>I personally still think that PAI is the best overall package>out there, given terms of coverage and expandability. It isn't>the best in terms of frame rates but none of the more frame>rate friendly packages come close to the coverage or ease of>installation for expansions. How does PAI compares to MT2006 in regard of framerates? This is important. I run a lot of addons planes ASv6 scenery RC and my performence is already strained.Which are the packages you call more frame rate friendly?

If you talk to the people who tweak AI for days on end to get it "perfect", they go around replacing each aircraft in turn with ones downloaded from the main site file libraries which are, apparently, more frame rate friendly. I haven't bothered.I don't and have never used any of the CD packages, so cannot compare those with PAI. I have used the downloaded MyTraffic Military package and wasn't that impressed with the visual models unfortunately (especially the paint, which I found totally unrealistic) so I don't have it installed any more.Ian P.

Hello All, Well, I've heard so much lately about the ADOBE traffic and AIA, that I removed My Traffic from my FS9, (moved the main file to another location and then removed the files and modules), and then downloaded and installed the two disk ADOBE.Even with my system, (all sliders fullright, 3.4 P4 oc'd to 3.8), anything more than 30% traffic brought the frames per second down to a mid teen crawl . . . with the ADOBE set at 50%, I'm in the mid twentys and the Ai traffic is beautiful in paint and actually acts like real aircraft. Any other simular reactions?Best,Clayhttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...ers/Dopke01.jpgClayton T. Dopke (Clay)Major, USAF (retired)"Drac"