Im currently using the Ultimate Traffic program for my AI, it works great and it seems that frame rates are not hit too bad as long as I dont overdo it. With decent AFCAD files and about 40% AI I have some realistic looking stuff going on. My problem is frame rates take a pretty big hit If I go much above what I have right now. This sim does not handle AI real well IMHO. What I am wondering is, is there enough of a difference in using the Aardvark models to replace my PAI ones for better fps? If its not a big difference I wont bother as IMHO its not worth the work. Im not an AI junky, I'd rather have some decent frames than hundreds of aircraft in line around me. Actually with about 40-50% in UT I get a very realistic set-up and Im pretty happy with it, just wondering if the AIA models help at all. They do look better to me.Hornit

Jim, I use PAI pretty much full installed and it works great. It took a lot of time to configure as the early installers sometimes didnt update well. But the newer installers work great. Over time, however I have replaced a lot of the models because some of the PAI shapes werent as good IMHO as some of those of either Aardvark or FSPainter. Both seem to look great while keeping the FPS impact low.I use Aardvark DC-9's, 727's, 767's and 747's now and almost all my airbus fleet is by FSP. This is by no means universal though because PAI has covered a wider range of airlines.Im no AI junkie either, but I do like quality in what I have. Both FSP and AIA will improve that. I use PAI as basic AI infrastructure and have used FSP and AIA to augment.Eric

Luckily a guy who frequent these forums as well did make a large scale test of how much impack FPS has.He's made up a neat chart with pretty much all kinds of AI models available from PAI, FSP, AIA, T.U., ARNZ and quite a few standalone ones such as Russian aircraft.http://perso.wanadoo.fr/gotorun/AIframe.htmlAs is pretty obvious from the charts (and my own expeirence), the framerate gain by switching from PAI to the others is pretty big. You get better looking models on top of that (especially Airbus series and the heavy Boeings) :)Personally all my AI is FSP/AIA/other except the regionals such as the Dash's and a few MD8*s and such. The rest is last resort choices in a way since PAI do crank out alot more repaints then the rest.

The test is excellent but unfortunately a bit old. So the only ARNZ (MCH) plane featured is the FLYABLE Bae146. Since it is flyable its fps are bad. In the meantime ARNZ has released quite a huge fleet of real AI (beside their flyable models) with great (=low) fps.When it comes to AI my favories re. fps are AIA, FSP and ARNZ. For exotic models and liveries PAI is the only alternative.I sometimes think it was better, if the guys at PAI, who did soooo much for the FS community and AI, would concentrate themselves more on fps than on the effort of creating as many different models and repaints as possible. Wolfgang

I'm an UT user as well. I've got a couple of questions:1.) Do these models (AIA, etc - non-PAI/UT) have an impact on frame rate when the aircraft are distant, or only when the full detail of the model is drawn, such as taxiing around a crowded airport? I generally like to have 100% ai, as the chatter on ATC is much more fun and I enjoy waiting in line to takeoff or land, but I don't care or even realize if the engines are 32 sided versus perfectly round...or if the paint job is six months old...2.) Is there a fast automated way to replace the existing PAI/UT models with AIA using the UT airplane assignment tool or some other utility? How about a tutorial someplace?And an EDIT>3.) How far can the "mix and match" go? eg AIA model with PAI v5 FDE, using FSP paints? The big question is whether it's okay to swap the existing model with an AIA one while sticking with the PAI/UT FDEs?Thanks!Best,sg

