Simple question. What gives better frames at similiar traffic levels? MyTraffic 2010 with low res/less animiation models or UT2 with their new SP1 models?Thanks.

This is a hard question to answer because there probably arent a lot of people who own both to compare them as far as FPS and frankly the ones who do own both probably had problems getting UT2 to work properly at first and ended up getting Mytraffic, hence they will say they prefer it and that it gets better FPS.Its almost like asking if FS9 is better than FSX. People are passionate about which ever one gave them a better experience and I wouldn't stake too much on anyone persons experience because setups and preferance can vary so much.I will say this about UT2 SP1 since I own it and came from the full array of WOAI. I can run UT2 at 100% commercial traffic and at an airport like KLAX or KJFX, during the peak hours, I will only lose about 2 to 3 FPS with all the traffic vs. turning it off completely. So for me a 2 to 3 FPS hit for all that traffic is pretty good at a large hub.The feature that really shines for me in regards to UT2 is the fact that using 1 key stroke I can completely turn off AI and then with the same key stroke I can turn it back on. I can also clear my approach with a key stroke if I am about to over take or be over taken by another a/c on final. In regards to being able to turn off traffic completely, the reason I like it is because there are a few hubs like the default KDFW that hammer me on FPS even with no traffic. So if I am on approach in bad weather and a lot of traffic I can zap the AI, gain FPS for a smoother approach, then once on the runway I can turn the AI back on like nothing ever happened. Kind of like having the best fo both worlds between no AI and 100% AI.On a side note about UT2 vs some other payware AI packages is that UT2 doesnt use the traffic bgls for traffic. It actually inserts the AI where it should be and at that particular time and place by using simconnect. This feature gives great control by letting you adjust how many AI spawn at a time, distance relative to your a/c that they will spawn, and also the hieght AGL at which you will not be able to see AI on the ground. By adjusting these variables you can fine tune your traffic to give you great FPS. Lastly the thing I like is that UT2 runs off of realworld schedules and time, although the times maybe off by an hour sometimes due to day light savings times. Also the traffic doesnt fly point to point, but follow actual flight plans. Its pretty cool to go to an airport like KDFW in FSX and see the one actual SunCountry flight depart to Mexico just as you would see it in person, or many other flights as well using the same flight numeber and time as their real world counter parts.Hope this helps but the worst case senario if you buy UT2 and dont like it is that Flight1 has a 30 day money back guarantee so you can get your money back if you dont like it.Rergards

This is a hard question to answer because there probably arent a lot of people who own both to compare them as far as FPS and frankly the ones who do own both probably had problems getting UT2 to work properly at first and ended up getting Mytraffic, hence they will say they prefer it and that it gets better FPS.Its almost like asking if FS9 is better than FSX. People are passionate about which ever one gave them a better experience and I wouldn't stake too much on anyone persons experience because setups and preferance can vary so much.I will say this about UT2 SP1 since I own it and came from the full array of WOAI. I can run UT2 at 100% commercial traffic and at an airport like KLAX or KJFX, during the peak hours, I will only lose about 2 to 3 FPS with all the traffic vs. turning it off completely. So for me a 2 to 3 FPS hit for all that traffic is pretty good at a large hub.The feature that really shines for me in regards to UT2 is the fact that using 1 key stroke I can completely turn off AI and then with the same key stroke I can turn it back on. I can also clear my approach with a key stroke if I am about to over take or be over taken by another a/c on final. In regards to being able to turn off traffic completely, the reason I like it is because there are a few hubs like the default KDFW that hammer me on FPS even with no traffic. So if I am on approach in bad weather and a lot of traffic I can zap the AI, gain FPS for a smoother approach, then once on the runway I can turn the AI back on like nothing ever happened. Kind of like having the best fo both worlds between no AI and 100% AI.On a side note about UT2 vs some other payware AI packages is that UT2 doesnt use the traffic bgls for traffic. It actually inserts the AI where it should be and at that particular time and place by using simconnect. This feature gives great control by letting you adjust how many AI spawn at a time, distance relative to your a/c that they will spawn, and also the hieght AGL at which you will not be able to see AI on the ground. By adjusting these variables you can fine tune your traffic to give you great FPS. Lastly the thing I like is that UT2 runs off of realworld schedules and time, although the times maybe off by an hour sometimes due to day light savings times. Also the traffic doesnt fly point to point, but follow actual flight plans. Its pretty cool to go to an airport like KDFW in FSX and see the one actual SunCountry flight depart to Mexico just as you would see it in person, or many other flights as well using the same flight numeber and time as their real world counter parts.Hope this helps but the worst case senario if you buy UT2 and dont like it is that Flight1 has a 30 day money back guarantee so you can get your money back if you dont like it.Rergards

In regards to KDFW, try this package from the library (There are others but I haven't tried them) This one seems to perform well for me. It also includes the missing Terminal Dkdfw_ade_rs_fsx.zip

I am on the same page as Sean. I will add that UT2 does what a traffic program should do - it can run in the background (set it and forget it) or it can become your obsession. Right now I have about 300 more aircraft to add until I have all of their repaints assigned (yes, I chose the obsession route). I am down to some of the most obscure stuff that I know no one will ever paint but it I find that elusive repaint, it is a snap to install.That sums up why I have loved UT since 2003. Its interface is so easy to use to assign new repaints and play with your traffic settings. With UT2, then UT2 SP1, it has gotten even better.When doing your research, ignore pre-SP1 posts because they are now irrelevant.Disclaimer: I don't have another traffic program. I installed the original UT on the day it was released back in 2003 and have never considered another product so I am a bit biased. It has always done what I needed.

