Sign in to follow this  
FlyingsCool

Freeway Traffic

Recommended Posts

Since SP1, I have started playing more in FSX since my system can see much of the eye candy without a huge perf hit.Anyway, while flying over Houston in the FS Baron I noticed that the traffic (set at 100%) was moving pretty fast. So I clocked it over Interstate 10 by matching its speed from spot view. It appeared to be moving at 78 to 80 kia which I think translates to over 90 mph (correct?).Living here (Houston) I realize that there are some very "hurried" drivers but I don't think it is this bad.... ;-)Cheers,MK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Seems about right.Lot of reckless drivers on the streets of FSX. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a way of reducing the speed of traffic in FSX (or there was with the demo anyway) but I can't remember at the moment how it's done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>There is a way of reducing the speed of traffic in FSX (or>there was with the demo anyway) but I can't remember at the>moment how it's done.Yes I wanted to know that too. The traffic is moving way to fast. I know there was a way in the demo but I have'nt seen the entry in the cfg file for FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>What was your ground speed?-that would be what you would need>to know the relative speed of the cars-indicated airpspeed or>even your true airspeed would not be enough.>>The speeds you give however are the typical speed in the>Detroit area :-lol.>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgNot sure of my ground speed at the time but I was no more than 100 feet above the traffic if that matters. This definitely was not a "scientific" experiment and I just wondered if anybody else thought the traffic was moving a little too fast. If it moved this fast in real life it would not take me an hour to drive the 20 miles to my home from the office."FS Traffic Jam" would be "as real as it gets" in the Houston area... ;-)Cheers,Monte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found the fix for slower traffic. Haven't tested it yet to see if it still works but here it is. Credit goes to GrayGB:"Hi All:go to: C:Documents and SettingsAdministratorApplication DataMicrosoftFSXDemoLWcfg.XMLEdit this file at the bottom line as shown here:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-16" ?>- Lists objects and settings to be used by living world featuresLWSettings.xml- - - - Use 50 here; default of 100 was too fastHope this helps!GaryGB"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ill try that although while searching for the solution at the same time I found the max mph setting in the sim.cfg file for each vehicle in fsx/simobjects/groundvehicles/veh_....Testing your solution first altough maybe it would be interseting to have them at different speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the full version format is spb not xml. But I'm guessing you can decompile it using spb2xml.zip, then recompile it using an sdk tool - not at that step yet. I'm gonna try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I just decompiled lwcfg.spb to xml format with spb2xml, changed all the freeway trafficspeed values to 50 instead of 100 using notepad, then recompiled it with the sdk core utility simpropcompiler using this command. lc0277 over at fsdeveloper is the source:simpropcompiler 2spb -symbols X:FSXpropdefs*.xml LWcfg.xml LWcfg.spb I actually just copied all the files I needed and the propdefs directory into my hard drive's root, so I wouldn't have to mess with long ~1 dos paths. The new file is the same size as the original in Application DataMicrosoftFSX (there's also a backup in the fsx main directory, but I assume fsx uses the former one). Testing it now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright guys. I tested the file by racing some freeway traffic with the trike and the automobiles are now going roughly 60mph (edit: make that 67mph), which is about right. Here's the file if you want to try it out. Scanned for bugs and so forth. Again, put it in the same directory as your active fsx.cfg. http://files-upload.com/286740/lwcfg.spb.html Ideal would be different speeds for different road types now that we have Ultimate Terrain. Also some craziness on the Autobahn! :) NEW EDIT: Um, I just tried switching the file back to make sure there was a difference and there isn't. I even tried copying the alternate in the fsx main directory. So... I'm thinking the op may have overestimated. On my system the speed seems close to correct for highways at least, maybe a bit fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your file worked fine. Too bad we can't have a few freight trains moving along the tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you are in the air-you are a part of the airmass. Therefore, your groundspeed is what you need to calculate the speed of the cars-not your indicated airspeed. Would suggest you use the groundspeed readout on the gps and not your indicated airspeed to truly find the speed the cars are going, and if they are going too fast.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,A couple of weeks ago, I post a "quick and dirty" method to reduce AI ground vehicles and boats speed, waiting for a more thorough one by the gurus.The post was the following: (in this forum)402021, "adjusting ground vehicles and boats speed"Hope this helpsRegardsFulvio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there will be when the new train sim comes out...>> Your file worked fine.> Too bad we can't have a few freight trains moving along the>tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. Do you think this speed is dependent on the speed of your processor? I just checked out how fast the autos on my 1.86 GHz Pentium M laptop, and it appears that with the default LWcfg.spb file, the cars are going about 46 kias. And setting that value to 50 brought them down to about 32 kias at 200 asl, 29.92.Not a rigorous test, but I'm only looking for +/- 15 mph.