sg,1) The really good AI models have several LODs that change depending on the distance of your viewpoint to the object. Detailed models are used close up, more simplified ones as you get farther away. Check this out for an excellent explanation: http://home.sprynet.com/~drawlins/AI_aircr...I_aircraft.htmlhttp://forums.ai-aardvark.com/viewtopic.php?t=82Even at a crowded airport you will as a rule never be in such close proximity to that many aircraft. So only the ones nearest you will have the full detail and even that is generally of lower framerate impact with Aardvark aircraft.2) Replacing AI aircraft is time consuming. One thing you can do to save time is keep the same title= information in the aircraft.cfg of the aircraft you install. That way you don't need to recompile your flightplans to get the new aircraft to show up. 3) You can't mix and match the way you describe it. FDEs were geared to specific aircraft.cfg files. Using the .air file from one maker and the aircraft.cfg from another will produce undesirable AI aircraft behavior. Likewise, aircraft.cfg files are geard to certain models. Switching them will produce misplaced light effects and potentially floating or sinking aircraft. Same goes for models and textures. The mdl files refer to specific bmp files with a specific texture layout. You cannot for example use a PAI texture on an Aardvark or FSP aircraft. There are exceptions to this. Some PAI aircraft are former FSP models that were acquired by PAI. You can freely switch textures but may have to rename the bmp files. (These aircraft are to my knowledge all the Dash-8s, Saab340, MD87, A300B2, A340-200 and -500/600 models, A330-200, 747-100/200, 747SP, 747-400F, all the ERJs and the F50.)The framerate gain is huge from switching from single-LOD models (like many PAI aircraft) to well made multiple LOD models (like the later FSP models and all Aardvark models). A visit to any major hub like JFK or FRA or LHR after the switch will confirm that to you. I use exclusively Aardvark and FSP where possible and a few PAIs as regional aircraft and some of Viktor Schacht's Russian aircraft for lack of alternatives. Misha

Hi Misha,What is a quick way to replace AI aircraft from PAI to others?ThanksShez

What I'll be doing is installing as many AIA planes as I can, then use the UT aircraft assignment tool to replace the UT/PAI assignments to AIA planes, one at a time, and recompile...Is that the only way?I figure I'll start with the boeings - 737, 757, the 767 as they represent the majority of airtraffic around me. AIA doesn't have an airbus series? Whose is fast?Best,sg

I'm afraid, this is the only way. However, you can speed up the compiling process, when you run it directly from the TTools DOS-interface instead from the UT-Interface - much, much quicker!Wolfgang

Hi Shez,I'm afraid, I don't know of a really quick way. I tend to do everything manually, so I know where every file is on my system. What I do is I make one folder (e.g. AI-744) with several model folders (ge, pw, rr, ge-d, pw-d) and lots of different texture folders. Then I just copy and modify the aircraft.cfg entries for each individual repaint. As I said I try to keep my title= line the same as before (e.g. DLH744), so when I have installed my AIA 744s I just delete the FSP 744s and don't need to recompile my flightplans for them to show up as they still have the same titles. MishaPS: Any new sceneries in the pipeline? ;-)

sg, FSPs A320/319/321 series should give you a moderate framerate gain over PAI, but significantly better looks. :-) Virtually every imaginable livery can be found for the FSP models these days. But beware: fiddling with AI can become addictive. ;-)Misha

Thanks for the tips!

Not directly on topic, but just thought I'd add:For FDE switching - Ok, there is an easy way to see if you can do this without too much hassle. The key, is in the WEIGHT and BALANCE section of the aircraft.cfg. Check the REFERENCE_DATUM_POSITION entry. In most cases, this will be 0,0,0. As long as this entry matches in the CURRENT FDE and the FDE you are trying to import, all you have to do then is copy in the LIGHTS section and the CONTACT_POINTS section FROM the original FDE INTO the new FDE. You will not get a perfect result, but the aircraft will sit on the ground properly, and lighting will line up.It is also possible to do this when the REFERENCE positions don't match, it just requires a bit more math to figure out the offset.

No, that's insufficient. Many AI authors extensively modfied the flaps sections and the flight tuning sections of the aircraft.cfg. This is for instance the case in all the FDEs done by Hiro (most of the FSP, TU and AIA models), which are all designed to fly very precise final approaches. Failing to copy these sections may give you porpoising aircraft in flight and unsuccessful landing approaches or other strange AI behavior. It can of course often be done, but it requires extensive testing and fiddling around and is not for people inexperienced with the structure of FDE files. This is the world of FS2002 and FS9 FDEs, where flight behavior is no longer exclusively controlled by the .air file but also in part by the aircraft.cfg.Then there is the question why? If one AI aircraft works with a certain FDE, why switch it?Misha

Thanks for the help Misha, let me see how I get along.I always fly online on VATSIM so kept to MP aircraft. However, I realised that it was a lot more realistic if AI traffic was everywhere and I could still spot the MP traffic on TCAS. So now I fly online without MP but AI active. Am trying to hunt ways to improve the fps. BTW does anyone know how to turn off ATC and still have AI traffic? When online the FS ATC tends to be the same ATC freq as online ATC and frequently it starts playing in the background when the online ATC is talking.RegardsShez