Got great liveries at all airports Intl and Regionsl, even small privates!!

Wait a few minutes while you do ur runups and checks and its moving, taxiing, departing and arriving no problem. Make sure you removed ALL UT2 files (or whatever old AI) completely!

 

My Traffic 360 Problems/bugs I see so far;

-marshalling car headlight turns on and off ALL the AI interior and logo lights-bizarre.

-planes taking off on approch

-that terrible audio

-Traffic Control Centre-Traffic Generator-has a slider from 0-200%. Not explained in manual as to what this does vs the in-game FSX traffic sliders it recommends us to use...?

-Audio Environment support/updates?

-VoxAtc support?

 

Traffic 360 Great improvements I see over my UT2 (imho);

-terriffic AI plane graphics and animations

-great night lighting on AI

-smoother more realistic (less jerky) movements

-more gates filled with some awesome foreign livery paints

-when depart gate, no pop in AI at gate in front of me

-not as overcrowded skies enroute, more realistic (sometimes in UT2 I could count over 60 AI in sky like stars ablazing!)

 

Gotta tell ya Im kind of excited with this product and the potential it has.

Awaiting SP1!

 

UT2 traffic is amazing, they follow airways.. busy skies if you follow them too.

BUT I got ctd's, and without UT2 none. Anyone else?

UT2 traffic is amazing, they follow airways.. busy skies if you follow them too.

BUT I got ctd's, and without UT2 none. Anyone else?

 

I've been more stable without it, i think. Seemed a little idiosyncratic. As you say , though, planes on airways is great - i do currently miss that.

 

I look at mybtraffix x as the simple solution , and ut2 being a bit more hit-or-miss but great when it works.

I see two different opinions. One goes for the less quality models and does not mind if the AI flies realistic routes, and don't want to invest time adding repaints to the models. So then you pick MTX. For me I do find it a lot of fun adding the latest liveries and update the latest flightplans, and when I'm at a crowded airport such as KJFK, I do find it important to have nice looking models. As realistic as possible is my opinion. So I stick with UTII.

 

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.

Was hoping to see more on My Traffic 2013, maybe some screen shots? The balls in your court Summer1. Thanks in advace.

@Vecter

 

MyTraffic 2013 is a cut down and dumbed down version of MyTraffic X 5.4a Professional, there has since been an free update made to it bringing it up to 5.4b, so MTX 2013 is already out of date. MTX 5.4 is sold by Simmarket and MTX 2013 is sold by and supported by Aerosoft, but they still are essentially the same thing.

 

I guarantee that you will get better and faster support with the Simmarket version as that version includes paid support by the developer himself Burhard Renk via his support forum. The Aerosoft version is packaged by and supported by Aerosoft and they do not know the product anywhere near as intimately as Burkhard does, obviously.

 

Getting updates from Aerosoft for MyTraffic 2013 is not an easy task, AFAIK you have to send the disc back to them for a swap with the new version, if they actually bother offering an update, as this hasn't always been the case, even when they do it can be many months later before the update is released compared to when you could have got the free update from Burkhard, i.e. instantly via download.

 

Another reason for buying the Simmarket version is to support the developer directly as Aerosoft take a big cut of the profits of that version even though all they do is repackage it and make a more esthetically pleasing installer and offer a boxed version. The Simmarket version also has more extras like MyTraffic interactive and a few other things.

The effort as mentioned by NGX to get UT2 to a realistic level is too great for me!

I am in the first category of "forget it and fly".

And it seems that Traffic 360 may incorporate all of that and more.

Hanging out at Orlando Intl...again great plane liveries at many gates. No pop ins!

Lots of landings takeoffs and taxi movements.

But the darn AI traffic taxis at 40kph!!! I cant keep up with it in the car.

That Follow-Me Marshalling car is just a great smooth and stable addon and may be worth the price alone!

Also I noticed after one 737 landed and taxied off rnwy, it stopped and held. Then another identical 737 landed and taxied right into and over the other becoming one 737! Bizarre!

Other than that (so far), I find T360 a smoother (fps) and more realistic (also great airways and contrails) than my UT2 was.

 

It is confusing as b renk has three versions of his software. I also went with my traffic x 5.4 as per the poster above, from simmarket.

Sorry correction, AI traffic taxis at 40mph not kph (im Canadian)!

UT2 traffic is amazing, they follow airways.. busy skies if you follow them too.

BUT I got ctd's, and without UT2 none. Anyone else?

 

I, like Johan, always had CTDs with UT2, now with MyTraffic 2013, none. Overall, i am quite satisifed with MyTraffic 2013. Is it perfect, no, but it gets the job completed.

 

Bob

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 completely understand and respect your opinion. However, if someone is planning to buy UT2, they must understand that they will now have a new very time consuming hobby editing AI traffic. Which is necessary in order to eliminate the generic paints and solve the problem of empty gates due to the 20 minute rule.

As I've said before, Traffic 360 is my first payware AI program. Before this, I used Don Grovestine's AI Flight Planner to insert all my customized flight plans for various business, commerical, and GA traffic at the airports I frequent. I would get my AI aircraft from WOAI or MIAW.

 

Because I'm very familiar with Don's tool, I've found it easier to use than Traffic360's flight planning tool. I, too, have found the documentation for Traffic360 somewhat confusing at times.

 

But, I do like Traffic360 so far. I'm not a fanatic about my AI traffic like NGXFanatic, so my expectations aren't as high.

Here is a sample (sorry bad vid from iphone) of some Traffic 360 at Amsterdam, riding around in the new Marshalling Van...

at the beginning .. you can see a cargo aircraft at the same gate with passenger planes :-(

...and chasing a BA 737 through de-iceing ramps (T360)...