Any comments form people who have this would be welcome. Would like to add a little more variety to msfs. Thanks.

If you are flying mostly tubeliners and care about immersion in regards to the aircraft models (Simple traffic only has the MSFS default ones, those 3 or 4 fake ones with the pointy noses, and only paints them with liveries), I'd rather recommend the freeware AIG (has about 50+ different aircraft models from real life). It is however a tad more complicated to install and use in comparison to Simple Traffic, which is basically drag&drop. (Sorry if you already know that and wanted to hear only from Simple Traffic users)

16 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

If you are flying mostly tubeliners and care about immersion in regards to the aircraft models (Simple traffic only has the MSFS default ones, those 3 or 4 fake ones with the pointy noses, and only paints them with liveries), I'd rather recommend the freeware AIG (has about 50+ different aircraft models from real life). It is however a tad more complicated to install and use in comparison to Simple Traffic, which is basically drag&drop. (Sorry if you already know that and wanted to hear only from Simple Traffic users)

Thanks for the response. i appreciate al comments. I'll check out AIG.

3 hours ago, dbw1 said:

Any comments form people who have this would be welcome. Would like to add a little more variety to msfs. Thanks.

I'm very happy w/ Simple Traffic, even w/ it's limitations.  Many models do not employ the pointy nose issue which I believe Asobo will update at some point as it's just too easy to do, and so these to me are kind of a placeholder.  But they're not show stoppers, for me.  ST also incorporates small GA aircraft and I don't think AIG does yet last I heard.  I find I don't stare at liveries in the airport so if the occasional pointy nose is there I'm simply not going to notice it because I'm very focused on pre-flight prep, taxi, TO and landing, etc.  I use MSFS Real-Time Online traffic and it, combined w/ Simple Traffic, is a massive improvement over nothing, or simply using RTOT w/o ST.  ST also matches correct livery w/ actual real flight present using RTOT in MSFS. 

If you're after the most authentic, and arguably the most difficult to install and maintain, then AIG is a good choice.  If you want simple and effective major improvement, one-click install and occasional one-click update, and can live w/ the odd pointy nose, then Simple Traffic is a good choice.

Here I am shadowing actual SWA flight 1308 in my own SWA livery in the B78X and you can see in the distance ST's matching correct livery to actual real world flight:

A bit far away to see but from a practical standpoint having the bodies not yet be represented as accurately this just doesn't come into consciousness for me while using ST.   

 

 

 

 

"... It is however a tad more complicated to install and use"

hehe... yeah, sure.

3 hours ago, dbw1 said:

Any comments form people who have this would be welcome. Would like to add a little more variety to msfs. Thanks.

Just get it!

Here we go again with another Simple Traffic vs AIG thread. It seems like every week one pops up in the forum and about 3 or 4 regarding how AIG TC doesn't work or is broken. I have nothing against AIG. I tried it like many here and do not wish what happened to me on my worst enemy. I'd say that it's the most time consuming ap I've ever tried for MSFS. If you like to waste time, then go right ahead and try it.

If you want something that is a one click install, just works without having to spend hours trying to get it to function, Simple Traffic is the way to go. If you want to twist yourself into a pretzel, and watch your blood pressure go up,  try AIG. 

Edited April 3, 20224 yr by Bobsk8

28 minutes ago, DJJose said:

Here we go again with another Simple Traffic vs AIG thread. It seems like every week one pops up in the forum and about 3 or 4 regarding how AIG TC doesn't work or is broken. I have nothing against AIG. I tried it like many here and do not wish what happened to me on my worst enemy. I'd say that it's the most time consuming ap I've ever tried for MSFS. If you like to waste time, then go right ahead and try it.

It's not for everyone, that's for sure.

I have Simple Traffic and am very happy with it in the same way that @Noel is happy with it. It works, there is no tweaking required and you get a decent variety of aircraft liveries.

Agree with the above comment.

I like Simple Traffic. Suits me just fine.  Difference is like the difference between a bland looking generated generic type airport and a good custom made one. I would hate to go back to MSFS default liveries.

If I have a criticism it's that Simple Traffic says that the AIRCRAFT TRAFFIC TYPE setting can be set to REAL TIME or AI OFFLINE but using the former with ST leaves you with all but empty airports in my experience.  But that might be an MSFS traffic injection issue rather than Simple Traffic's problem as such.

So I use AI OFFLINE for AIRCRAFT TRAFFIC TYPE and that gives me best results.  Going to different places seems to produce the right majorities of airlines.  Dubai International is loaded with many Emirates planes as you would hope.  At US airports you'll see US planes.  At London you'll find lots of BA aircraft and so on.  It may not be 100% accurate (odd exceptions, not accurately reflect live actual situations at real airports) but Simple Traffic does what it says on the tin.  For me that's enough, at least for now.  Want more? Go to AIG.  It's great that there are choices!

19 minutes ago, Humble Jim said:

AI OFFLINE but using the former with ST leaves you with all but empty airports in my experience.  But that might be an MSFS traffic injection issue rather than Simple Traffic's problem as such.

This is not, I repeat is not, the case here and I only use RT traffic.  I could barely get out of EDDF the other day--4th in line to takeoff.  I wonder if we're set up differently perhaps?

 

Edited April 3, 20224 yr by Noel

I have to agree with Noel and the others: Simple Traffic is dead simple to use, works very well at most airports I've flown out / in to and when checked again FlightAware is nearly spot on accurate with many flights I see in sim.  Flying out of Mumbai two days ago I waited nearly 15 minutes or so in line at runway 28 to take off.  The three flights in front of me and the ones landing I found in FlightAware.  Too cool considering the amount off effort involved in using the product.  It appeared that not every flight was present but enough were that it really created a living environment.  I've had this experience at many airports worldwide.  I tried AIG and once I got it to display traffic it was cool, however the installation and verification was so time consuming it wasn't worth it for the payoff so to speak.  I went back to Simple Traffic after reading a post from Noel actually and haven't looked back since.

 

 

Best solution? Simple:

1 - Using AiG only to install liveries and models that you want, without using the traffic injecting.

+

2 - Using the real traffic provided officialy by MSFS.

=

You get the realistic and real time traffic (15 mins delay, check on Flightradar24) with the real liveries if you downloaded them wit AiG.

 

Enjoy.

 

8 minutes ago, Noel said:

This is not, I repeat is not, the case here and I only use RT traffic.  I could barely get out of EDDF the other day--4th in line to takeoff.  I wonder if we're set up differently perhaps?

 

That's actually a pretty good picture (the first one) to help people decide if they need AIG for immersion or if they can be happy with Simple Traffic. Wizzair doesn't fly to EDDF, but that's probably not something most people would notice because at least it's a pretty big carrier in Europe that can be seen in a lot of places. But those two AirAsia A320s...? Air Asia is a low cost carrier from Malaysia that only flies the A320-family (and those obviously not in Europe). That's would be like Ryanair flying to Hong Kong...