Before I am obliged to register in yet another forum (anyway, I like this one!) can someone tell me whether Lago's FSSE works in harmony with the other methods of traffic creation in FS2002? In other words if I have, say, an add-on version of KLGA and have added AFCAD gates and TT Tools traffic, will any user file I download for use with KLGA from Lago's site conflict with, enhance, or confuse previous settings? Or will the previous stuff just get overwritten?Grateful for any views. FSSE looks good to me given that many say the FPS hit is minimal. I think you can keep the Lago sounds package, however; I bought FS2K2 to fly, not sit on a park bench. Mind you, I guess the "bush" contingent would find it attractive, given the amount of time they probably spend grounded trying to repair their Wasp radials these days (oooh, I feel a flame coming on ... don't worry, all in jest). I have to say, though, that the last time I flew in a Beaver for real (out of Ketchikan) the pilot asked me to hold the door shut on take-off as with all the vibration it tended to come unlatched and we'd all get wet ...Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitak.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/reds.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitakv3.jpg

Hope Tom's not watching ... but then I reckon 7 hours online and only 23 views justifies a quick ..... BUUUURRRMMMPP. Sorry.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitak.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/reds.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitakv3.jpg

I haven't had a problem integrating FSSE with AI traffic, AFCAD gates, etc. but it could happen. If someone placed a FSSE visible building or truck or jetway or a whatever right over an AFCAD parking spot, then AI planes would taxi right into or (I believe) right through the visible object.For the most part, I've used FSSE and AFCAD to create my own stuff (rather than importing the work of others) and I use the two together to make the AI jetliners cozy right up to the FSSE jetways. It takes a little time to manipulate things but it's worth it. R-

Hi RonThanks. You confirm my fears, actually. I have enough trouble with conflicting add-ons already ... my own fault for installing so much ... and I can see that this might only make things trickier if there are conflicts. I'm not one who is going to spend hours setting up baggage trucks and teams of mechanics at dozens of airports, so I had intended to rely on importing a lot of stuff that others cleverer than I had already done; which, of course, means you lose control of the layout.I do, of course, have one or two favourite airports where it would be fun to play. So I may yet go for it. I suppose we've the best part of a year before it all becomes obsolete once more!Thanks again.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitak.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/reds.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitakv3.jpg

I don't see the problem. FSSE objects are no-collision, so if something taxies in, move it away!TM

There is no problem.If the Afcad modified airport conflicts with your FSSE file, just change the FSSE file and you're back in business.

Just let me add one thing Mark. Notice that my second paragraph starts out, "For the most part, I've used FSSE and AFCAD to create my own stuff . . .." I have enabled a few FSSE airport upgrades created by other users without conflicts. If I do encounter a problem, I fix it or ignore it or I delete that airport upgrade. Any of those options can usually be done in 10 minutes or less. R-

>I have enabled a few FSSE airport upgrades created by other >users without conflicts. If I do encounter a problem, I fix >it or ignore it or I delete that airport upgrade. Any of >those options can usually be done in 10 minutes or less. As FSSE lets the user add objects in any position (okay, within limits, you can not position an object more than 99 miles below the surface:-) there is always a potential problem with traffic paths.But like you say, the strenght of FSSE is that it is so easy to move (or delete) the object that is in the way. Like some other user noted, we removed crash detection from our objects because crash detection is framerate killer beyond believe and a traffic cone should not crash an aircraft when the wing is over it. So even when their is a conflict it will not stop FS2002 in any way. Most users will never even see the conflict happening.In the end, FSSE creates standard BGL files that only need the base module to play. Conflicts with other products are therefor unlikely.Mathijs KokLAGO

<<>>Now that IS interesting, Mathijs. So is that the case with the basic FS2002, also? If one disables crash detection, will FPS leap up? I've never seen that ploy cited as a way of "easing the load". It's a good one, if it's true, because I for one tend to try to avoid hitting buildings when I'm driving Boeings and thus probably wouldn't notice whether it was on or off otherwise. I do run with it ON by default at present.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitak.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/reds.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitakv3.jpg

>Now that IS interesting, Mathijs. So is that the case with >the basic FS2002, also? If one disables crash detection, >will FPS leap up? I've never seen that ploy cited as a way >of "easing the load". It's a good one, if it's true, >because I for one tend to try to avoid hitting buildings >when I'm driving Boeings and thus probably wouldn't notice >whether it was on or off otherwise. I do run with it ON by >default at present. No, it does help a bit but not much. The real framerate killer is in complex shapes that contain crash detection. That's in BGL and it is loaded and used all the time. The crash detection setting in FS2002 only 'ignores' it.Mathijs

Thanks for the further reply, Mathijs. Very interesting.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitak.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/reds.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitakv3.jpg