A couple of days ago i posted a question about Traffic x because (A), it was on for 43% off and ( :(, i am thinking about alternatives to UT2 because i am finding there is a big difference in performance (FPS drop) once i start pushing those traffic sliders up past the 30% mark with UT2.In the answers to that post, My Traffic X Pro was recommended, so i did some Googling and got the impression that MTX-PRO had better performance reported. However, the question of a/c model quality came up a few times. Opinions ranged from lousy to good, but none excellent.I did read a lot from people saying that they saw many more gates filled and generally more populated airports without noticeable performance hits. This is what i am looking for, but the quality thing concern's me.Can anybody enlarge on this?Regards,Edit: Don't know why the face there. It's supposed to be a 'B'

Edited January 30, 201214 yr by wanabflyer

http://forum.avsim.n...s-are-we-using/This post shows the most popular choices. I found performance in MyTraffic X Pro to be much better. Especially after unchecking the option "enable exits for ground animations".Both UT2 and MTXPro are great, great traffic programs. The extra FPS with MTX and the neat night strobe effects is what sold me, though.Edit: MTXPro also features military traffic. My CLT ANG ramp has C-130s on the ramp, as it should. Cool little feature. Yes, WOAI has military traffic. Spare me, I'm not spending my time compiling routes and packages. The payware is set and forget.

Edited January 30, 201214 yr by ZachLW

Rick,I agree with Zach, MTX5.4 is a great AI addon. Support from Burkhard is 10/10. I subscribe to the FS Live portion of the addon as well, 16 euro for 6 months sub, which gives more accurate timetabling obviously.So I would say yes, go for MTX.

Rick,I agree with Zach, MTX5.4 is a great AI addon. Support from Burkhard is 10/10. I subscribe to the FS Live portion of the addon as well, 16 euro for 6 months sub, which gives more accurate timetabling obviously.So I would say yes, go for MTX.

Hey thanks for the advice guys but what is all the talk about low quality AI models, or is this an exaggeration?

Spare me, too: I only use peripheral vision to notice other aircraft parked or moving around me: I could care less what schedules they run: what gate they're parked at.I wanted to see what I normally see at large, busy airports during the daytime: I also wanted loads of GA at GA airfields, such as those of the PNW: I also wanted military aircraft where they should be - and only MTX Pro filled that bill. :(..and Burkhard's support is first-class! Oh yes - the quality is very "adequate": It's not a PMDG NGX sitting next to you, and it doesn't need to be. If this little piece of the sim "might" not be as realistic as it should be - then I can think of so many other aspects of the simulator that can be picked out and trashed - like no gate numbers, like hokey-looking airport vehicles, like houses perched on hillsides, like the empty seat where a first officer should be, like no passengers, and so on. To be honest - I've found that once you've had a look at a UPS MD-11, and then a BA or Qants 747 - you go go back to the job at hand.. entering data in the FMC; starting: pushback - all else disappears into the ambience of the moment.

Edited January 30, 201214 yr by Paul J

I found the models in MTX to be very good. most of the posts regarding quality of the models was in the previous version. When you consider how vast the coverage of the addon is, they are darn good. Every aircraft has a livery, which is were UT2 falls short. As PJ said, it will fill your airports.

To be honest - I've found that once you've had a look at a UPS MD-11, and then a BA or Qants 747 - you go go back to the job at hand.. entering data in the FMC; starting: pushback - all else disappears into the ambience of the moment.

Nail on the head. I want fluid performance with good FPS. I'm not trying to simulate plane spotting, but rather flying an aircraft in a lively, believable, smooth environment. That's no cop out to MTX's models; they're good and represent the A/C well.

I found the models in MTX to be very good. most of the posts regarding quality of the models was in the previous version. When you consider how vast the coverage of the addon is, they are darn good. Every aircraft has a livery, which is were UT2 falls short. As PJ said, it will fill your airports.

Yes. Way more airlines!

I think you just sold me on MTX-PRO.Many thanks to all three of you guys.Regards,

Well, I'm one of the opposite opinion. I actually own both because by the time I gut fed up with My Traffic I was past the 30 day Flight1 return policy. While the bread and butter 737, 787, A320 type of aircraft are ok visually, anything other than mainstream is just plane ugly. They looked like blocks with wings. I think this was version 5.3b I owned, so perhaps there have been updates, but I couldn't deal with the massive ugly and got Ultimate Traffic 2. Fills my airports just the same and I lose 1-2 fps over My Traffic X, so overall a very insignificant performance loss.

