Africa traffic

[Harrier77 60]

I would like to hear positive news directly from Balthasar before I renew my subscription.

[kiek 1,215]

7 hours ago, Harrier77 said:

Same level of subscription for a lower quality of service.

That's the RT part. The quality of PSXT has improved over the last 6 months...

 

[Harrier77 60]

Just now, kiek said:

That's the RT part. The quality of PSXT has improved over the last 6 months...

I totally agree, you have made PSXT a fantastic product - thank you. What it needs now is good quality RT data, and good coverage so that PSXT's improvements can be fully appreciated.

[kiek 1,215]

4 hours ago, andre1977 said:

Giving up from RT ? No way on my personnal opinion.

Good decision Marco, thx. There is no other program that can give you this real time traffic immersion. 😉

 

[andre1977 6]

Thats true Nico.

That's one of the reason i'm here. Real time traffic and accurate. With bgl files we are always behind and i know that because i build flightplans for a Forum.

I used bgl files since ever till i got here  I used Microsoft Flight Simulator since my 16 years old. I'm 46 now.

Its another world with RealTraffic and PSXT.

 

Abranpuko,  i'm not reach too😉 that's why i have 6 months standart and 6 months professional.

I mainly fly GA and Cargo and i follow GA all the time.

Many airports are empty as GA most of the times switch off the transponder before landing. Frustrating.

Reading the manual i found that we can work the parking spots in the airports.

What i did was fill up some parking spots with permanent GA airplanes that use that airport. At least when i takeoff and land i can see some GA in the airports. In air they are all there for sure because i fly with them.

Some parts of the world traffic dessapear like in Africa. Well ,i hope that can be improved soon.

Anyway its a whole open world with real data.

Of course we still can't have everything we want but is very close to that.

Again is just my personnal opinion and i perfectely undersand Abranpuko opinion mention before.

Regards

Marco.

[Harrier77 60]

20 hours ago, kiek said:

Btw, making the decision whether or not you spend 10 pounds for a new month of traffic cannot be that difficult, I'd say. You don't have to opt for a whole year.

Hi Nico,

I have decided to give Balthasar more time to find a solution for RT, so I have started a new 3 month subscription. Hopefully he can get something working in that time.

[abranpuko 369]

i have decided to not renew my license on realtraffic. six moth are more than enough for waiting. 

i have paid for 5 month the same price than before 6 month, receiving very poor data coverage.

im sure he is working on it. 

 

[kiek 1,215]

14 hours ago, abranpuko said:

I have paid for 5 month the same price than before 6 month, receiving very poor data coverage.

Could you share with us what program you are going to use in the mean time, that fullfils your needs?

[abranpuko 369]

5 hours ago, kiek said:

Could you share with us what program you are going to use in the mean time, that fullfils your needs?

Dear Kiek, I do not understand exactly your efforts to make me consume PSXT and Realtraffic, taking into account that I, personally, am an excellent customer and I have been using them practically since they were invented by you.
That is precisely why I appreciate that you value our criticism from the positive side.

A few months ago I was able to enjoy PSXTraffic using Learning traffic with MSFS turned off. Which was fantastic to update the live traffic without spending resources on the computer. I could also access the realtraffic radar window and see the data of the planes. But now, having decided by you that this is not done, users can neither use the learning center outside of msfs nor see the traffic data with psx and learning mode. After those options that you have changed, we are all still paying the same.  
That is to say: the same in exchange for minor services. And as if that were not enough, the data coverage is much worse. So in response to your question: the problem is not that there is no other option, but that whoever asks me has only left me one: either that or nothing. That's why I don't pay: I'll wait for the solutions to come. 
im sure Balthasar is looking for better options. And im sure that freedom for users is always better to make the happy!😃 

don’t make us open MSFS to prepare the live parking scenery. 
And let us use the radar of realtraffic because we are now obligated to not use it even if we have the rights as realtraffic users. 

Thanks for hearing us!!!