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My post above seemed to work for me. I slowed all the minis down to 60mph and they were all definetly slower than other traffic. I noticed they cause a little bunch up of traffic also as cars in the same lane will go as slow as the car in front. Also the various lanes going at different speeds seemed more realistic.I havent been able to test it thoroughly however as I broke a capacitor off my video card and it appears it was the FSX capacitor as its the only thing that doesnt work now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have to ask Allen, perhaps he slowed the traffic down with Ultimate Terrain/X? When I measure the speeds of autos on the freeways in Nashua, NH, they are going about 42 kias (~48 mph) as I am taxiing on the ground with them. Really too slow actually. Average traffic speed should be about 50% higher. But I imagine that's a good speed since there are probably not per road speed limits in FSX (yet), so that makes for a decent secondary road speed.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas, On a seperate note... I have downloaded UTX and considering purchasing it. Is it a worthy addon? I leep seeing mixed reviews about blurries.THanx,Monte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the answer to your question would depend mostly on your expectations, your hardware, and your current performance. More information on these three items would help me answer your question better.Is it a worthy addon? Absolutely. It was indespensible in FS9 in my opinion, and I believe that to still be true. FSX is much better by default than FS9 default is, and FSX stands on its own fairly well in the area of the U.S. that I do most of my flying (Northeast), but UT/X adds all the water, coastlines, and roads everywhere, puts auto traffic on way more roads, which is just amazing when you see it, and adds lots of other details as well to the point I don't want to do without it. And if you live in other areas of the country, the change in scenery for the better is very dramatic. Even in the Northeast, the increase in quality of the landclass of UT/X really helps. I've stopped using the two other landclass products I have as they don't represent the populated areas as well as UT/X. That's not a knock against them, just my opinion at the moment. I'm sure they will get better. The type of flying I do is mostly low level VFR/IFR GA flying. You didn't mention what type of flying you like to do.By itself, it is possible there will be some performance hit due to Ultimate Terrain, but, for the most part, I have found that hit to be minimal if at all. The biggest hit will be due to the increased auto traffic, which you can reduce by turning down the auto traffic slider. I'm running my auto traffic slider on the high end desktop at 35% and there is traffic everywhere!For the last few months I have been testing Ultimate Terrain/X on an E6600/nVidia 8800 GTS 640 MB/2GB system overclocked to 3.34 GHz, an AMD 2500/ATI 9800 pro/1GB overclocked to an AMD 3200, and a 1.86 GHz Pentium/ATI X300 64 MB/2GB laptop, and I have not noticed any effect on blurries of UT/X on any of the systems. Obviously, the high end desktop performs ten times better than the laptop, which is more suitable for FS9; but FSX/UTX is usable on the laptop as long as I set the sliders appropriately, and the slider setup is the same with and without UT/X. The AMD machine performs admirably. If I keep the flying traffic turned off, I can crank the scenery sliders on the AMD machine and I have not seen any blurries problem. If I want flying traffic, I'd have to compromise on some scenery sliders. I imagine your machine is somewhere in between?I believe that the people who are having blurries problems are either pushing their machines too hard, or have other issues with their setup (i.e. incorrect memory setup, or other issues). I imagine also that flying at 600 knots at 3000 ft will also increase your susceptability to blurries. But I've been flying at up to 350 knots at low level and only occasionally seen the high end desktop have trouble catching up in a pretty populated city (Boston). And that was with all sliders cranked and the autogen defaults set at 5500/3000. The issue was easily fixed by turning down a slider or two a notch.So, if you already have problems with blurries, UT/X won't make it better. But smart FSX setup should help you avoid any problems. Is the product worthy? In my opinion it is!Give me some more information on your setup, expectations, and how you like to fly, and I can give you a more informed answer that fits your needs better. Sorry for all the exclamation points, but I'm really happy with it.Thanks!Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info. I went ahead and purchased and as you stated, the addon has many possibilities. System is Gigabyte MB, Intel 6600 CPU, 2 Gig Memory and 8800 GTX V-Card. I really like the point lighting at night and additional traffic everywhere... textures are fantastic.Thanks Again,MK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your welcome.I especially love recognizing landmarks as I fly (golf courses, parks, graveyards, etc.). You may want to check out the different point lighting options under UTSetup Menu, Ultimate Terrain/Change Lighting Effects Brightness. The default is 100% (4 lights/light). I happen to like the 25% option, especially when used with the optional halo.bmp that Allen provides (I assume it's in the released version). Look in the FSXFlight One SoftwareUTUsaFsxTEXTUREHALOUT directory, back up your old version of Halo.bmp in FSXTexture and try out the replacement file. Some of the testers liked it (me), others thought it was too dim.In my opinion, FSX's lights are WAY too bright. This provides a much more muted option.There is one problem in that the runway lights are rather dim when you get close to an airport, but I think that can be adjusted for the better by modifying the effects.cfg file. There are some entries in there for adjusting lighting brightness as you get closer to an object, and I want to test some various things with it.Now if somebody would just make some textures that reduce or remove altogether the glowing ground and water textures at night.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this