Landing Amsterdam with some nice T360 cross traffic action (if this would even be allowed) and plenty of AI at gates and taxiways...

 

The Traffic 360 models look pretty simplistic, you can tell what type it's supposed to be but they look like the AI I had in FS2002. That right there is a deal breaker.

 

Some of the issues pointed out regarding different traffic programs have nothing to do with the programs at all, but are limitations of the FSX AI traffic engine.

 

"The space between aircraft on approach blows UT2 away!" - FSX controls the AI. Has nothing to do with UT2, maybe Traffic 360 has something similar to AI smooth built in.

 

"I was just at Heathrow and had two aircraft landing a few 100 meteres apart, but they both had to do a go around because the previous aircraft which landed is just sitting on the runway" - FSX issue. Similar to this is aircraft landing and stopping midway to their gate, this is an FSX afcad/ADE issue.

 

"planes taking off on approch" - FSX feature.

 

Aircraft taxiing through de-ice aprons is from a poorly made ade/afcad file for that airport.

And for the most real experience, I like to go to my local airport-lol!

UTII abides! Cheers jja

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. As Raymond mentions, there are two trains of thought on AI in FSX, those who want minimal fuss and a "set it and forget it" injection of traffic into their skies to bring their airports and skies to life, and those who are die hard fanatical (to the point of being OCD fussy about the smallest details, like the placement of windows, emergency doors, engine type, or satellite domes on the AI model) and appreciate AI airlines that follow real life schedules, which are updated yearly, and use the correct equipment and liveries, which are also in a constant change every year/month. I fall in the latter camp, and see the installation of user submitted freeware flightplans as a 2nd sub hobby within flight simming, but I respect those who don't see the need to go to such effort, either because of a lack of time (very important for the work involved) or interest. I admit, sometimes I get into the NGX and because I'm very much a heads down, go by the book pilot, I often don't even notice all the work I have poured into making my AI traffic so realistic. But Ienjoy the research, and I have learned so much about the current state of airline operations, aircraft types, etc. Also, I record all my flights with FSrecorder, so I often like to relax after the flight and take in the details of my collection of payware airports and AI, which I can't afford to do when the heat is on in the cockpit!!

 

And because I'm a stickler for realism, my choice is UT2. I believe its one of the greatest addons of all time for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The developers had put a lot of thought into the design of the GUI and the behind the scenes main program database, allowing the user to easily customize the appearance of the traffic they see in the sim, and to fine tune the density of the traffic to match the performance capabilities of their PC. Also, you can create a timetable for any UT2 airline, even for a specific airport, in PDF format!

 

One of the neatest features of UT2 is their addon Powerpack program, a user friendly GUI that allows the user to import any freeware TTools compliant flightplan into the UT2 database, so that those user schedules can enjoy the same benefits UT2 offers its own branded schedules, such as traffic flying real waypoint based routes, having the ability to zap conflicting traffic, and the user has the flexiblity to hide ground traffic when above a certain altitude threshold so that airport gate AI is not using up computer resources, which helps with fps in a measurable way.

 

Because of a feature introduced by the developers to the UT2 SP1 hoping to improve performance, UT2 traffic only spawns at the gates 20 minutes before push back, and disappears 20 minutes after shutdown. True, this helps FPS, but not by much IMHO, and the visuals of AI popping in and out like whack a mole is very disconcerting, not to mention, that busy airports that should have 80-100% gates full only appear to have 40% full. Unfortunately, the developers refuse to correct this issue, but I had discovered that if I replace a UT2 airline with a freeware schedule imported with the Powerpack program, that traffic will not be affected, and gates are full with traffic again! If not for that workaround, I most likely would have given up on UT2 and returned to just WOAI or Alpha India traffic.

 

Another small issue with UT2 is that although the models are superb, because they are the same TFS, AIA, DJC models found in WOAI and other freeware sources, not all engine or model variants are provided, most likely to keep things simple for the user or to shorten development time. For instance, the Boeing 777-300ER is missing, but you will find the TFS -200 and -300 in the sim. Also, the 747-400 uses 3 different engine manufacturers (RR, PW, GE), but in UT2 only the GE variant is used. Likewise, for the DJC Airbus A320 series, the CFM engine is modeled, but the IAE variant is omitted. It may be OCD, but this bothers me a little, but I understand most folks really don't mind.