[kiek 1,215]

Well, not really an answer to my question, but I take it that you have not found an equal or better alternative program to PSXT, which is reassuring.

You are repeating yourselves, so I will do that too, hence briefly:

Running a learner program without MSFS open is a thing of the past. There were good reasons to stop that, and you know that (the load on the RT servers, the weekly Offline learned airport files instead).

With PSXTraffic you can still use the RT radar screen, and you can learn the airport where you are. Destination learning is not possible anymore unfortunately in PSXTraffic, you have to switch to PSXT for that.

About 75 percent of the users are on PSXT now, and this number is increasing. That's why I decided not to undertake the work to add Learning Destination to PSXTraffic. I am on my own, and maintaining and upgrading PSXT is already almost an ( unpaid ) day job.  

You always have had, and still have, PSXT/PSXTraffic for free. If you want further more options to PSXTraffic I might ask for a sponsorship or a license fee ... 😉😉

But no kidding, more important for all users, is that Balthasar succeeds in bringing ground traffic back at a good level.

 

 

[mmcmah 413]

1 hour ago, kiek said:

Well, not really an answer to my question, but I take it that you have not found an equal or better alternative program to PSXT, which is reassuring.

You are repeating yourselves, so I will do that too, hence briefly:

Running a learner program without MSFS open is a thing of the past. There were good reasons to stop that, and you know that (the load on the RT servers, the weekly Offline learned airport files instead).

With PSXTraffic you can still use the RT radar screen, and you can learn the airport where you are. Destination learning is not possible anymore unfortunately in PSXTraffic, you have to switch to PSXT for that.

About 75 percent of the users are on PSXT now, and this number is increasing. That's why I decided not to undertake the work to add Learning Destination to PSXTraffic. I am on my own, and maintaining and upgrading PSXT is already almost an ( unpaid ) day job.  

You always have had, and still have, PSXT/PSXTraffic for free. If you want further more options to PSXTraffic I might ask for a sponsorship or a license fee ... 😉😉

But no kidding, more important for all users, is that Balthasar succeeds in bringing ground traffic back at a good level.

 

 

There is currently no alternative. Yes, I gave the options a hard look before deciding whether to renew my license. I was honestly not happy about the choices or about renewing.

As abranpuko has said, much has changed and not all of it for the best. I do understand the reasons why the changes happened and yet the underlying sense is that the  change of the stress on the RT servers was driven by a need to reduce costs. Combined with Balthasar's seeming inability to find a new ground data source, one wonders if the costs and revenues calculation simply make that impossible at this point.

His lack of communication exacerbates this sense further. He used to be quite open and engaging in his communications. Now, not nearly as much. You are left to field everyone's questions, and while we value your work so so much, that's not fair to you.

Coming back to the point of the competition, I believe that the new ATC products that are being developed may start to include traffic injection more and more. If that is the case, they may be the more apt competition, if the ATC control somewhat mimics the real world, especially as one can see those ATC programs and their traffic changing depending on the weather conditions you set.

[abranpuko 369]

6 hours ago, kiek said:

Well, not really an answer to my question, but I take it that you have not found an equal or better alternative program to PSXT, which is reassuring.

You are repeating yourselves, so I will do that too, hence briefly:

Running a learner program without MSFS open is a thing of the past. There were good reasons to stop that, and you know that (the load on the RT servers, the weekly Offline learned airport files instead).

With PSXTraffic you can still use the RT radar screen, and you can learn the airport where you are. Destination learning is not possible anymore unfortunately in PSXTraffic, you have to switch to PSXT for that.

About 75 percent of the users are on PSXT now, and this number is increasing. That's why I decided not to undertake the work to add Learning Destination to PSXTraffic. I am on my own, and maintaining and upgrading PSXT is already almost an ( unpaid ) day job.  

You always have had, and still have, PSXT/PSXTraffic for free. If you want further more options to PSXTraffic I might ask for a sponsorship or a license fee ... 😉😉

But no kidding, more important for all users, is that Balthasar succeeds in bringing ground traffic back at a good level.

