Why do you say MTX is better outside the US?

What FSCamp said, and MTX has some more models IIRC, especially the Soviet built planes, but you wouldn't really notice that unless you're flying within the area of the former USSR, because nowadays most (if not all) airlines of that region operate western aircraft for flights to most of Europe.

 

Ah OK, I've never noticed missing UT2 paints and mainly fly in EU and Asia.

That might be, because UT2 covers the better known airlines. But have I'm pretty sure that less known, mainly regional airlines like Air Alps or Air Dolomiti are not included in UT2, but hardly enyone would notice that they're missing, because there probably aren't too many people who actually know of theses airlines.

 

I actually fly in Europe, so is MTX better for me?

Saying so would probably be oversimplifying. It really depends on what you want. If you only want realistically crowded airports, but don't care too much for the quality of the models(most likely resulting in  a better perormance) and the routes they fly, MTX is for you. I for one, as I've stated in some other threads, don't really care for the models, because I just don't want to feel alone in the air/at the airports, and with MTX you get the most planes and liveries for your money. On the ground I am usually busy with preparations for the flight or with navigating to the gate or the RWY, so I don't pay too much attention to the other aircraft, except where they're moving to/from, and when airborne I just hope that ATC keeps me far enough from other planes that I don't have to see how "ugly" they are.

Besides, beauty is always a matter of preferences :smile:. I agree that the MTX models leave much room for improvement, though.

That might be, because UT2 covers the better known airlines. But have I'm pretty sure that less known, mainly regional airlines like Air Alps or Air Dolomiti are not included in UT2, but hardly enyone would notice that they're missing, because there probably aren't too many people who actually know of theses airlines.

 

Well flights for both of those actually happen to be included, however it doesn't include any repaint for Air Alps, so ther planes show with default "Daedalus" airline paint unless you change that using Ultimate Traffic 2 interface.

 

I think current version of UT2 has pretty good coverage for many smaller airlines that operate scheduled flights, mainly some smaller cargo airlines & charter operators are missing. However through UT2 power pack program it's very easy to add those airlines too, it allows you to import any traditional flightplan text files to UT2 traffic.

 

So to really get rid of all the "Daedalus" paints and replace them with real airline paints takes a lot of time, however at least for me it's worth it, really nice to see AI with beautiful models flying actual routes with waypoints instead of just directly flying from point A to point B like Mytraffic and other traditional AI traffic.

 

Though I use Mytraffic for a long time before I got UT2, I think it's a brilliant program too, I just like how UT2 gives me more control over things, allows me to very easily update paints, airlines, models and so.

I dont think ive ever seen any Daedalus paints since i got UT2 but i dont really fly to small airports.

Or maybe you have them disabled from UT2, you can have it so that traffic with Daedalus paint doesn't show up at all.

 

Before I started to add liveries to replace Daedalus paint whenever I went to any major airport I could see several aircraft with Daedalus paint.

I have Traffic X, and I guess that it's pretty good. I'm just frustrated by the start-up sounds, which have two errors: 

 

1)The aircraft is already taxiing when the sounds start;

2)The sounds can be heard literally 20km away, and almost as loud as if you were right next to it. 

 

But its great for me apart from that, I'm happy with it. 

AirNav FS Live Traffic 3

 

http://www.airnavsystems.com/FS/index.html

AirNav FS Live Traffic 3

 

http://www.airnavsystems.com/FS/index.html

 

That looks interesting but very expensive! I tried downloading the demo but I cant seem to get access after entering my email.

For what its worth after looking at AI traffic options I finally decided on World of Ai.

First of all its free. Save that Addon money for ORBX or PMDG or REX or something.

If you don't iike it you can always get the payware of your choice later. I have so far only installed a couple of Airlines at my home city Toronto: Air Canada and Porter but I am very happy with what I see. The only drawback I can see is that there is a lot of downloading. Your mouse finger will be in a sling before your done. I have downloaded about 300 or the roughly 600 packages available.

 

The good thing is that you can apparently install them all at once but dont quote me on that. I have not done it yet. I was advised to make a new folder for the packages and edit the .cfg to point at that folder for AI traffic. You can convert all the FS9 packages to FSX all at once too. Again don't quote me! Not yet done.

 

It is true that the World of AI traffic web-site will be gone at the end of April but the last thing i read is that the Installer and packages will continue to be available from AVSIM library. I figure the project will likely continue under the AVSIM banner and if not all of the required downloads will still be available.

Thanks for mentioning ORBX! The context is a different, but that reminded me of the two freeware traffic packages by ORBX for NA and AU. Those packages are GA traffic only, though, and only for the respective regions, but the models are nice, so if you mainly attend smaller airfileds in Australia, the West Coast of North America or New Zealand you might give those addons a try. Here's the link for those who are interested: http://fullterrain.com/product_traffic.html

I tried the UT2 demo a few years ago and my main objection was that if you accessed the FSX drop down menu all of the traffic dissappeared and you had to wait for it to populate again.  This to me was a larger negative than the lower quality models of MyTrafficX. In the 3 pages of this topic no one has mentioned this. Has this issue been corrected or did I not have UT2 installed/configured correctly?

 

Also it is my understanding that all development, except for revised annual flight schedules, has stopped for UT2 while MyTrafficX is under constant development. Is this correct?

 

Ted

Or if you are willing to spend a lot of time to get the best AI possible you could get Ultimate Traffic 2 and then download & install all the liveries it's missing...

Exactly, then go one step further and disable UT2 and use your new library of models and paints with the superior AIG plans which are available here on avsim for free.

Aren't those AIG plans just like all other flightplans, directly from airport A to airport B?

 

Because one of the major advantages of UT2 is that it makes AI to fly proper routes with waypoints instead of just using the direct route from airport A to airport B.

 

If I just wanted to have basic AI that uses direct routes I would just reinstall Mytraffic.

Aren't those AIG plans just like all other flightplans, directly from airport A to airport B?

No - when you install the AIG flightplans using UT2 Powerpack one of the options in powerpack is to:

a) have flights fly direct (UT2 generates the flightplans to fly a to b straight line) or

b) have flights fly waypoint to waypoint (UT2 generates the flightplan using waypoints as the other UT2 traffic does)

 

Regards

 

Steve

proper routes

Proper meaning simply built using the FS Flightplanner? Have you looked at some of those "routes"? I had to change 90+% of both the inbound and outbound routes to and from Vancouver they were so bad.

 

I'll take plans created with care by the guys who do this out of the desire to have accurate AI and not to simply fill the sky.

Proper meaning simply built using the FS Flightplanner? Have you looked at some of those "routes"? I had to change 90+% of both the inbound and outbound routes to and from Vancouver they were so bad.

At least they have waypoints. To my understanding if I take some AIG flightplan files and compile them using ttools the end result will be a simple direct route between airports, without any waypoints?

 

Yeah FS flightplanner routes aren't perfect, but in my opinion still better than just direct route between two airports.

 

No - when you install the AIG flightplans using UT2 Powerpack one of the options in powerpack is to:

a) have flights fly direct (UT2 generates the flightplans to fly a to b straight line) or

B) have flights fly waypoint to waypoint (UT2 generates the flightplan using waypoints as the other UT2 traffic does)

 

Yeah, but Dave suggested to disable UT2 completely and use those flightplans as regular FS traffic files which to my knowledge don't include waypoints?