Anyone have experience with MytrafficX?

Anyone have experience with MytrafficX?

I used to use MyTrafficx, and every single thing about it is good, except many of the models look like something out of a cartoon.Its got very good traffic distribution, so big airports arent too conjested, and smaller remote airports also have some traffic. Non of the newer traffic programs has got traffic distribution as good as MyTrafficX.But many of the Ai models are a joke, especially the military stuff, they were so funny looking i disabled military stuff all together.However there is an option to select quality of Ai models used, and this does improve the look of the AI models, but not to the standard of TrafficX and UT2.If MyTrafficX models were up to date, it would be far better than UT2 and TrafficX, for the simple reason that, even at low traffic sliders, you get traffic even in small remote airports.With UT2 and TrafficX you need to turn the sliders up quite high, before smaller airports start getting descent traffic, problem is, as sliders go up busy airports become too busy, causing stutters and lowing FPS.They did a very good job on myTrafficx , shame about the AI models though. I dont care if the AI are flying real world flight plans or not, Just need lots of planes at big busy airports, and no ghost town at small remote airports, MyTrafficX does a good job here.

They did a very good job on myTrafficx , shame about the AI models though. I dont care if the AI are flying real world flight plans or not, Just need lots of planes at big busy airports, and no ghost town at small remote airports, MyTrafficX does a good job here.

Any models in particular? The older "DX9" models are a product of the their time and don't look so good compared with the newer "DX10" versions or other AI packages. Many of those are retired now, and even more with the upcoming 5.2B version. One interesting aspect of 5.2B is the inclusion of some GA AI models that should improve performance still further at GA airfields.

And the problem with most Aerosoft FSX sceneries is very well known. Their scenery developers needs to do their homework and study the SDK much better. :(

It's actually the other way around you shouldn't use any FS9 port over models in FSXbut just use native for FSX with better FPS and details :( That's why there is so much discussed about backwards compatibility which never should have been implemented :(

It's actually the other way around you shouldn't use any FS9 port over models in FSXbut just use native for FSX with better FPS and details :( That's why there is so much discussed about backwards compatibility which never should have been implemented :(

I agree with you very much, awf.I am a FSX scenery designer which follow MS and SDK as close as I am able to. Still I get a lot of desperate mails regarding WOAI traffic going crazy, and my airports are "at fault". This is BS. Default AI and UT2 traffic (even if they are not fully FSX) are working perfectly at all my airports. It is only WOAI that do crazy stuff, and they need to fix their fp`s, FDE, whatever. It is NOT the airport. I can safely say that, having spent hours and hours reading about problems with WOAI in FSX (waste of my time really, but I felt I had to).My "general rule" is to not use stuff that are "ported over" from FS2004/2002.

It is to bad, that there are so many different ideas of fs9 ai in fsx. I just don't know what to believe. I know that ever one beleives he/she is sure of his/her answer, but just wish there could be one person with out an axe to grind, that would tell it straight. I am not trying to get people all upset, just stating an opinion. I would love to bring my Traffic 2005 stuff over to FSX, but just not sure of the effects on other traffic (ships and vehicles). Well just my opinion.

Well, the simple answer is this:If you place an FS9 type traffic file in FSX, it WILL completely disable all FSX type traffic files from working. FSX can handle one or the other, but not both at the same time.The solution is to either run ALL FS9 style traffic files, or convert all your FS9 style traffic files to FSX format.

And with one of the many converters out there, it is automatic, and can be done very quickly.

I use My Traffic 5.2b Professional and am very happy with it. Good performance, the dx10 models look good (and it also allows you to choose a higher or lower resolution setting depending on your hardware.) Helpful support forum also.

When you say "FSX style traffic", are you referring to flightplans or aircraft? If flightplans - yes is it very easy to convert them over. If aircarft - that is a different story.

Well, the simple answer is this:If you place an FS9 type traffic file in FSX, it WILL completely disable all FSX type traffic files from working. FSX can handle one or the other, but not both at the same time.The solution is to either run ALL FS9 style traffic files, or convert all your FS9 style traffic files to FSX format.

When you say "FSX style traffic", are you referring to flightplans or aircraft? If flightplans - yes is it very easy to convert them over. If aircarft - that is a different story.

traffic .bgl files = flightplans; not aircraft... :(

Being a sucker for new things I have tried My TrafficX 5.2b Pro, Ultimate Traffic 2 and JF's Traffic X.My TrafficX - I think the best overall value. Models are very good in the latest version.UT2 - reloading every time you touch the FSX menu is a showstopper for me. A right pain. Needs some more GA.Traffic X - has too many deserted airports (even with the update). The Traffic tools are buggy, especially the compiler.I should say I don't care that much about schedules, I just want some credible traffic in my airports.I supplement My TrafficX with HeliTraffic 2009 to generate random rotorcraft traffic (vertical take offs), a very cool program.David

Just to get the preception right :When you use FSX we recommend that you convert the traffic bgls with a converter to FSX style.You can use AIFP by Don Grovestine, AIFPC by Peter van der Veen and others.You should use it for 2 reasons : to get the day format corrected within FSX ( since it differs to FS9) and to get FSX default traffic (GA, BOAT, Vehicle,etc) enabled We deliver the packages with FS9 style BGL'sIssues with addon scenery often rise out of the fact that the end user hasn't adapted the traffic bgl's for FSX.So we always recommend to convert the traffic bgl's for FSX.If you have any questions regarding WOAI you can always visit the WOAI forums at www.world-of-ai.com

Just to get the preception right :When you use FSX we recommend that you convert the traffic bgls with a converter to FSX style.You can use AIFP by Don Grovestine, AIFPC by Peter van der Veen and others.You should use it for 2 reasons : to get the day format corrected within FSX ( since it differs to FS9) and to get FSX default traffic (GA, BOAT, Vehicle,etc) enabled We deliver the packages with FS9 style BGL'sIssues with addon scenery often rise out of the fact that the end user hasn't adapted the traffic bgl's for FSX.So we always recommend to convert the traffic bgl's for FSX.If you have any questions regarding WOAI you can always visit the WOAI forums at www.world-of-ai.com

Hi, so all of the files that you're providing are in FS9 format? Man, I did not know that!!! If I have a lot of your packages installed already in FSX, will it take a long time using this utility to convert them to FSX format? Regarding the FSX default traffic, I can see the road traffic but I've never paid any attention to Boats or GA. Should I not see highway traffic with FS9 format bgls?

If you use a good converter, you can choose all the traffic files and convert them all in like 5-10 minutes.