 

 

Dear Kiek,
Actually, it is not that "75 percent of users are using PSXT", but that, by censoring options in PSXTraffic, we have no choice but to change.
That's what I've done myself, so, almost naively, six months later I stop and notice that I'm still paying for a professional license with these deficiencies:
1) less data coverage in thousands of airports. (practically, if I want to live in them I must fly to the capitals, and cancel destinations that I could go to before)
2) when using PSXT, I can't see the realtraffic radar window. Since the "return to the past" you speak of is impossible, then we are forced to not be able to use the Realtraffic product in its entirety. It's not our decision: it's yours.
3) If it costs you so much work to update the software: get paid. Those of us who love to pay for good work will happily do so if the service provided is up to par.
4) Realtraffic and PSXT are a wonderful marriage, but if I want to make regular flights to domestic destinations: I can't. All the "marriage" properties are useless because there is no data. The planes are not there. And, logically, paying to NOT SEE PLANES makes no sense.
5) The current competition, if that is your concern, is BeyondATC, which claims to have an option to inject planes in real time and connect them with the ATC software until they are brought to the gate. Also in the opposite direction. I like this alternative, because the delay may be a little longer, but realism is not lost.

So, we hope with joy that your "agreement" with Balthasar continues to bear good fruit, but seeing how the planes disappear before landing: it is of no use.

thank you!

[kiek 1,215]

16 hours ago, mmcmah said:

Coming back to the point of the competition, I believe that the new ATC products that are being developed may start to include traffic injection more and more.

I know, but none of them gives you real time live traffic.

The problem with real time live traffic is the costs of the data.

[kiek 1,215]

11 hours ago, abranpuko said:

Dear Kiek,
Actually, it is not that "75 percent of users are using PSXT", but that, by censoring options in PSXTraffic, we have no choice but to change.
That's what I've done myself, so, almost naively, six months later I stop and notice that I'm still paying for a professional license with these deficiencies:
1) less data coverage in thousands of airports. (practically, if I want to live in them I must fly to the capitals, and cancel destinations that I could go to before)
2) when using PSXT, I can't see the realtraffic radar window. Since the "return to the past" you speak of is impossible, then we are forced
3) If it costs you so much work to update the software: get paid. Those of us who love to pay for good work will happily do so if the service provided is up to par.
4) Realtraffic and PSXT are a wonderful marriage, but if I want to make regular flights to domestic destinations: I can't. All the "marriage" properties are useless because there is no data. The planes are not there. And, logically, paying to NOT SEE PLANES makes no sense.
5) The current competition, if that is your concern, is BeyondATC, which claims to have an option to inject planes in real time and connect them with the ATC software until they are brought to the gate. Also in the opposite direction. I like this alternative, because the delay may be a little longer, but realism is not lost.

So, we hope with joy that your "agreement" with Balthasar continues to bear good fruit, but seeing how the planes disappear before landing: it is of no use.

thank you!

@3 The donation button is on my website 😉

@5 That product will not give you real time live traffic. No holdings, no diverts, not using the right runways, no go arounds, no real live queues for landing and departure, and so on. It is canned traffic. 

It is all a matter of money, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

I stop arguing with you now, I am on vacation you know. 

I with you all the best.

 

[andre1977 6]

Hi

Today i recieved a reply from Baltasar.

Like Nico said the answer is the same.

Changes can make this things to happen. We all dislike changes and the process of change. Human condition.

Personnaly i will give the neccessary time for those changes and keep using RT/PSXT.

 

'Dear Marco, 

thanks for sharing your thoughts. It is unfortunately the case that a major traffic provider I used to have no longer wants us to have their data. I am working on a solution, but this takes time.

 Meanwhile I appreciate your patience and that of the other users.

 Kind regards

 Balthasar'

 

And have a nice holidays Nico.

End of topic for me. 🙂

Edited March 10 by andre1977