Does it use FSX flightplans (BGLs) as apposed to the FS9 style BGLs carried over from FS9 days?And since it was brought up above, does it include Military flights?

Does it use FSX flightplans (BGLs) as apposed to the FS9 style BGLs carried over from FS9 days?And since it was brought up above, does it include Military flights?

Hm, I don't quite now the details about bgl flightplans but I know from the UT2 manual (available for free on the UT2 website or here) that All plans to be imported into Ultimate Traffic 2 MUST conform to either the FSX or FS9 standard .pln file format. Which might answer your question with yes if the FSX plan format is bgl and the standard .pln file format only refers to FS9.whorthwile to mention again, BTW, that UT2 does use 'real' flightplans at all. I mean, if you fly a standard route from a to b you may have traffic before and behind you. nice.for military check this link: Military Traffic. right now no but it is planned.Phil

More companies -----> More flightplans -----> More planes flying ------> less FPS This is what i said.

me, too, and that's why we have the agreement that MTX might be your preferred program for 'special areas' away from the main stream...

And yes, i know Burkhard contributed to UT2.

This wasn't targeted at you in person; I found this interesting in general.

me, too, and that's why we have the agreement that MTX might be your preferred program for 'special areas' away from the main stream...This wasn't targeted at you in person; I found this interesting in general.

I know I am well in the minority but I bought it around 5 pm tonight. Installed and ran and got a Could not load "system.core" error.Tried to go on the forum (though on the flight one forums no name or password I"ve used in the past worked). Spent almost 2 hours just trying to get on the support forum-finally got in by setting a new account with the same name and password I've used before-go figure. Then read the faq that if you don't have Microsoft net 3.5 you will have problems. Downloaded net 3.5 installations taking 30 minutes each with a crash on each before completion. Rebooted-the chkdisk thing with a 30 minutes wait-tried again and got net again. Ran it and got all the way to the end-where it seemed to not complete though the complete bar showed 100 %-then got the same system.core error when trying to run it. Done for the night for now.I am for sure this is not flight one's fault or ultimate traffic 2 which looks great-but didn't turn into my idea of a fun night.-which seems to be pretty much anything having to do with windows computers at least in my world for the last 2 years. Mac's are looking better all the time...

Done for the night for now.I am for sure this is not flight one's fault or ultimate traffic 2 which looks great-but didn't turn into my idea of a fun night

fully understandable, Geof. I am just happy that it worked out of the box for me. Good luck tomorrow then :( Phil

Mac's are looking better all the time...

Oh! boy! I couldn't agree more Geofa !I went back to a Mac close to two years ago, and finito all those Windows frustrations (except when I run FS on a Windows partition :-( ). The only program that bugs on my Mac is a MS one: Messenger (which I need to keep in touch with my kids and grand children).Jean-Jacques

Hi,How are the textures/models?. Are they any better than previous versions?. How do they stack up against Project AI, AI Aardvark, EvolveAI and all the rest?.Thanks

Hi Mike,I miss your checklists! What about checklists for the PMDG MD-11 and RealAir Duke?I thank you a lot for sharing your workRegardsEdmundo(Sorry to jump in - matter not related to this thread)

Hi,How are the textures/models?. Are they any better than previous versions?. How do they stack up against Project AI, AI Aardvark, EvolveAI and all the rest?.Thanks

They actually are using AI Aardvark and Fruit Stand models, that were reworked by Flight One to be fully FSX and DX10 compliant. See the headlines here http://www.ai-aardvark.com/and here http://www.the-fruit-stand.com/So everything should be top notch. And yes, those AI guys have a wacky sense of humor.

Hi,As soon as I get my new system up and running, I'll look into it.Glad you find the checklists useful.

Hi Mike,I miss your checklists! What about checklists for the PMDG MD-11 and RealAir Duke?I thank you a lot for sharing your workRegardsEdmundo(Sorry to jump in - matter not related to this thread)

Hi,Thanks for the info. Just one more question, it showns over 1.3 million general aviation flights, does this mean I'm going to get Cessna's taking off and landing at KJFK and other major airports?. It just looks ridiculous seeing four to seven Cessna's tucked in between airliners. Thanks

They actually are using AI Aardvark and Fruit Stand models, that were reworked by Flight One to be fully FSX and DX10 compliant. See the headlines here http://www.ai-aardvark.com/and here http://www.the-fruit-stand.com/So everything should be top notch. And yes, those AI guys have a wacky sense of humor.

