Do we have any traffic addons in development?

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

Excellent P3D video Dave  :wink:

[Guest]

Excellent P3D video Dave  :wink:

Thanks Richard, Glad you enjoyed it! :smile:

[gfd 15]

Except the only thing that those guys at the pirateware AI groups did was package together other peoples work (they didn't do any of the actual labour involved in creating the plans, repaints or models) but they were quick to change the filenames, remove copy writes and call it all their own work. If I had put in many hundreds and often into the thousands of hours creating AI models or paints or flightplans, I sure don't think I'd find others using it under their own name something I'd want to ever see. It's similar to if the creators of ORBX or PMDG, for instance had others take their work and re package it under their own name and either sold it or even released it for free.

You are right Dave. But what about websites like flyingcarpet75? They are great folks...yes, but they have just about every model and paint ever created available for download. What about Alpha India? They have schedules for every major airline and they give you links to download the models and paints.

 

What if someone came along and said "here is a package of schedules, models and paints that will fill your airports and skies". And then what if they went on to acknowledge each schedule, model and paint creator? Essentially they would just be doing the work. If that is not OK, then basically we're saying "hey, use it all you like. But if someone else does the work (and gives it to you for free), they and I, are pirates".

 

I've never been to one of the sites. If they sold advertising on their site and didn't get approval from the content creators, then I could see the conflict. By the way, I'm not challenging you. It is what it is. Whay don't the model, schedule and paint guys just charge a royalty for their product and let someone create a decent AI addon. Now I may have answered my own question (UT2).

 

By the way, speaking of UT2, it appears it is once again being developed (from their forum). This would render my post moot as I would then have my first choice in AI up to date and I could completely disregard the model and paint wars.

 

Cheers from a fellow Canuk.

[Dave_YVR 987]

You are right Dave. But what about websites like flyingcarpet75? They are great folks...yes, but they have just about every model and paint ever created available for download. What about Alpha India? They have schedules for every major airline and they give you links to download the models and paints.

 

What if someone came along and said "here is a package of schedules, models and paints that will fill your airports and skies". And then what if they went on to acknowledge each schedule, model and paint creator?

 

Flyingcarpet75 and Alpha India etc are a combination of the creators of or have the permissions/approval from the original creators to host what ever files they offer. A pre packaged setup offered elsewhere even giving acknowledgement to each schedule, model and paint creator still doesn't meet the copyrights that are included within each flightplan, repaint, and model.

 

If they removed the credits that was lame for sure. The comparison to payware products however I can't agree with.

 

It is lame indeed but that's how they did it. As for the comparison to payware, what's the difference? A copyright is a copyright. Similar to any of the payware products, the original creators have put many hundreds of hours into developing their wares only to have another group of people rebadge the work as their own. Similar has been seen at all of the usual FS websites even here at avsim where on numerous occasions freeware products are taken and then edited or repackaged and uploaded for release under a new title by a "new" author. Those products generally don't last very long in the library as it's a violation of the TOS and also copyrights and get removed then banned as soon as possible.

 

Each of our sim's is a culmination of the work we put into them, from payware to the freeware you get what you put into it. The freeware developers have put in serious time to create these products and are then nice enough to share them for us to use for free albeit with very easy and simple limitations. For those that don't want to put some effort into it, just stick to the simple and lesser payware options, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

[aamontoy83 7]

+ 1 with Dave...it just takes a couple of mins and you can have the best AI possible...if it werent for AIG P3D skies would be empty and terribly boring.

 

a couple of my work...

[Mr_LoL 10]

Does anybody find the MyTraffic 6 schedules woefully inaccurate? I was told by the developer to reduce my traffic setting to under 50% but at LAX all the flights from London arrive at 2 in the morning instead of the afternoon.

[Luis_KMIA 242]

I've just been downloading a lot of freeware: AIG flightplans, good basepacks and repaints, and using AIfPv3.2 to install them.  They seem tow work OK in P3Dv3.  I did buy UT2 in the old days and would love to see a complete update with a simple installer.

[simmerhead 885]

As for the comparison to payware, what's the difference? A copyright is a copyright. Similar to any of the payware products, the original creators have put many hundreds of hours into developing their wares only to have another group of people rebadge the work as their own. Similar has been seen at all of the usual FS websites even here at avsim where on numerous occasions freeware products are taken and then edited or repackaged and uploaded for release under a new title by a "new" author. Those products generally don't last very long in the library as it's a violation of the TOS and also copyrights and get removed then banned as soon as possible.

