adr179

As I stated in my first post - completely depends on area of interest. I do not know the list of airports that Ultimate Traffic is covering, so it can happen you'd be completely satisfied or completely disappointed with it's results.The aircraft we refer to as "traffic" are not static, they are exactly what the word "traffic" implies - they do their daily, weekly or monthly routine of flights.To make your own traffic all you need is Microsoft's SDK (software developer's kit) that is included in some versions of FS X - check your first DVD for folder SDK and if you have it, then read this:http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=SDK_Installation_%28FSX%29once you have your SDK properly installed reading Traffic toolbox SDK is a must, when you familiarize yourself with what is covered there, all you need to produce your own traffic is a decent program to write your flight plans and createyour traffic bgl file or files. As of aircraft - you can use the whole fleet you have inside your SimobjectAircraft folder, but only if you have a strong computer. If not, then search the file libraries for aircraft that were specifically designed to play the role of AI traffic aircraft - they are designed with less polygons, so they produce less stress to the hardware.A very decent program for creation of flight plans is here:http://stuff4fs.com/newpage.asp?folder=AIFPdownload link is at the bottom of page, link almost hidden in text Version 2.1.25Good luck and I guess, you'll have lot's of fun doing this.

There is no cfg file that could change anything to solve your problem.Depending on which area is on your mind, the chances that any free or pay-ware product will populate small airports of your interest are also rather slim.The best solution for you is to do it yourself. If you are at least averagely computer literate and you have a couple of hours to spend, voila soon you'll be making your own traffic.

To be honest, I don't know if new or additional, since I don't have the slightest idea what sections can be in that additional file. Maybe it's possible to scale settings from the first file, there might be some more settings, but since nobody used it so far(at least as far as I know), the chances to find out what's inside the second file are slim, if not next to none.

That is understood, but so far I haven't saw anybody used this option and actually wrote enbseries2.ini. As far as I understand name of entry(AdditionalConfigFile) somehow implies possibility of more additional settings.

Jim, from my standpoint "easier" is not the name of the game.And while I was checking "ingredients" of enbseries.ini, I found also something else and would appreciate if you or somebody else knows the answer:http://forum.avsim.net/topic/366612-enb-series-additionalconfigfileenbseries2ini/

O.K., I moved the [LIMITER] section to the end of *.ini file, still no joy and I wasn't expecting really to see any difference - just position of a section can't really make any difference.Let's see what are the differences in our systems? For this tests I'm using I can say what's default installation of FS X+Acceleration - some addon aircraft and scenery, but no other tweaks, no Altuve's fsx.cfg tweaks, nothing of this sort.Could it be, this [LIMITER] section actually invokes a piece of software you do have and I don't?

Do excuse me if this was previously covered, I did searched the forums, but couldn't find anything relevant.This is the entry that puzzles me in the enbseries.ini:AdditionalConfigFile=enbseries2.iniit's part of [GLOBAL] section.While everything works as expected, maybe out of sheer purism I'd like to make this little detail clear:One would expect to find the enbseries2.ini in the root folder of FS X, right along the enbseries.ini, but that is not the case. And since all enbseries.ini files I tried(some 5 of them) have this entry referringto some additional settings, the fact makes me wonder - are we missing something here?

Hmm, I also copy/pasted this section and put it into my enbseries.ini immediately after [PROXY] section, so it's second section in *.ini, but it does not work on my system, windowed or full screen modeAny suggestions venustus?.

Nice discovery - thank you for sharing this.

+1 - If you had FSX up and running on any of installs, you were just throwing your time away, since this is definitely related with video drivers.

Please, somebody correct me if I'm mistaken, but as far as I know, behavior of AI traffic aircraft is hard-coded into the sim., so there's no easy (if at all) way to change that.

My family is pretty big and all of my kids want to play, so we happen to have 4 PC's that are capable of running FSX more or less decently. And if I start FSX on any of the 3 that don't have RAID simultaneously with the one that does have it, I'm finding myself in simulation almost 10 seconds earlier on the RAID computer and I don't have any stutters even in densest scenery areas, which is not the case on machines without RAID. All 4 of PC's I'm talking about otherwise have GPU's and CPU's that are not identical, but not so far apart to make them incomparable, so what I'm stating here is not theoretical expectation, but practical, measurable and with human feelings noticeable difference in performance .

Sorry, but I simply can't agree with anything of this. Theoretically and also in practice first of your statements make no sense. First reasonably small partition of physical hard drive will always be faster than the rest - it's pure geometry.So it does matter where files are positioned on a disk. I'm using RAID0 on motherboards based controllers for years and RAID0 has almost double speed compared to a single disk - measured with any disk speed software and timing loading time of FS X. So far I never lost a single bit of data from those RAID setups. Real reason for problems with RAID setups is almost always in PSU - people simply forget the fact that adding more and more hardware requires more power.Only thing I agree with you is that it makes no sense scattering the FSX files on other disks if you only have disks with same data output rate.

Lots of people I know are using combo of REX or AS textures and FSXrealwxlite for weather download and injection into the sim. I think it's quite a good combination, using best functions of more programs. Nothing against REX or AS, but FSXrealwxlite is popular for, by my opinion, one reason - it's really light on resources, computer hardly knows it's running in the background.

With three disks that have identical performance it makes no sense to move folder scenery from within FSX folder structure, especially so if you're not experienced with this. Configuration with three identical disks is different situation from the one that OmniAtlas has, where he has one small but significantly faster disk and he was wondering, which files from within FSX folder he should move to his fastest but smallest disk.Do not move any sub-folders of FSX if you're not sure what you're doing, you can cause re-instal of everything! In my previous post I was referring to scenery as various addons - additional high quality airports, whole countries or big areas covered with photo-real tiles and so on. This additional sceneries tend to be big in size and it makes sense to put them on the first (fastest) partition of the third disk if first partitions of first and second disk contain the operating system and FSX.