Hi,Aside from the Airways and Navaids, does UT 2 use RVSM?.Thanks

I don't own it yet, but the fact that UT2 has traffic that actually flies routes via published airways and navaids is enough to convince me.The fact that it ships with good looking AI models is a plus too. Replacing the PAI models of the original UT was a huge undertaking.Regards,Nick

I don't own it yet, but the fact that UT2 has traffic that actually flies routes via published airways and navaids is enough to convince me.

Having realized this is actually true, I'm wondering how on earth did they manage to come up with a fairly realistic flightplan for each of those 550000+ flights?? Must have been a helluva manual task or some ingenious data management skills :(

And since it was brought up above, does it include Military flights?

Regarding airports and this also applies to GA and Military flights.UT2 does not include FSX AFD files to change airport parking, to add more parking to airports. FSX already had sufficient parking for most commercial airports.That means some airports which have GA traffic in MTX will not have traffic in UT.There is no military traffic because almost none of the military base airports in FSX have parking. Most to not even have taxiways and ramps.

Does it use FSX flightplans (BGLs) as apposed to the FS9 style BGLs carried over from FS9 days?

UT2 does not use traffic.bgl files of any fromatIf you are going to use additional .bgl AI traffic, they must be FSX compliant.UT2 is not AI traffic in the sense that we understand Traffic Database Builder, Traffic Tools or the even better AI Flight Planner. UT2 only loads traffic after the user aircraft is present and fully initialized in FS. You can change aircraft.cfg files entries, change aircraft assignments, adjust routes. Stop and Start UT2 traffic - and see the changes to your AI in your AI world - without shutting down FSX.UT2 aircraft are placed in the FSX world based on how it reads it's schedule files, determines which aircraft should be where within 120 nm of your aircraft and places them in the world at that point.Much like the early stages of building a traditional flight plan, but using the abilities we have known about since the FS2004 SDK was released for an external program to create AI traffic with a flight plan for that session only.There are at least two additional programs which have been out for quite a while which use a similar methodology. Neither tackles as large an AI world as UT2.Traditional TTools flight plans are more about fleet management than aircraft routing. UT takes each flight leg as itself. A lot we have to unlearn to understand this concept.

Just one more question, it showns over 1.3 million general aviation flights, does this mean I'm going to get Cessna's taking off and landing at KJFK and other major airports?. It just looks ridiculous seeing four to seven Cessna's tucked in between airliners. ?

No, GA AI is in broad catagories and the type of airports used is based upon the catagory. The major commercial airports to not get the slow prop aircraft. Even though real Cessna's do land at KJFK almost every day in the special hours they can request a slot. But they do move out quickly after getting that logbook entry.

Aside from the Airways and Navaids, does UT 2 use RVSM?.

I'm wondering how on earth did they manage to come up with a fairly realistic flightplan for each of those 550000+ flights?? Must have been a helluva manual task or some ingenious data management skills

For both questions - I don't know.But I do know of two major databases of real world flights and routings. One is FlightAware in the US, another is FSBuild for Flight Simulator. Or UT may have created most routes with the FSX Flight Planner, as I did for an additional airline last night.The FlightAware and the FSBuild databases will use altitudes which the real world aircraft use - so most likely RVSM - though I would also imagine that the FSBuild database used the alternate North/South RVSM rules used in Europe.The FSX Flight Planner uses RVSM.Though I have never seen any of the three alter the altitude for RVSM for individual legs between waypoints such as real world aircraft do.FlightAware list the maximum altitude of the flight unless you look at the detailed profile of the route actually flown. (By FlightAware, I mean their database of scheduled flights with expected normal flightplan routes between airports, not the actual flight tracking where the routes vary quite a bit based upon weather, traffic delays, etc).FSBuild is setup for Flight Simulator which is not setup for alternating RVSM altitudes on different legs of the same flights.UT2 does have a few standard routes across the North Atlantic - which the FSX Flight Planner does not. This does tend to concentrate the across the pond flights into a few narrow corridors, but is one heck of a lot better than the FSX great circle routings.