MyTraffic and Ultimate Traffic 2

[do_denver2 18]

I use MT 6 and it's working fine.  It seems I can see traffic in the air all over the place and at a distance.   One caveat though is that it seems important to use the AI Traffic Manager to limit the amount of aircraft so that it doesn't tank FPS.  With the newest update even at 15% there's a ton of traffic, and limiting to 50-100 seems to keep FPS from tanking much.

[olliecast 1]

I've moved from mt6 to ut2 for the time being with the 2013 schedules. I've added the missing models and textures for airplanes at egnx

 

The reason being is that only the a320 in mt6, from an airliner perspective seem to have navigation or strobe lights visible from a distance

[gfd 15]

I am using My traffic 6 in P3D v3 but what I did was replace some of the models with the higher quality models that are available (FAIB..etc) I only did the domestic US carriers as that's where I am most of the time. I have not put my shockwaves lights into P3D as of yet so they all are using default lights. You can in fact see them in the distance again....which is good!

 

 Thanks Flic. Did you replace the models in my traffic\aircraft or did you modify the schedule? If either, how did you do it?

 

 

I use MT 6 and it's working fine.  It seems I can see traffic in the air all over the place and at a distance.   One caveat though is that it seems important to use the AI Traffic Manager to limit the amount of aircraft so that it doesn't tank FPS.  With the newest update even at 15% there's a ton of traffic, and limiting to 50-100 seems to keep FPS from tanking much.

 

I use that as well with MyTraffic. Anybody know if it gets along with UT2?

[Flic1 976]

 Thanks Flic. Did you replace the models in my traffic\aircraft or did you modify the schedule? If either, how did you do it?

 

 

 

I use that as well with MyTraffic. Anybody know if it gets along with UT2?

 

 

What I did was to add whatever new aircraft you want to the main MT6 Aircraft folder. I then searched out the original MT6 aircraft in that same aircraft folder that I want to replace and copy the title of the applicable airline to the new aircraft .cfg.  Make sure you then change the title of the original name you are copying (I put a number at the end of it) so you don't get a duplication error.  Your new aircraft will then show up in place of the default!  Hope that helps!

 

Eric

[gfd 15]

Thanks Flic,

 

Think I've got it. Will test a few. Thanks again.

[olliecast 1]

If somebody could let me know if the other model in mt6 show their lights at night (I'm guessing they would)

 

Could get traffic back over water then!

[Flic1 976]

If somebody could let me know if the other model in mt6 show their lights at night (I'm guessing they would)

Could get traffic back over water then!

The problem with default MT6 aircraft is that the models had the lights built in and did not use .fx lights with the exception of the beacons. I think this was due to the p3d issues with the lights not being seen in the distance. The problem with that though is the built in lights cannot be seen very well either. I replaced numerous models and put p3d default lights on them and they can in fact be seen in the distance. I will try experimenting with shockwaves lights maybe this weekend.

[cropduster 0]

which one gives better frame rates, I had UT2 but then switched to MT6 for v2.5.  About to install for v3 so curious on this.

 

Also does my traffic manager work for UT2 as well?

[DylanM 1,069]

I've moved from mt6 to ut2 for the time being with the 2013 schedules. I've added the missing models and textures for airplanes at egnx

 

The reason being is that only the a320 in mt6, from an airliner perspective seem to have navigation or strobe lights visible from a distance

Interesting find...have you reported that to Burkhard over at the MT forums?

[FlyCathay 18]

UT2, in fact, the first thing I check before I decided to move to P3D is the compatabilty of UT2. Schedule can be updated easily and models look good.

 

And for some reason, I have traffic over the sea in P3D but not in FSX.

[nicksort 8]

I have MT but I have not had the time to install it into V3.

I am also thinking of purchasing UT but I cannot find any reference to loading UT in V3, even the store selling it and the UT website says NOTHING about compatibility with V3.

Is there some secret install directions I can find on the internet?

 

Thank you to all that respond!

[olliecast 1]

Interesting find...have you reported that to Burkhard over at the MT forums?

Sure have. The response was it's a bug in p3d that lm has to fix. Even though the a320 is fine in mt6.thats why I've thrown the towel in and gone to ut2, even though it's older.

Ut2 models, and others I've added into ut2 has made the world come alive in terms of light etc

[gfd 15]

+1 olliecast

 

Burkhard also stated that many of the UT2 models were licensed from MyTraffic. If that is so, why aren't those models in MyTraffic. I don't like having smoke blown up by backside. The difference between the quality of UT2 models and MyTraffic is night and day. The MyTraffic equipment is not that great in comparison. Now, different people place different importance in that. That's OK. Everyone has their own preferences. I would support those that disagree with me as much as those who might agree.

 

Until P3D gave back the night, I didn't care. But there is something to be said about watching an aircraft take off with all its lights, as opposed to a few, none or some. Furthermore, MyTraffic aircraft are like glow worms when they get some distance away. Again, it is a matter of personal taste. There are many who aren't all that interested in AI. Bravo! All Burkhard would have to do is say here are the coordinates for the lights of my aircraft. Add lights. If you don't like the performance, don't bother me about it. It's your choice. That works. 

 

UT2 is configurable, easy on resources. The sound is realistic. The models are superior.

 

But now it's all the system's fault. It's all the user's fault. It's all Lockheed Martin's fault. Yada, yada, yada. I can't believe I'm typing this. I have been a dedicated MTX fan for a long time. I wouldn't even look at UT2. Show's you what a narrow minded person I am...eh?

 

If Burkhard was smart, he'd buy the rights to UT2 and inject his airports, schedules and paints to get rid of Dadelus. That would be something to behold. Failing that, I think it's becoming curiouser and curiouser.

 

Please forgive me for this. I started this thread to get a better understanding of how to merge MYX and UT2. I certainly hope I didn't torpedo the thread. Now that I have installed UT2, I want to get the best out of both packages.

 

MTX schedules and airports are excellent. The UT2 system and equipment is superior. I hope, going forward, this thread allows people like me to learn how to get the best out of both.

 

Sorry for the rant.

[Christopher Low 5,353]

 

Burkhard also stated that many of the UT2 models were licensed from MyTraffic. If that is so, why aren't those models in MyTraffic.

 

A handful of models in UT2 are indeed licensed from MyTraffic (eg. Bae 146/ATR/CRJ). However, they are significantly inferior in quality to the other UT2 models, which is why I have replaced them with better quality versions.

[Dave_YVR 973]

MTX schedules and airports are excellent.

 

As Christopher mentioned, it was only a few of the MTX models that were in UT2 and none of them were very good in comparison to what was available with freeware.

 

 The MTX schedules do certainly populate the skies, but they are quite devoid of any realism. To many this fact is completely acceptable, they just want the skies populated with traffic but to many others they don't want to see unrealistic city pairings or traffic operating at airports where there would never be irl.