FSX Traffic Files

[Guest Lee]

I'm currently working on a traffic file decompiler for FSX. However, all I have to work with is the demo traffic file. I don't have access to the beta. While I am finding the differences between that file and FS9 traffic files, I don't know if the FSX beta files or the actual FSX traffic files will be the same as the demo.In any case, my initial goal is to create a decompiler that can be used with the traffic compiler in the FSX SDK. It will also decompile FS9 traffic bgl files into the SDK text file format. At least then I'll be able to transfer my existing FS9 traffic files over to FSX. Eventually a compiler and Windows front end application will follow. I contacted Lee Swordy and he has provided me with the traffic tools source. Based on his reply, I don't believe he is going to continue upgrades on the application, hence the reason he has provided the source.If possible, can someone who has the FSX beta take a look at the traffic SDK and let me know if the text file structures used for the traffic compiler has changed from FS9? Is it still a set of text files? Is it now in an XML format? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.The other Lee (Steffensen)

[mgh 89]

I haven't seen the FSX EULA. If it has the same wording as FS9 then you are probably in breach of the EULA."Limitations on Reverse Engineering, Decompilation, and Disassembly. You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE PRODUCT, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation."

[Guest Lee]

You make a good point. But then isn't this entire forum topic based on a product that does exactly the same thing? Doesn't traffic tools decompile the FS9 traffic files today? And lets not even bring up AFCAD or many of the other fine freeware BGL decompilers that we all use to modify existing scenery?Based on current precidence by the fact that BGL decompilers have been created and have been used over the last several years, I wonder what activity is expressly permitted. Did Microsoft come down on Lee Swordy? Is that why he no longer supports his software?I don't really want this thread to turn into a legal discussion on whether users have the right to modify existing Flight Simulator scenery. All I want to do is be able to transfer my existing FS9 traffic files to FSX and maybe give something back to the community.Lee Steffensen

[RFields5421 1]

The TrafficToolBox SDK includes with the file planet beta does not have example input files for aircraft flights.It does have example input files for boat routes and boat terminals.The descriptive writeups in the HTML document look almost identical to the FS2004 versions.There is a new input optional parameter / file - countries - where registration numbers can be defined for autogenerated traffic files.Though it looks like it will perpetuate the N-zero issue (For non-US based folks - no US registration can have a zero as the first number - despite what you see in dozens of repaints and flight plans in the library).The Dump Airports feature for airport data is almost the same as the FS2004 file - though of course the default GATE parking sizes have changed and the user and AI aircraft no longer use model radius for their parking placement - they use half of the wing_span= value in the aircraft.cfg airplane_geometry section.The default Small, Med and Heavy gate radius values are 18M, 23M and 36M in FSX.I have already created a dump file of all the default FSX airports - 24,490 of them.Working on a comparison of deleted and added airports - and those which have changed ICAO/Designators.Send me a PM and I'll send you the 1MB zip.

[Guest qurious]

The FSX Demo and Beta traffic bgl file formats are almost the same as FS9. Sections 1 and 2 are identical (airport and aircraft data). Sections 3 and 4 used in FS9 have been replaced by 5 and 6 (for flight and traffic cell data). The data in these sections is almost identical to FS9. The difference is the departure and arrival time data as far as I can tell so far.

[Guest qurious]

I'm not sure I understand the N-zero issue, I just ran the TrafficDatabaseBuilder and some of the tail numbers it generated were N0579U and N0342B. Does this mean the N-zero issue you mention has been fixed?What I can't get to work is custom routes (I think they call them schedules now). TrafficDatabaseBuilder reads the input files ok but does not create a bgl file. Did you get the /Schedules= parameter to work?

[RFields5421 1]

N-zero-five-seven-nine-U is not a legal US aircraft registration number.Any aircraft registration which is N-zero is invalid.Any program which generates such a registration, or any flight plan with such a registration is ..... poor.I haven't had time to go into the SDK in depth - working on a FS2004 AI package release right now.However, I do know, thanks to Tom Gibson, that the BGLComp SDK is not functional due to issues in the .XSD file.Many of the SDK's may have similar missing pieces to prevent beta testers from working with them before the release.What is your log file say when you ran the TrafficDatabaseBuilder ?

[Guest qurious]

In that case the N-zero problem is still there. And according to the SDK docs the country file will not be able to fix this either.What is possible though is to write a post-processing program that goes though the generated bgl file to replace N-zero with something else. That would not be hard to do.And all the log file says is:countries.dat : Reading country data...airports.dat : Reading airport data...I hope the final release will have updated docs and some sample files for the TrafficDatabaseBuilder

[Guest MikeS]

Check the email you have associated with this forum...Mikewww.aimadeeasy.comwww.flightontario.comI'm confused. Wait...maybe I'm not!

[mgh 89]

Unfortunately it is a legal issue, regardless of your wants.There are often posts in these forums from people complaining that their rights have been infringed, usually by having their work uploaded to another site without permission, or by others using it. Quite properly, the infringement is universally condemned by other posters.Whether or not decompliers etc have been around for yeas doesan't alter the fact that they infringe Microsoft's rights.Why, I wonder, is infringing some peoples' rights condemned while infringing Microsoft's is acceptable?

[tgibson 11]

Because MS has not prosecuted anyone for creating a decompiler, and has in fact mentioned them in their blogs, etc. Thus they have tacitly indicated that decompiling certain types of files (scenery, AIR, AI traffic BGL, etc.) is OK with them (or at least they will not get upset if you do).Hope this helps,--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

[Guest Lee]

Yep, your correct! It looks like the time data is now four bytes each for departure and arrival instead of two. Maybe it's more accurate? I know that weekly schedules (168 hours) were always off a little more then a minute due to the accuracy of the packed time value. Maybe the new format is allowing for two week schedules (oh happy days)? In any case, the flight plan records have grown from 12 bytes to 16. I'll have to wait to and purchase FSX (like I wasn't going to... yeh right!!!) and compile a few simple flight plans to get an idea what is happening with the time records.The good news is that I can read the traffic tools compiled flight plans just fine. Moving on!!!Has anyone used the SDK to compile a flight plan in the beta yet?Thanks.Lee Steffensen

[mgh 89]

Your approach seems to be "anything's acceptable provided you can get away with it".Whatever Microsoft has or has not accepted (and I doubt if blogs can be taken as representing Microsoft's offical policy) the fact remains that decompiling is expressly forbidden in writing in the FS9 EULA. If the clause is repeated in the FSX EULA then that still represents Microsoft's policy.

[Guest qurious]

I just got the SDK to generate a traffic file using autoschedule, but I can't get it to compile customschedules yet.It looks like those four bytes are actually two entries of two bytes each. First a number that might be some kind of index used to access and/or sort the cell data - I haven't figured this out yet. This is followed by the time data, which has less accuracy than before. The time data is now a byte for the frequency (0 for ONE_HOUR, 1 for TWO_HOURS, etc) followed by a byte that encodes the time inside the frequency range.I think the new format will allow two-weekly, five-weekly and eight-weekly schedules, but I can't tell if these can be used only by boats.But then again, this is based on a beta. We'll have to wait and see what the final retail version brings us.

[tgibson 11]

OK, fine.Then I hope you are not using ANY addon aircraft that use anything but a default AIR file (i.e. 737-400.air, etc.), since the AIR file was decompiled to find out how it worked, and AirEd (the editor most people use) decompiles the AIR file as it works.If you are then you are just as guilty.--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___