I was one of those who downloaded and installed on day one and experienced some of the issues many had including no aircraft in skies while airborne, no aircracft at arrival airport (despite destination being entered), lots of static aircraft but nothing moving at airports etc.

Have these issues been addressed in the update?

10 hours ago, BWBriscoe said:

I was one of those who downloaded and installed on day one and experienced some of the issues many had including no aircraft in skies while airborne, no aircracft at arrival airport (despite destination being entered), lots of static aircraft but nothing moving at airports etc.

Have these issues been addressed in the update?

To an extent yes.  The initial update has improved things for a lot of users although we're aware some are still experiencing issues.  We're doing what we can not to ascertain some commonality between the set-ups of those still struggling.  The dev team are working on various options right now and we're targeting next week to get the next update live for everyone.  Hope that helps.

2 hours ago, JustFlightScott said:

To an extent yes.  The initial update has improved things for a lot of users although we're aware some are still experiencing issues.  We're doing what we can not to ascertain some commonality between the set-ups of those still struggling.  The dev team are working on various options right now and we're targeting next week to get the next update live for everyone.  Hope that helps.

Unfortunately it doesn't seem like it. I sat at EGLL for 20 minutes at 1420 local time with traffic at 100%. I saw four aircraft taxi out to the runway (nothing taxied for the first ten minutes). Three airarcft atttempted to land; two did go arounds for no reason (no aircraft on the runway). 

Compared to FSLTL, I have a very decent amount of traffic...a queue of 3/4 aircraft deep for each runway.

I went from no traffic on the initial release to having traffic after the update. I flew YSSY-NZAA last night, and while there wasn't a LOT of traffic, there was indeed traffic at departure, enroute and destination. I haven't tried any of the large airports like KLAX or EGLL yet.

I would update and see for yourself.

,I fly all the time the PMDG 600 or 800 series,  my airport that I am taking off from for KLAX, always has traffic or KEWR, takes about 10 minutes to load up, before takeoffs and landings will start,, which people have to remember that, actually says something like that in the manual, when I arrive at my destination airport, I have traffic there as well.

The main problem, NO TRAFFIC while I am cruising to my destination.  I could be flying at 30,000 feet for 2 hours, and the skies are completely empty.  For example a couple of days ago did a short flight from KDCA into KJFK at around 5:00pm,  this northeast corridor is one of the busiest in the US. I had traffic at both airports, but the skies were completely empty

It still has lots of issues.  I hate myself for purchasing it on release day, but we live and learn I guess.

Yesterday I did three flights after using the new updated software.  Two flights showed AI Traffic at the destination airport, but all the planes are static at the gate.  It takes a good ten minutes for the first plane to start taxiing to the runway.  I did see a few planes at cruise, but it's way less than what it should be.  What also bothers me is that there is absolutely no traffic shown at airports when you fly over them.  Overall I'm pretty disappointed with the product, especially since FSLTL was free and offered a more "immersive" experience for me at the moment.

27 minutes ago, TWerner said:

Overall I'm pretty disappointed with the product, especially since FSLTL was free and offered a more "immersive" experience for me at the moment.

Not that THIS was already pretty obvious months prior to release... Just Flight focussed each and every preview on eye candy only and I was asking them several times to give more info on how the traffic then finally works and if they were able to get around the bugs of the MSFS AI engine, never got any useful reply. 

So for me it was clear from the very early previews onwards that FS Traffic will offer good looking models at most, everything else maximum on par with the freeware solutions already available. And that is exactly what we have now, not surprised...

Also a very, very intelligent move of FSLTL to quickly offer an option to prioritize the FS Traffic models if having this addon installed. Personally, I am reasonably considering buying FS Traffic just for the use as nice looking AI model resource. But then, I already have the full AIG installation, way more diverse even if not equally good looking...

It would be interesting if FS Traffic and FSLTL could get together and merge the best of both programs together, now that would be worth the money.

Well they have.  In the latest version of FSLTL you can use FS Traffic models as priority.  So you will have real-time traffic and use the best models which increase FPS.  Good enough?

If the just flight fleet folder is in the community folder will FSLTL automatically use the FSLTL models?

No.  You need to select the option to use it when running the FSLTL config (last question).

6 hours ago, AnkH said:

So for me it was clear from the very early previews onwards that FS Traffic will offer good looking models at most, everything else maximum on par with the freeware solutions already available. And that is exactly what we have now, not surprised...

This ^^
As long as MSFS doesn't sort out it's AI bugs, none of these "traffic" programs will work decently and if payable are just a waste of money.
And models are just models, some may offer a bit better looking ones but models don't make traffic work: unneeded go arounds (you can spot more in 15 mins in MSFS then there are in real life in a whole year), low flying aircraft, blocked runways/taxiways, continue rolling past the end of the runway and then miles into town, cutting corners over the grass etc...the list of buggy traffic just goes on and on with nothing in sight 2,5 years after release. None of these programs has been able to correct that. Instead, they should call themselves model add-ons instead of traffic add-ons.