I mean for Prepar3d, I use P3D.

This is a great idea duke, thanks for the contribution.

 

I was thinking, maybe as an alternative to the origin-destination airport thing, you could add direction of the AI plane into the mix to help mitigate the traffic disappearing issue.

Inbound A/C, headed to you would take preference over those flying away from you. Not sure if this would add too much processing overhead. Calculating the heading for each AI a/c would probably be far too much, but maybe using the distance differential to your current position could do the trick. Keeping the previous distance to your plane, if the next distance sample is bigger and the A/I a/c is far enough, it might be safe to delete 

Barring steep direction changes typical in some SID's and STAR's, I guess it could work well enough. Not sure though. If this is a problem extra logic could be added (planes on climb/descent excluded from deletion) but it would still be just a partial solution so...

 

Just an idea, it's already great as it is

 

Have you noticed incoming traffic dis-appear? Maybe around heavy traffic airports?

 

Heading information for AI is already available, so calculating if its headed to you should not be much. But it should be a problem first.

I mean for Prepar3d, I use P3D.

 

Then just take the first link from the P3D thread.

 

 

Have you noticed incoming traffic dis-appear? Maybe around heavy traffic airports?
 
Heading information for AI is already available, so calculating if its headed to you should not be much. But it should be a problem first.

 

I haven't tested it yet TBH, just managed to brick my VRInsight MCP panel a few days ago and haven't flown ever since 

I was merely trying to address this

 

 

 

For example, consider you are at your departure airport and taking time to get ready to depart or just watching traffic. I believe that AI coming to your Airport will first appear at the edge of the AI bubble, or at least that's how most of the incoming AI will appear. Without the departure airport optimization, these AI at the edge of the bubble will get deleted as its farthest from you. This behaviour will show up in heavily congested areas, not everywhere

 

as means to avoid the need to set the origin/destination airports

I'll do some tests later today time permiting

I haven't tested it yet TBH, just managed to brick my VRInsight MCP panel a few days ago and haven't flown ever since 

I was merely trying to address this

 

 

 

 

as means to avoid the need to set the origin/destination airports

I'll do some tests later today time permiting

 

Right, I understand the background now.

 

There would be two cases:

 

1. You are on ground in the departing Airport

In this case checking the destination of the AI is the best option, as the heading of the AI would vary as they maneuver in towards the Airport

 

2. You are in-flight

This is the case where heading check is an appropriate option, i.e. if it is a problem now.

 

But my theory on in-flight would be that, as you are moving, the bubble moves in front of you and brings in more traffic (traffic being generated by the sim).

 

In-flight, most of the times, you will will have less traffic around, so normally your set of limit of 100 odd would not delete much, if any, traffic. For example, from EGLL to OMDB, in flight I did not any have almost any deletions.

 

In-flight, in some cases, when you are flying over high traffic areas, e.g. NYC, this may be a problem. However I would think that in heavy traffic areas, the traffic generation rate would be higher and would compensate.

 

Theory in the end. Lets see what results you get.

Duke,

 

Am I correct in thinking the airport ICAOs need entering in upper case? If so can you force the entry to caps instead of the user having to do it.

 

Thanks. :smile:

It does help VAS. I landed in FSDT KORD with 1.5GB free VAS. But I do use TO with AI Cull

 

Aren't the two redundant? Ignorance talking here. :blush:

Aren't the two redundant? Ignorance talking here. :blush:

 

Good question btw.

 

Thanks,

Dirk.

Aren't the two redundant? Ignorance talking here. :blush:

No, I believe not. AI Cull will delete AI below certain altitude, the default is 18000ft. If you have TO set to 100nm, you are still going to have a lot of ai within 100nm of your dep and arr airport. KJFK is a good airport to test, as you have a lot of busy airports nearby, TO won't touch them, and remember, ai cull deletes ai that are on the ground that are not at your dep or destination.

No, I believe not. AI Cull will delete AI below certain altitude, the default is 18000ft. If you have TO set to 100nm, you are still going to have a lot of ai within 100nm of your dep and arr airport. KJFK is a good airport to test, as you have a lot of busy airports nearby, TO won't touch them, and remember, ai cull deletes ai that are on the ground that are not at your dep or destination.

 

I'll have to give AICull a try.

 

UT2 has a utility for controlling number of AI;

 

"Target FSX frame rate"  off - 60 FPS

 

"Max altitude ground aircraft visible" 5,000 - 50,000 ft.

 

"Distance to spawn ground aircraft" 5 - 50 nm

 

"Maximum aircraft to spawn" 10 - 600 aircraft

If you are using UT2, don't use AI Cull, it does the same thing. I used too, but now use WOAI

I had a problem with Windows Update so eventually performed a restore from a backup. Since then I cannot get Traffic manager to run. SimConnect checks okay and I have checked I have the latest version of .NET4.

 

The message displayed is Failed to Connect - Error HRESULT E_FAIL has been returned from a call to a COM component.

 

What doesn't it like?

Tried .NET 4.5 or reinstalling .NET 4 or any VC++ libraries?

You can't install an earlier version of .NET 4.5. It repaired it but still no joy.

 

I have run Microsoft FixIt but the problem remains. I have 9 entries in programs & features for Microsoft Visual C++. How do you repair those installs assuming it's possible

 

It's a pity the requirements aren't laid out. The error message is of no help whatsoever. :unsure:

 

One final point. I also run Active Sky Next and Avliasoft's EFB and those connect fine via SimConnect. So it has to be a problem with Visual C++ files or .NET files. But without a meaningful error message I'm stuck.

You can't install an earlier version of .NET 4.5. It repaired it but still no joy.

 

I have run Microsoft FixIt but the problem remains. I have 9 entries in programs & features for Microsoft Visual C++. How do you repair those installs assuming it's possible

 

It's a pity the requirements aren't laid out. The error message is of no help whatsoever. :unsure:

 

Ray, there no more requirements than what the SDK says:

 

Setup for .NET

1. Ensure that .NET Framework Version 2.0 is installed. If it is not, uninstall the ESP SDK, install the .NET Framework from the following link, then re-install the SDK:

What I know is that .Net Fw 4.x should also run this fine.

 

Do you have entry in Add/Remove programs like this:

 

Microsoft ESP Simconnect Client v1.0.20.0

 

Can you try repairing it?

 

More than a decade ago I was a COM programming expert and wrote a tool to trouble shoot such problems. All that went after moved to another job.

I had a problem with Windows Update so eventually performed a restore from a backup. Since then I cannot get Traffic manager to run. SimConnect checks okay and I have checked I have the latest version of .NET4.

 

The message displayed is Failed to Connect - Error HRESULT E_FAIL has been returned from a call to a COM component.

 

What doesn't it like?

I had a similar problem with another application - my computer had crashed when installing ELicenser software (for a music application). I ended up solving it by searching my entire hard drive for the application (using a wild card for the file name suffix), after which I was able to successfully install and run the application. I don't know if this will help but maybe it's worth a try.