 

Now, because I had to use Powerpack schedules to get around the 20 minute spawn rule and the single engine choice for models with multi engine options, my UT2 install does not really use any of the UT2 provided airline schedules for ANY major airline, at least airlines I see at world airports I frequent. 150 of the airlines in my UT2 are all hand imported Powerpack schedules, which encompasses ALL U.S. based airlines as well as the big international carriers. It was a lot of work, but is necessary to have a realistic amount of gate traffic and models with the correct engines depicted. Some would say this is overkill, but like I said, this is a little hobby unto itself, and it's fun for me. True, I could just bypass UT2 entirely and just import those schedules directly into FSX as regular traffic.bgl files, but then I would miss out on the value added by UT2 such as the realistic routes and fps saving features. Also, I only go to this effort for passenger airlines, I found that I am satisfied using Ttools to create old fashioned bgl traffic files for the world's cargo carriers, or obscure small airlines and GA biz jets, since they have small fleets and I seldom see them in the skies anyways. As it stands, I have 411 traffic bgls in my scenery folder, for the aforemetioned cargo, obscure, GA biz, and Military traffic.

 

At the end of the day, I see AI traffic as moving scenery. I don't have the knowledge or inclination to create airport scenery, but when I add quality AI traffic to my FSX skies, I feel like I'm making a worthwhile contribution to my enjoyment of this hobby. Just like when I built model airplanes or put together intricate legoland worlds when I was a kid, it's satisfing to not just be a passive user of the sim and to have a hand in creating the world around you, at least in our little virtual world. When you invest the time and money into adding high end payware airports and other scenery into FSX, it defeats the purpose to ruin the experience by having ugly AI models with sloppy, cartoonish paintjobs occupying your sim world. IMHO, UT2 offers the best AI package for those who relish having "as real as it gets" AI traffic populating their "real as it gets" FSX world.

 

I am a UT guy too!

 

I have not done all of this work like you have but I see the possibilities and want to start down that road too. Sounds like fun to me too.

 

You should make a tutorial. I would enjoy getting started with this.

The Traffic 360 models look pretty simplistic, you can tell what type it's supposed to be but they look like the AI I had in FS2002. That right there is a deal breaker.

 

Some of the issues pointed out regarding different traffic programs have nothing to do with the programs at all, but are limitations of the FSX AI traffic engine.

 

"The space between aircraft on approach blows UT2 away!" - FSX controls the AI. Has nothing to do with UT2, maybe Traffic 360 has something similar to AI smooth built in.

 

"I was just at Heathrow and had two aircraft landing a few 100 meteres apart, but they both had to do a go around because the previous aircraft which landed is just sitting on the runway" - FSX issue. Similar to this is aircraft landing and stopping midway to their gate, this is an FSX afcad/ADE issue.

 

"planes taking off on approch" - FSX feature.

 

Aircraft taxiing through de-ice aprons is from a poorly made ade/afcad file for that airport.

 

I dont know about all that. Maybe its just me, but I have never seen two aircraft landing a few hundred meteres apart in FSX alone with no traffic program. Ive never seen FSX AI just getting stuck on the runway blocking everyone else. Maybe a fluke but ive been using FSX since its introduction without an addon traffic program until I got T360 with the issues above.

I have never seen two aircraft landing a few hundred meteres apart in FSX alone with no traffic program. Ive never seen FSX AI just getting stuck on the runway blocking everyone else.

 

I've seen it hundreds of times, it's nothing new to FSX. When you have enough AI in the skies, its just how it goes. FSX airport ATC is really only capable of handling a couple dozen a/c movements an hour at best.

I had used UT 2 for FSX and when Traffic 360 came about I installed it into Prepar3d, liked it so much I uninstalled UT2 and switched FSX over too.

