>A real issue, which you know if you've worked with UT, is that>the FS world and the real world differ enough to make a>perfect product impossible. Too many missing airports and too>little data in the world aviation databases.>>That's where My Traffic excels - they work with the FS world.>Can I infer from the above abstract My Traffic is a superior package to UT? Could you please elaborate and comment some more on the above?Thanks.

I find all of the available commercial packages pure rip-offs. Ridiculously ugly models and/or ludicrous flight plans. The only way is to use the work of dedicated painters and schedulers, who spent many hours on minute details to give us the best AI traffic available! A thousands thanks to FSPainter, Aardvark, EvolveAI and all the many many others involved in this effort, including the compilers of WoAI packages.==Marten:Weber==P-D920 oc3.64MHz 2GB RAM WinXP ATI X1900+1024MB 2xSATA250 2xVIEWSONIC 19"Best AI available today: www.world-of-ai.com

Thank's for your thoughts!I'm just curious why there are people complaining about the 3rd subpage of the weather-page in the FMC is missing but find it OK to see wrong airlines at their home airport.Maybe I'm hypercritical because I'm working at an airport (that is LOWW - which is, btw, why Live Traffic X, although a great product, makes no sense for me outside the US) and know the airlines and their schedules. But then I don't care if flight xxx departs at 0915 or at 1100 as long as aircraft model and liveriy is up to date (in Traffic 2005 I found aircraft/liveries that are not in use for at least 10 years.Talkimg about WorldodAI, there are lots of single airline-packs but I miss a "superpack" to install everything at once which would agin reduce the manual work.Martin

I remember reading in another forum somewhere about the performance hit of the jetways, and that they can be turned off for AI aircraft. Is there anyone that can share the modification of AI files that turns them off?

I've seen SWA aircraft at KDFW in several packages - payware and freeware pirate collections.I try not to be too picky because aviation is a fast changing world - never static.But seeing an SWA aircraft at KDFW - that blows the illusion for me instantly.

Super packs are not going to happen.The two biggest reasons are rights issues and updating.There are several models makers who are not going to allow their models to be used in automated install packages. Others will not allow their models to be used with models from other people.Same with repaints and flight plans. Perhaps the most amazing part is that groups like World of AI can actually convince enough people to participate.Secondly, updating is a nightmare the larger the pack gets.Ultimate Traffic is/was the only source of consistent world wide flight plans. They purchased data from OAG or a similar source and after a tremendous amount of work - put together worldwide flight plans for one week - for every airline in the schedule in the world.At their best MRAI only had about 200 airlines in one schedule season - and a lot of majors were missing.Let's take the current World of AI offering as an example.130 airlines - schedule dates from 05 Summer to 07 Summer - though most are 06/07 Winter.260 mb download size.This week they released one new package - Silk Air and an update to Singapore Airlines.The only way to manage updates and new airlines would be a totally automated intaller and not allowing you to move aircraft around, substitute repaints, add repaints, substitute newer schedules.The AI community isn't going to accept that.And at that practice you would have to have:WoA Summer 07 Pack - 260MBWoA Week 1 Update - WoA Week 2 Update - WoA Week 3 Update - WoA Week 4 Update - WoA Week 5 Update - WoA Week 6 Update - The end user has to keep track of each update and ensure they are only applied in order.The second option is everytime they update a schedule, a repaint or add an airline - force everyone to remove all the previous installed aircraft and traffic files - redownload the entire 260mb pack and reintall.People won't do that every week.I've seen / have all the pirate packages - and not a single one comes close to the consistency of My Traffic, Traffic or Ultimate Traffic. They have their good points - but they all have terrible holes/ inaccuracies.

Comment out the exits section in the AI aircraft.cfg file.

Ultimate Traffic uses real world schedule data from a source like OAG.Those real schedules and UT schedules have flights into airport like Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands and RJBE - Kobe Airport in Japan.Neither of those airports exists in FS2004 or FSX. Bikini because there is no airport data available. Kobe because it is too new.For Ultimate Traffic, we have to find a substitute or make a correlation so that the fare system IATA code can be matched up with a navigation system ICAO code. There is a whole UT stick thread devoted to these airport assignments, the freeware packages to add the airports, etc - necessary to make the flight plans compile flights with those airports as a leg.My Traffic doesn't bother. Skymark Airlines home base is Kobe - RJBE. I assume that MYT flies the airline out of Osaka or Kansai.Air Marshall Islands would only fly to Kwajalein and flights to all the small islands would not be represented.It doesn't make one better or worse - just a different concept of how FS AI traffic should work.As noted elsewhere, I personally prefer real world schedules - so UT is my "base" AI program. The vast majority of my AI is World of AI and Project AI packages (about 220 airlines) with many, many individual airlines added (maybe 400).But since I'm likely to fly in Peru one day, China the next, Africa the third and the US or Europe sometimes - I use UT to have all the other airlines (another 400-500) in those regions flying.As I've also noted - I own all three for FS2004, and will purchase them for FSX.I keep them ready in a default state when I need / want to test airports. I also have two other setups for PAI and WoA.So five testing AI worlds and one personal flying AI world.It's not as hard as it sounds, but it did take me a few trys to get the organization worked out.

Thanks for the detailed comment, Rfields.