6 minutes ago, FSHud said:

This not correct - therefore I've said "it depends".

Gate is prioritized - but it can be that the gate contains airline codes or much larger radius than the aircraft wingspan.
(Unfortentatly you didn't provide simulator and scenery details).
Also - it is unknown what FSHud version you're using, because this was changed in latest versions.

Simulator is 2024. Scenery=CYYZ (Toronto). AIG, FSTraffic and FSLTL is installed but none of their injectors being active when running FSHUD (latest version). Barely any a/c at "jetway-gates", but numerous (100+) everywhere else.

28 minutes ago, Nemo said:

I thought that the FSLTL injector should not be active when FSHUD is in charge for injecting traffic?

Not the case ... as FSHUD doesn't appear to support FSLTL injection natively, like it does for AIG. See my previous post ;)

@FSHUD - is native support for FSLTL planned?

6 minutes ago, Nemo said:

Simulator is 2024. Scenery=CYYZ (Toronto). AIG, FSTraffic and FSLTL is installed but none of their injectors being active when running FSHUD (latest version). Barely any a/c at "jetway-gates", but numerous (100+) everywhere else.

This is what I'm getting at MSFS 2024 - Default CYYZ (AIG and FSLTL are running):


 

As you can see - gates are prioritized - but the size of the gate against aircraft wingspan and amount of aircrafts is also improtant.
Therefore - 120 parking aircrafts is too much and you have to adjust it accordingly (defaults of 50 are recommended):

I think it's much more effecient to investigate those issues via ticket - instead of making declarations of things that are not correct.
There is a ticket system build-in inside application where we can continue this investigation in much more effecient way.

Thank you

1 hour ago, AnkH said:

The plane on the night shot in the back looks like WizzAir. Has no gear. The plane on the runway in the back has no gear, at least not visible in this absolute mess of a picture, what resolution do you use? 

Alrighty! 😊 Pretty much how I thought it would go, but I gave it a shot.

1 hour ago, AnkH said:

And those two pictures look like absolutely manually selected to proof your point of landing gear visible far away, pls show me screenshots from daytime with proper quality from EGLL, KJFK, KLAX and other big hubs where variety is bigger. 

And more accusations...... Nope! I've seen this scenario before, and tend to doubt you would ever be satisfied.

Against my better judgement, I gave it a shot though.

1 hour ago, AnkH said:

This pixel mess is no proof for me, in the daytime shot you can see the water on ground effect for the closer plane, but the quality is so bad, you can not even tell for this plane if the landing gear is shown or not... 

Well its a 2k PNG file.

And as you're not getting any better...... I guess have a good night.

Forum glitch and double post: Ignore

Edited September 15, 2025Sep 15 by HiFlyer

@HiFlyer coincidentially, @FSHud just took over your job you failed and posted screenshots proving my point. Because on his shots, basically NONE of the AI planes have visible landing gear. But thanks to proper resolution and quality of his picture, you can actually judge it. 

Edited September 15, 2025Sep 15 by AnkH

8 minutes ago, AnkH said:

But thanks to proper resolution and quality of his picture, you can actually judge it.

His pictures are 2539 x 1055 and mine are 2258 x 1270...... 

By the way, in an earlier post, I noted that AIG planes (Which the developer seems to be using in his pictures) in my experience appear to have the lowest view distance for landing gears etc. (and the wheels also tend to fall through the tarmac much more) followed by FSTL (and their wheels hardly ever fall through the tarmac) and then FSTraffic which as the most recently updated, specifically for FSFS 2024, seems (in my experience) to fare the best in this regard.

I'm currently using FSLTL Because I feel it may have more different airline liveries than FSTraffic

 

Quote

 

FS Traffic (v1.0.8) 24/06/25

• Added MSFS 2024 compatibility
• Added additional model LODs for improved performance and MSFS 2024 compatibility (MSFS 2024 only)
• Updated lighting effects (MSFS 2024 only)

 

•  

18 minutes ago, AnkH said:

@HiFlyer coincidentially, @FSHud just took over your job you failed and posted screenshots proving my point. Because on his shots, basically NONE of the AI planes have visible landing gear. But thanks to proper resolution and quality of his picture, you can actually judge it. 

Not sure I understand you at all - what screenshot? What does it proove on my complete job failure? 🙂

1 hour ago, Adamski_NZ said:

Not the case ... as FSHUD doesn't appear to support FSLTL injection natively, like it does for AIG. See my previous post 😉

@FSHUD - is native support for FSLTL planned?