Hey guys What's the best traffic program PC specs? Sorry it's a bit long. Also I think using UT2 And my FPS is about 3-5 Check out some of my videos at, http://www.youtube.com/user/Flightbudy2channel/videos?flow=grid&view=0

 

The only addons I'm using with FSX are,

Fspssangers

iFly 737NG

FS2crew for ifly

Flghtbeam studios KPHX

UT2

And Afcad's

 

Component_______ details____________________________________Subscore

Processor-----------Intel core Quad CPU Q9300 2.50GHz-–----------- 7.2

Memory (Ram)-------4.00 GB---------------------------------------------7.2

Graphics----------NVIDIA Geforce 9800 GT------------------------------6.9

Gaming graphics----------2303 MB total available graphics memory------6.9

Primary hard disk----------401 GB free (596 GB total)-------------------5.9

Base score

5.9 Determined by Lowest Subscore

Windows 7 Home Premium

System_____________

Manufacturer----------gateway

Model--------- FX4710-UB802A

Total amount of system memory-----------4.00 GB Ram

System type----------64-bit operating system

Number of processors---------4

Storage_____________

total size of hard disk(s)-------596 GB

Disk partition (C:)----401 GB free (596 GB total)

Media drive(D:)------- CD/DVD

Graphics_____________

Display adapter type----NVIDIA Geforce 9800 GT

Total available graphics memory--------2303

Dedicated graphics memory--------512 MB

Dedicated system memory-----0 MB

Shared system memory--------1791 MB

Display adapter driver version-------8.17.1.12.9573

Primary monitor resolution----------1920+1200

Direc X version--------- directX 10

Network____________

Network adapter---------Intel® 82566DC-2 gigabyte network connection

Network adapter---------compact wireless-G USB network adapter

Network adapter---------Microsoft visual Wi-Fi MinisPort adapter

notes____________

The gaming graphics score is based on the primary graphic. If system is linked or multiple graphic adapters, some software applications may see additional performance benefits.

T360-Just saw a 747 land at small airport (Springfield AFB MA) that had NO traffic. It landed off rumway on the field and then just sat there permanently! Bizarre!!!

Now that I've played around with T360, I may reinstall UT2 and do a better compare...

 

Why do some aircraft in UT2 land short on grass and some actually fly into tree tops (Air France Air Show) Ive seen some horrible crashes with UT2 AI!

Why do some aircraft in UT2 land short on grass and some actually fly into tree tops (Air France Air Show) Ive seen some horrible crashes with UT2 AI!

This has nothing to do with what AI program you have, it's part of the FSX AI engine!

 

UT2 adds traffic only, nothing to airport files. All approaches flown by AI are done by FSX and from what airports you have installed in FSX (default or otherwise). Traffic 360 and the MyTraffic does add airport files, moreso designed to populate the airport with AI. Traffic landing short is often attributed to either starting a flight and the AI is spawned too high and close to the destination airport that it cant possibly complete a stabilized AI approach or a poor airport file. FSX wasn't meant to handle the amount of AI thrown at it by today's AI groups/programs. P3D in it's current release isn't any better.

It's very quirky at best.

The 2000 or so airport files that MyTraffic X update is mainly to create enough parking spaces at default airports to allow for more realistic traffic levels, many default AFCADS don't have any parking at all for AI. There are a few improved airports too that look far better than the default and enable things like none parallel runway landings.

Happy New Year!!!

So I installed UT2 again just to compare.

The familiar GUI is nice. Also a free beta Winter 2012-2013 schedule and repaints available now.

Well imho, the frame rates dropped considerably over the new T360.

I am certain the AI aircraft renderings are much improved in T360! Also more realistic (less shaking) movements of aircraft. Airport gates are mostly empty and NO traffic at many regionals and privates in UT2.

I think one must perhaps have both programs in order to compare properly with your computer capabilities etc...

Again, once Just Flight releases its Sp1, i think you'll really see the differences.

Cant fly UT2 anymore as it is very jerky to me now and aircrafts look poor!

Gonna reinstall Traffic 360 and keep working with it.....

Video of Ultimate Traffic II again at Amsterdam, in comparison to video (above) with Traffic 360.

UTII set at 90% Commercial and 95% GA. Notice only about 50% gates full and of those, 90% KLM!

Nice El Al taxi to moving gate.

Would make a big difference depending on the time of day as well, I know EHAM can be busy but 50% gate occupancy isn't unrealistic. UT2 isn't without it's many faults, but the plans come from current schedules.