The one problem I have with UT2, is that the AI uses flight plans instead of direct routing. This is obviously more realistic, but because of FSX (and FS2004) problem with handling aircraft separation, you end up with groupings following each other like a family of ducks. The problem is that in many cases they trail each other close enough, that you get ATC constantly issuing traffic alerts, which gets annoying, and not too realistic after a while. That is why I went back to primarily using WOAI.

In regards to KDFW, try this package from the library (There are others but I haven't tried them) This one seems to perform well for me. It also includes the missing Terminal Dkdfw_ade_rs_fsx.zip

Thanks Tom for the suggestion. Actually what I have done is add this file kdfw_v1_rb.zip by Rhett Browning here in Avsim that is actually a Terminal D that he modeled. Then I opened the ADE file that came with it and deleted about 200 misc little scenery objects like cars, trucks, cargo, etc. and it has helped over the default. Luckly if you look here http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=3140.0 you will see some just released pics of FSDT's upcomming KDFW and also here http://www.blueprintsimulations.com/ they just announced that they are wrapping up a KDFW also. It is weird however that KDFW causes me trouble while places like KJFK and KLAX are fine.

...or it can become your obsession.

I know how you feel. I have spent hours tweaking and adding more models and paint than I care to count. Sometimes I have more fun doing that than actually flying.

How much space is required on the SSD by UT2?

The one problem I have with UT2, is that the AI uses flight plans instead of direct routing. This is obviously more realistic, but because of FSX (and FS2004) problem with handling aircraft separation, you end up with groupings following each other like a family of ducks. The problem is that in many cases they trail each other close enough, that you get ATC constantly issuing traffic alerts, which gets annoying, and not too realistic after a while. That is why I went back to primarily using WOAI.

I would always see a large group of AI no matter what flight plans I used. just use a separation program and you should be good

I was using My Traffic and my first impression was a big wooow when I switched to UT2.Beautiful graphics, nice interface, lot of options etc...I never used MT again until last week when I was tired to wait for AI in small airports or even in big ones where the traffic was rather light.I then purchased the MT last upgrade and reinstalled it, just for the fun.Well, I must say that I am very satisfied with My Traffic.OK, the textures are not so good but airports are full of AI, even very small airfields and most of all, there is no pause, no frame hit, nothing, very smooth landings on big airports.Maybe schedules are not that accurate but who really cares? Both addons are very nice softwares.For my needs I prefer MT2010 today.Just my 2 cts :--)

airports are full of AI, even very small airfields and most of all, there is no pause, no frame hit, nothing, very smooth landings on big airports

What's your traffic level?

What's your traffic level?

60% and 60%

Well, I must say that I am very satisfied with My Traffic.OK, the textures are not so good but airports are full of AI, even very small airfields and most of all, there is no pause, no frame hit, nothing, very smooth landings on big airports.Maybe schedules are not that accurate but who really cares? Both addons are very nice softwares.For my needs I prefer MT2010 today.

My thoughts entirely, David. As long as I have traffic coming and going, two or three taxying, a couple on approach as I'm starting up - I could give a hoot for "real-world schedules" or "El Al doesn't fly to Seattle". It's exactly the same as the r/w. I go to the airport: I rent an aeroplane: I fire it up and I'm gone. I don't check to see what aircraft or airline is parked a t which gate. The realism is the atmosphere, the sounds, the smells, the rattles, the bounces, ATC and so on. In the last two months FSX has so drastically improved - I can only think of a couple of things I'm missing.. one would be a "Buttkicker" - http://www.thebuttkicker.com/ - the other... being a.... uh.... a..er... a Flight Attendant uniform for my wife......

I would always see a large group of AI no matter what flight plans I used. just use a separation program and you should be good

I use AISmooth, but that only works on aircraft on approach, which works about 99% of the time. I don't like the other one (I think it's called AiSeperation) because it does it by slewing the aircraft to maintain separation, not very realistic to see a 747 stop short to maintain space with the plane in front of it. I don't get half the traffic alerts with WOAI that I do with UT2, and that's with a pretty large database, especially in the US, Europe and Asia, with most of the majors, and their regionals , including FedEx and UPS, which UT2 does not include by default, as well as most of the MAIW packages (All in the US) running at 100% Performance is very good as well.

Simple question. What gives better frames at similiar traffic levels? MyTraffic 2010 with low res/less animiation models or UT2 with their new SP1 models?Thanks.

If you are considering MT 2010 you should get MTX 5.3 Pro instead. Go the below link and at the bottom of the page it explains the differences, 5.3 Pro is a more powerful AI program than the 2010 one sold through Aerosoft, both are by the same author.http://secure.simmarket.com/b.-renk-mytraffic-x-pro.phtmlI have only every had MTX, I started with 5.2 and now have 5.3. 5.3 has some great looking AI planes, you can see them on the above link. Unless I am at some heavy hitting airport like KORD, KJFK or KEWR I get 30 FPS without a problem, at heavy hitting aiports like KEWR that can drop to 12 to15, but remember that at KEWR you have three large airports within miles of each other. At airports like KLAX I get around 20. I have my FPS locked at 30 and once I get away from any big airports I get 30 FPS, if I unlock my FPS it will go up to 50 or so.I have my commerical and GA traffic set to 30% and places like KEWR, KJFK and KLAX are so populated that sometimes I feel like turning down my traffic to 20%.Keep in mind when I talk about how many FPS I get above that all my scenery sliders expect terrain mesh and water are maxed out. Mesh is set to 10m and water is set to 1x low, but since I have FEX the water comes alive.I have never regretted buying MTX and Burkhard, the autor, gives unbelievable support on the Simflight MTX support forum.Rod

My bad...I was speaking about MTX 5.3 and not MT2010(I didn't know there was such a difference)