FSHud does support FSLTL and any other traffic add-on that works directly with MSFS - please watch Traffic Settings video that explains it:

 

Edited September 15, 2025Sep 15 by FSHud

Although the video probably covers it, the short answer is that for FSLTL:

1. Set Simulator traffic to Enable in the FSHud traffic settings.
2. Do not check any of AIG, BGL or External, unless you want to take traffic from those sources as well.
3. Do run the FSLTL injector.

In this way, FSLTL injects traffic into the simulator, FSHud 'intercepts' that traffic, removes it, and creates a duplicate of it which it controls fully.

Another tip - A traffic source which injects traffic successfully to the simulator without FSHud running can be made to work with FSHud by using the above settings. The volume of traffic may be different, it may appear at slightly different times and places, due to FSHud controlling it not the simulator AI traffic engine, but you should see traffic nevertheless.

Edited September 15, 2025Sep 15 by ConstVoid
spelling

1 hour ago, FSHud said:

Not sure I understand you at all - what screenshot? What does it proove on my complete job failure? 🙂

Ehm, your CYYZ screenshots above? None of the AI planes have visible landing gear while standing at the gates...

@HiFlyer interesting, it might be (or must be) related to the models itself then and different between the models from different sources. Good to know. Interestingly, according to the screenshots from FSHud, he at least partially has AI models from JustFlight on his screenshot, and the total absence of landing gear for all shown models tell me, that also JustFlight AI models suffer from the same issue (although maybe to a lesser extent). And no, at least the picture visual.jpg has a resolution of 3680x1529... but anyway, if you do not see a difference like night and day regarding clarity, definition and details in his screenshots vs. yours, it might explain why missing landing gears dont bother you 😉 Dont get me wrong on this point, it is one of those things that the moment you start noticing it, you cant unsee it anymore. So be happy if you do not see it or you consider it as negligible, all that bothers me is if people claim that it does not HAPPEN on their end, because it obviously does...

2 hours ago, Adamski_NZ said:

Not the case ... as FSHUD doesn't appear to support FSLTL injection natively, like it does for AIG. See my previous post 😉

@FSHUD - is native support for FSLTL planned?

Also, we've updated our traffic settings manual:
https://www.fshud.com/site/knowledge/traffic-settings-v2

25 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Ehm, your CYYZ screenshots above? None of the AI planes have visible landing gear while standing at the gates...

@HiFlyer interesting, it might be (or must be) related to the models itself then and different between the models from different sources. Good to know. Interestingly, according to the screenshots from FSHud, he at least partially has AI models from JustFlight on his screenshot, and the total absence of landing gear for all shown models tell me, that also JustFlight AI models suffer from the same issue (although maybe to a lesser extent). And no, at least the picture visual.jpg has a resolution of 3680x1529... but anyway, if you do not see a difference like night and day regarding clarity, definition and details in his screenshots vs. yours, it might explain why missing landing gears dont bother you 😉 Dont get me wrong on this point, it is one of those things that the moment you start noticing it, you cant unsee it anymore. So be happy if you do not see it or you consider it as negligible, all that bothers me is if people claim that it does not HAPPEN on their end, because it obviously does...

This is how MSFS renders traffic, if you come closer you do see landing gear (I can provide screenshots). 🙂
FSHud has zero control on how aircraft model is rendered by MSFS and what parts of the model are rendered - so it's nice to move all of the shames to FSHud by saying it's my job failure 😏

5 minutes ago, FSHud said:

so it's nice to move all of the shames to FSHud by saying it's my job failure 😏

You completely misunderstand this. Nobody ever said or wrote that it is a FSHud issue, but there was a discussion going on because some people (e.g. HiFlyer) are claiming that they do not suffer from this issue and I asked for proof. Coincidentially you then showed screenshots proving it 😉 I am totally aware of the fact that it is a MSFS2024 issue/bug, but as long as people claim that they do not suffer from it (although they do), nothing will be done about it. Sadly. 

7 minutes ago, AnkH said:

You completely misunderstand this. Nobody ever said or wrote that it is a FSHud issue, but there was a discussion going on because some people (e.g. HiFlyer) are claiming that they do not suffer from this issue and I asked for proof. Coincidentially you then showed screenshots proving it 😉 I am totally aware of the fact that it is a MSFS2024 issue/bug, but as long as people claim that they do not suffer from it (although they do), nothing will be done about it. Sadly. 

Sorry, my bad 🙃 - because "...FSHud just took over your job you failed and posted screenshots proving my point."  looked for me like it's an "FSHud job failure" 😁