flightplans for it. You can also specify some parameters and limitations for the genrration, so that rare aircraft aren't seen everywhere all the time.
But beware: Generating a flightplan for ~30 GA aircraft will take a while and produce a 200Mb+ traffic.bgl file.

Note to self: Hunt down more GA aircraft and generate new flightplans with GA Traffic. Mine are about two years old now.


Oh, and around here I feel that we commercial pilots don't exist. :p

[guzler]

I have looked into several packages, and was / am a huge fan of WOAI. I went with UT2 because the models / textures are WOAI quality whislt being true FSX models to improve frame rates. The other packages on the market don't seem to come close on texture / model quality to UT2 (having looked at screen shots in FSX and been a user of traffic, mytraffic in fs9). I now use a mixture of UT2 and WOAI and it all works very nicely. I can hugely recommend it if you like WOAI.

[shackleton_boy]

ok cool - but it still doesnt clear up which one is better

[Javis]

Specs are Q9550 @ 3.4 GHz, 8 GB DDR2 1066 MHz, GTX280 1 GB GDDR3 @ stock speeds

Ahh..... now you're talking...

I have never seen anything like 30 fps taxiing around a medium size airport with a bunch of AI models on the apron. 15/20 if i'm lucky... ( Core2 Duo E6700 2.66 GHz, 4GB DDR2 667MHz,GF 8800GTX ). That's fine with me actually. It's better than it used to be with only default AI. ( now using only WOAI )

I can imagine with a machine like yours you have some spare room to try normal models as AI. I've seen my fps go down to 4 when i once tried that... ( thru 'GA Traffic' using the option to lower the texture res ) Don't think i had any A2A models amongst it hough.

Anyway thanks for the info, Kiwi.

cheers,
Jan

[Javis]

Markus Brunner's "GA Traffic" will help.

Yip, way ahead of you here, Bjoern..

Ok, with a lot of effort you can get some traffic going at your smaller fav airfields thru the use of Markus Brunner's 'GA Traffic'

Oh, and around here I feel that we commercial pilots don't exist. :p

Yep, head on over to Avsim or Fs.com, mate..

( posts about Lotus' magical L-39 at Fs.com : 0... Here at SOH : only 1124 and just 63,274 views ... )

cheers,
Jan

[Javis]

I now use a mixture of UT2 and WOAI and it all works very nicely. I can hugely recommend it if you like WOAI.

Do you mind me asking why you keep running WOAI next to UT2, Guzler ?....

Cheers,
Jan

[IanP]

I use TrafficX. I've tried two versions of MyTrafficX and, personally, won't touch it with a bargepole again. Although it creates massive amounts more traffic than any other product, includes more airlines, more types and has absolutely superb support, it doesn't bear any resemblance to reality at all.

I don't know how UT2 works - I don't have it and haven't tried it - but as an example using WOAI and MTX, using WOAI you will see the correct aircraft at the correct airports, using the correct routes. But that means that if you don't have traffic installed for, say, Mogadishu, you will see no traffic at all there. MTX on the other hand will look at where Mogadishu is, look what traffic would be used in that country and region then assigns flights randomly using those airlines and their aircraft.

It's personal preference, ultimately.

I did consider getting copies of all three major commercial packs, plus possibly WOAI, setting a series of specific tests and doing a direct comparison between them. Would anyone be interested in seeing that? If so, I'll contact developers and beg Nick to take some screenshots for it.

[jmig]

Oh, and around here I feel that we commercial pilots don't exist. :p

Ohhhhhh boy oh boy, this is too good to pass up.

Let's see.....you program a computer with the flight. You take off...the computer takes over and flies you to your programed destination with out you doing anything other than sipping coffee and complaining about the new flight schedule.

You arrive at destination, the autopilot flies the approach and you take over 30 secs before the end to land.

And you call yourself a PILOT? *insert fake snicker here*

In my day.... I had to get to the right altitude and heading before turning on the autopilot.

Here's to the debriefing...

[Javis]

Let's see.....you program a computer with the flight. You take off...the computer takes over and flies you to your programed destination with out you doing anything other than sipping coffee and complaining about the new flight schedule.

Excactly, and judging by what the 3 major payware AI Traffic producers are concentrating on THAT's exactly what they think the majority of the flightsim community is really into....

I say again, if Flight1 would've made that 'Ultimate GA & Warbird Traffic 1 ' instead of Ultimate Traffic 2, the number of sales might've pretty much surprised them...

cheers,
Jan

[guzler]

Do you mind me asking why you keep running WOAI next to UT2, Guzler ?....

Cheers,
Jan

Yes, UT2 doesn't include some cargo flight plans, so I have selected stuff that isn't covered. Also, I have some classic airline liveries in there that I play around with, so rather edit the WOAI flightplans to get these so that UT2 is untouched.

Cheers

[IanP]

I'm surprised anyone is even having this discussion any more... The sheer number of sales of airliner add-ons compared to everything else, the sheer difference in sales and download numbers between modern commercial airports and any other type and the sheer number of downloads of airliner liveries compared to everything else answers it.

Yes, there are more people more interested in flying airliners than anything else. It's easily proven with a simple visit to a download library.

This is a Combat centre. We prefer something else, but that doesn't make us the majority.

[jmig]

I'm surprised anyone is even having this discussion any more... The sheer number of sales of airliner add-ons compared to everything else, the sheer difference in sales and download numbers between modern commercial airports and any other type and the sheer number of downloads of airliner liveries compared to everything else answers it.

Yes, there are more people more interested in flying airliners than anything else. It's easily proven with a simple visit to a download library.

This is a Combat centre. We prefer something else, but that doesn't make us the majority.

I see that on MyCockpit.org It is a site for cockpit builders. 95% of the cockpits are airliner. Besides myself, I think there are two other people who post there who have or who are building a fighter cockpit.