Well, I'm one of the opposite opinion. I actually own both because by the time I gut fed up with My Traffic I was past the 30 day Flight1 return policy. While the bread and butter 737, 787, A320 type of aircraft are ok visually, anything other than mainstream is just plane ugly. They looked like blocks with wings. I think this was version 5.3b I owned, so perhaps there have been updates, but I couldn't deal with the massive ugly and got Ultimate Traffic 2. Fills my airports just the same and I lose 1-2 fps over My Traffic X, so overall a very insignificant performance loss.

Just to clarify, My Traffic isn't a Flight1 product, people.Depends on where you fly. Thanks for the input. Although I disagree, AI Traffic programs are extremely subjective to the end user. Much like asking "what's your favorite clothing brand". I had a difference of 4 FPS at FSDT's KLAS. Which is huge considering that add on keeps my rig consistently at 20-28 FPS average.

Well, I'm one of the opposite opinion. I actually own both because by the time I gut fed up with My Traffic I was past the 30 day Flight1 return policy. While the bread and butter 737, 787, A320 type of aircraft are ok visually, anything other than mainstream is just plane ugly. They looked like blocks with wings. I think this was version 5.3b I owned, so perhaps there have been updates, but I couldn't deal with the massive ugly and got Ultimate Traffic 2. Fills my airports just the same and I lose 1-2 fps over My Traffic X, so overall a very insignificant performance loss.

Your talking a older version, but it is sold by simmarket, and Aerosoft ? not flight1 as Zach stated, The only one sold by F1 is air traffic X and UT2 of course.

I have both. What I like about UT2 is - for example - the fact that you can clear your approach with one keystroke. And the models are much prettier.MTX has way more variety. It fills most airports around the globe.But you know - you can use both of them together :-). The steps to do that aren't trivial, but well described on the MTX support forums.However, I ended up using MTX alone ;-)

I agree with PaulJ and ZackLW .. MTX is the way to go...believe me, you wouldn't want pmdg quality paints flying around you...you would hear a big sucking sound as your frame rates plummet. MTX models are fine, low res, paints on fine low res models. But they are not so crayola looking that they aren't believable. But if you are in FSX to actually fly and not look at the traffic, after a few minutes, you will be immersed because the thing that was sorely missing, traffic at airports and in patterns will be there. Just like when you are driving through a parking lot, you aren't examining every parked car with a magnifying glass. Additionally, MTX seems to have lots of jet, cargo, regional, and GA traffic, appropriately placed at appropriate airports. i.e. You won't see a 747 in Aspen,CO.

According to Burkhard about MT traffic settings, a 25% traffic setting gives you the maximum commercial traffic at airports according to the real time table data recieved for the particular airport. Setting to 30% to 35% gives you the traffic plus cargo traffic according to real time tables. Also he says anything over that is mostly for plane spotting purposes. Going over those settings really increases parked traffic at major airports and that is where you will see performance start to downgrade. Other then that it runs like butter for me. I can generally fly in the major areas in the U.S. with a 20% setting otherwise you cant get a word in edgewise with ATC. Other areas I usually keep my setting around 35 to 40% which can really fill the major airports in Europe, Australia and Asia. I also turn off the exit animations. All those jetways trying to work will bog down any system.

According to Burkhard about MT traffic settings, a 25% traffic setting gives you the maximum commercial traffic at airports according to the real time table data recieved for the particular airport. Setting to 30% to 35% gives you the traffic plus cargo traffic according to real time tables. Also he says anything over that is mostly for plane spotting purposes. Going over those settings really increases parked traffic at major airports and that is where you will see performance start to downgrade. Other then that it runs like butter for me. I can generally fly in the major areas in the U.S. with a 20% setting otherwise you cant get a word in edgewise with ATC. Other areas I usually keep my setting around 35 to 40% which can really fill the major airports in Europe, Australia and Asia. I also turn off the exit animations. All those jetways trying to work will bog down any system.

Thanks for the tips, Dave. I've been running 60% no issues, but I'll look around and use your suggestion. CLT is a little busy...My recent MTX purchase lead me to getting Audio Environment Airliner Edition. I've never been so impressed with AI traffic in my simming life. I've finally found the right stuff! The NGX, LatinVFR scenery, MTX Pro, and Audio Environment. Now I just need FS2Crew and I'll be set until the next PMDG release... Highly suggested, though it's a little steep for what it does.

Edited January 31, 201214 yr by ZachLW