 

Each of our sim's is a culmination of the work we put into them, from payware to the freeware you get what you put into it. The freeware developers have put in serious time to create these products and are then nice enough to share them for us to use for free albeit with very easy and simple limitations. For those that don't want to put some effort into it, just stick to the simple and lesser payware options, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

The difference is significant. It's called damages. Other than a bruised ego, what damages have the freeware repainters and modellers suffered? I just did a youtube and  google search one one of these pirate groups. Both places I found them they stated clearly that they didn't create any of the models, repaints or flightplans, just made a compilation of freeware to make it easy for anyone to install and use it. On youtube they also listed the websites from which the models were downloaded. It's not nice, but not a hideous crime either... 

 

I just don't get why some freeware developers insists on making things complicated and difficult. You can serve the cake and let people eat it too - it's all up to you. 

 

As for the thousands of hours spent creating freeware, what about it? It's a game and a hobby. It's not a bone in my body that understand how it can be taken all so seriously and why someone feel the need for accolade. Volunteer to the Red Cross, the Army or whatever and make a real contribution to the world and I'll pat your back. But having the luxury and privilege to indulge in a game, seriously? Anyone with money and free time on their hands spend their life creating something, and by far, most of them never get any credit or claim copyright for it. It usually takes all the fun out of it. 

 

The problem with payware offerings is that they might have legal issues to iron out with those companies who own the design, trademark and logos. That makes payware offerings a slippery and complicated slope to be in. 

[gfd 15]

At the risk of becoming too repetitive, I look forward to the progress in UT2, which appears to be once again in development. I would be willing to pay a premium for a product that is easier on resources (my experience) and more configurable; provided it had updated scedules, accurate paints, flew over water and had a 787

 

I wonder if there are so few folks in this business cause maybe it ain't too easy balancing performance and realism; not to mention schedule maintenance. Perhaps this and the fact that unlike creating user aircraft and scenery; it is relatively easy to go to flyingcarpet and AIG and create an airline. Ergo, competition from potential customers. I for one don't relish the prospect of recreating the world's AI traffic. I do salute those that do so.

[jason99vmi 157]

@simmerhead - Compiling of say the models and schedules is completely fine BUT you need to ask permission from the original developers.   Its a simple email to them stating your intentions and that all credit will be given to them for their work, etc.  I think most freeware developers are fine with that. 

 

The problem is when they don't ask permission and something goes wrong.  Then people are knocking on their door saying "your item is broke", "fix this or fix that", and ruin their reputation because someone repackaged it without their knowing.  If the person repackaging items and asked permission then the orig developer knows and can tell them that product A won't work with product B and thus avoiding issues. 

 

And sometimes freeware becomes payware for example Dino Cattaneo's F-35 or Alan Constable's AI Sounds. 

 

I think said AI pirateware group has been known for years.  And shunned by the community.

[simmerhead 885]

@simmerhead - Compiling of say the models and schedules is completely fine BUT you need to ask permission from the original developers.   Its a simple email to them stating your intentions and that all credit will be given to them for their work, etc.  I think most freeware developers are fine with that. 

 

A simple e-mail? There are 100s involved and it is not doable I'm afraid. Contact info is sometimes missing or outdated, some have left the hobby and is nowhere to be found, and some don't want their work shared outside of their control. 

 

I tried when I made an AI package for Scandinavia. I didn't simply recompile files. I added new paints, corrected and converted textures for FSX/Prepar3D, made new and edited wrong flightplans, corrected outdated and wrong paints (Lots of bad repaints out there - some repainters seem to be colourblind!), edited and corrected effects and aircraft.cfg files. It took me quite some time. Sadly, because of the EULA of the freeware I was using, none of this work will ever be shared with anyone. 

 

In the end everybody loses. 

[jason99vmi 157]

Based on the size of AVSIM's library and the download libraries of other flight sim websites.  I think we'll be fine. 

 

I used WOAI and updated flightplans and aircraft using AIG.  I have up to date flightplans, models and paints. 

 

I have 2D panels and VC in my 787 that was a collaboration between freeware developers, and its great. 

 

Yes things don't always work out but hey I think the flightsim community is doing just fine. 

 

Just think when we go to 64 bit all this conversation will be absolutely worthless...lol

[simmerhead 885]

Based on the size of AVSIM's library and the download libraries of other flight sim websites.  I think we'll be fine. 

 

I used WOAI and updated flightplans and aircraft using AIG.  I have up to date flightplans, models and paints. 

 

I have 2D panels and VC in my 787 that was a collaboration between freeware developers, and its great. 

 

Yes things don't always work out but hey I think the flightsim community is doing just fine. 

 

Just think when we go to 64 bit all this conversation will be absolutely worthless...lol

 

We're doing fine, but could be doing so much better!