which traffic add-on is better? |
Post Reply 
|
| Author | |||
ppgstf 
P/UT 
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Location: Nr Sandy Points: 102 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: which traffic add-on is better?Posted: 24 Jul 2008 at 5:02pm |
||
|
Going back to the original question and the first answer to this thread.
I don't think Traffic X will be FS2004 (FS9) compatable, so you can wait all you like, it aint gonna work!
|
|||
 |
|||
|
reider
Chief Pilot 
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 1103 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 Jul 2008 at 9:17am |
||
|
Heres an added bonus:
This is a section of the aircraft data file, with each aircraft allocated an AC (aircraft data file number and maximum allowed speed-AC#2 is 95 knots as its a small plane);
here is the airports data file selection, you can see the long/lat and the airport code;
Here is a section of the flightplans;
So, AC#653 (which is allocated from the aircraft data list) is issued a flight number, its set for 24hr repeats, flying IFR and starting at 04:59:53. Then its told which airport code to fly from and to and approximately how long its allowed. It also covers the flip flop journeys (return) too. The allocated percentages are shown and these are user selectable as mentioned in the previous post. We can see the first flight repeats its times over a 24 hour period and flies RJAA to VHHH. Later, another entry would show VHHH to RJAA to complete the loop, ready for an outward journey again. If not then many more vanishing aircraft would occur as they strive to meet their preset deadlines. Let us further assume we wish to make a change. We wish to add an aircraft and/or an airport. We append the aircraft list with the next number in the list and follow the layout, sometimes guessing the speed. We then add the new airport in the nearest place to it in the airports data list, with the correct long/lat. Open the flightplans file in wordpad, too big and slow for notepad. Carefully we add some new flights for the aircraft and airport we just added. Following the layout of the existing data. Compile the three files to a working traffic.bgl and place it in FSX. Et voila a new airport and extra aircraft! All of this is compiled into one file, the traffic.bgl. This is often 50-60mb containing all 3 data files streamed into one lot of collated information. Which FSX then reads and allocates to each and every flight. This is whats going on in the background all the time we fly. I hope this insight to what really goes on in the background is interesting and informative for you. Reider |
|||
|
|||
|
KRHart
Check-In Staff 
Joined: 29 Jun 2008 Location: UK, Notts Points: 23 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Jul 2008 at 7:05pm |
||
|
Thats great info reider thankyou.. quite a clever piece of programming by the looks of things.
 |
|||
|
|||
|
leesheeky
P1 
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Location: watford/ uk Points: 666 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Jul 2008 at 3:15pm |
||
|
to be fair i don't like to use either
i enjoy world of ai. i find it more up to date |
|||
|
emo god.
we live to die why not die to live fs9. |
|||
|
|||
|
reider
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 1103 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Jul 2008 at 10:26pm |
||
|
Not sure if this is the answer you`re looking for but here goes. I think they look at the data for selected airfields by night and day plus seasons and by services normally using particular airports. Then we have daily flights (24 hour), periodical, weekly, monthly etc..... Then add it to the flightplans in a timed data list. This data list is timed to percentages, so if the user selects 40% traffic then he/she gets the data aimed at that level and below. Whereas all traffic above that level ceases to show for that session. The percentages are spread pro rata throughout the range of airports. I hope this is what you were looking for.
The traffic.bgl is made up of thee individual files; airports data aircraft data flightplans The available information is entered in all three as required. When these are compiled, its the effect of shuffling a pack of cards. The info from each is mixed in as one complete pack, which we know as the traffic.bgl-a full pack of cards! Reider |
|||
|
|||
|
KRHart
Check-In Staff
Joined: 29 Jun 2008 Location: UK, Notts Points: 23 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Jul 2008 at 9:40pm |
||
|
I was gonna ask a similar question to 767nutter.. I have Ultimate Traffic and wondered, having looked at the other traffic addons, if I have a good addon or should I look for a better one. I'll be honest, I've not really used my UT much at all, so I dunno whether its worth me getting another version. I suppose if I was making more use of FS2004 I should upgrade.
P.S. I was wondering.. how does it actually work out what flights there are? Does it download a snapshot of a database like the real-world weather? Sorry if its a daft question.
 Karl
|
|||
|
|||
|
reider
Chief Pilot
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 1103 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Jul 2008 at 8:36pm |
||
|
Traffic2005 is the most up to date at the moment and works on both FS2004 and FSX. An advantage if you later change to FSX. It is known as Traffic and is badged as FSX compatible. Traffic2004 was the version immediately preceding Traffic (traffic 2005). TrafficX is currently due in Q3 and compatible with FSX only, with SP2/Acceleration compatibility included.
Traffic2005 can be purchased on disk or by download. Its fully supported by JF and the user base in the forums. As far as the users go help will still remain available after the release of TrafficX. JF will probably be the same, one of the better software resellers. Reider |
|||
|
|||
|
767nutter
Chief Pilot
Joined: 09 Jul 2008 Location: Norfolk, UK Points: 1330 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Jul 2008 at 4:56pm |
||
|
ok i just need a conclusion from anyone who has owned either traffic 2004 or just traffic, as i dont want to go buy traffic 04 then find out traffic will be better
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kelvin_C-J
P1
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Location: Fareham Points: 620 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Jul 2008 at 6:59pm |
||
|
I believe so, atleast according to the 'In Development' area.
|
|||
|
Best Regards,
Kelvin Chilvers-Jones |
|||
|
|||
|
767nutter
Chief Pilot
Joined: 09 Jul 2008 Location: Norfolk, UK Points: 1330 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Jul 2008 at 3:50pm |
||
|
ah right i just saw people saying traffic and traffic 2005 was different, but isnt traffic x for fsx only? |
|||
|
|||
|
Kelvin_C-J
P1
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Location: Fareham Points: 620 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Jul 2008 at 8:38pm |
||
|
Traffic is Traffic 2005!
However, with the release of Traffic X I presume imminent, I would suggest waiting for Traffic X or if you really can't go for Traffic.-Traffic X will probably cost more, but will be fully up-to-date, with new features and totally worth the extra Sterling!
|
|||
|
Best Regards,
Kelvin Chilvers-Jones |
|||
|
|||
|
767nutter
Chief Pilot
Joined: 09 Jul 2008 Location: Norfolk, UK Points: 1330 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Jul 2008 at 4:09pm |
||
|
at the moment i have ultimate traffic which i find is lagging behind now and i am wondering which other add-on for FS2004 is better? i am looking at Traffic or Traffic 2004, plus maybe traffic 2005? (if it exists) any info would be much appreciated,
|
|||
|
|||
|
Post Reply
|
|
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
AC#1,200,"Beech King Air 350"