29 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

Can someone provide a link to the Nico thing?  Google didn't reveal much

Here you are:

http://www.lekseecon.nl/PSXseeconTraffic.html

32 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

Can someone provide a link to the Nico thing?  Google didn't reveal much

http://aerowinx.com/board/index.php?topic=3351.0

As I understand, the Nico live traffic program is not good to represent airport AI traffic (during taxiing). That still holds true?.

Cheers, Ed

 

1 hour ago, edpatino said:

As I understand, the Nico live traffic program is not good to represent airport AI traffic (during taxiing). That still holds true?.

Cheers, Ed

 

According to what I just read that's correct.  And also it looks like the airports I fly out of there wouldn't be much traffic.  I believe the program only injects traffic with transponder codes in the NAS (at least for the US).  This means a discrete code associated with a flight plan.  Many aircraft have local beacon codes assigned by tower or approach that wouldn't be in the NAS.  Also for your point a lot of airports don't require mode C while taxiing around.  Well, actually I think the AIM recommends this but many smaller airports/ATC don't have ASDE (ground radar).  

I wonder if they gash up the airline names in this like they did in the last version.

Couldn't help but notice the developer (like the blackbox duo) don't poke there heads In to say hi. Couldn't think why 

Be interesting how they are going to pull data.  especially on the ground 

2 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

According to what I just read that's correct.  And also it looks like the airports I fly out of there wouldn't be much traffic.  I believe the program only injects traffic with transponder codes in the NAS (at least for the US).  This means a discrete code associated with a flight plan.  Many aircraft have local beacon codes assigned by tower or approach that wouldn't be in the NAS.  Also for your point a lot of airports don't require mode C while taxiing around.  Well, actually I think the AIM recommends this but many smaller airports/ATC don't have ASDE (ground radar).  

But if you don't fly with traffic anyway, what difference does it make if your airport is empty?  It's empty now anyway.

If you go on Flightradar24, every flight you see on the screen is injected into your sim.  You can filter it if you want to altitudes above and below your aircraft If performance is an issue.

My experience is a much higher FPS numbers and lower VAS consumption for the same amount of AI That would be generated by P3D.  The fact that P3D isn't doing the math for the AI releases the VAS needed to computer those traffic bold, and my FPS is up because, again, the CPU isn't bogged down flying AI.

It's free to try...works great in my opinion.  No cost to try but your time.

 

 

Interestingly, or worryingly, the two sets of "preview" screenshots posted don't actually show anything new at all - other than a newer interface.

All of the "functionality" present in those new shots is already present in Ultimate Traffic 2:

The Traffic generation settings i.e.target frame rate/distance to spawn ground aircraft etc is all in UT2
The tail number modifications are already in UT2
The traffic board is already in UT2
The flight map is already in UT2
The aircraft label options are already in UT2
The aircraft assignment/configuration is already in UT2

Also noted in the new screenies is:

a tab "Aircraft using generic Daedalus" (aaaargh!!)
and visible in the Addon Flight Schedule Information section the following - "A sample addon schedule is provided with utLive with 2 flights included...."!!

There's nothing on the "live" aspect at all whch I would have imagined would have been the first, and biggest, plus/selling/draw/feature of any new product.

I appreciate its early days.....I'm still hopeful, and surely there has to be a lot more to the new Ultimate Traffic not yet revealed....but after seeing these screenies I'm beginning to wonder if it's not going to simply be a rehash of UT2 for P3D (with the flight over water bug fixed etc.) which would be a huge disappointment to say the least.

Regards
Steve

Hi guys..I tried Nico's Live traffic, but abandoned it because of two main issues:
1 - No airplanes move in the taxiways in all non ASDEX airports (ex. Europe).
2 - Many times I saw airplanes flying fast above the terminals (like 1000ft) because of update issues.

Do you have these problems? Otherwise UT is my choice, as Live Traffic ruins the immersion to land on an empty airport when full of traffic in the air.

58 minutes ago, netshadoe said:

 It's empty now anyway.

It's not. I use WoAI in P3Dv3.4

Cheers, Ed

36 minutes ago, stevem72 said:

simply be a rehash of UT2 for P3D

To me it seems to be the case here.

Cheers, Ed

If it has P3d compatible  models and a full complement of up to date liveries and schedules, I will probably upgrade.

 

Anyone notice they have more aircraft running daedalus paint jobs than aircraft with real liveries? If thats gonna be the case, no thanks.

UT2 used some of the same models as WOAI and MyT 6 use (with permission  of course). Will the new version do the same?

The big advantage (as far as I am concerned) with UT2 over standard BGL based flightplans was the much better behaved AI planes at startup. It really is quite annoying to see AI planes performing "Stuka dives" because they have been incorrectly positioned when close to an airport, or approaching runways from ridiculous angles/landing short/landing long (beyond the end of the runway) etc.That particular bug with the BGL based AI system should have been sorted out a LONG time ago.

Hi,

To clarify what UTLive is about (in a short summary)...

We do not mean to cause any confusion. It is not connected to a data feed, which is limited and does not have worldwide coverage and non-airline traffic.

The actual core simulation is completely rewritten to behave very different from its predecessor.

Of course some configuration settings are the same, but that would be obviously universal to this type of product. Generic repaints can now be toggled on or off is a new option, as well as other options that are that were not part of UT2.

Now, the live aspect, or you could say "living", is that cause and effect is factored into the simulator.

UT2 was completely static. Every step was hard-set in the data. You start at Tuesday at noon, you get XYZ. You start at Tuesday at noon again, you get the exact same XYZ. If weather was different, it would not matter.

The new simulation is not preset on data points at intervals along a route. Note the size of UT2. UTLive is actually considerably smaller because of the new engine. Maybe 66% smaller.  With the simulation engine using flight plans, it helps us have more fluid control of the world you see and are flying in.

A plane may be delayed because of weather conditions in various regions. There may be maintenance delays. And this effects the entire ecosystem. When a plane is delayed, it affects its arrival, and next departure. Bad weather in a region may cause many delays in another region that has good weather, as planes have not arrived yet. So the simulator responds accordingly, even to a single flight delay.

Each time you load UTLive, the experience would be different. It is not a static experience, it is more a "living" environment,

This is how the product is being built. We want more chances for you will see a plane along the real-world route you may be flying. We want it to be more of a real experience all-around for simmers.

Thanks!