Print Page | Close Window

Traffic X Dash 8 No Lights

Printed From: Just Flight Forum
Category: Just Flight Products
Forum Name: Traffic X / Traffic / Traffic 2005
Forum Description: Discussion area for Traffic titles
URL: http://forum.justflight.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=21199
Printed Date: 03 Jun 2020 at 6:14am


Topic: Traffic X Dash 8 No Lights
Posted By: Lawgiver
Subject: Traffic X Dash 8 No Lights
Date Posted: 11 Jul 2013 at 3:11am
Hello Everyone,

It's too quiet around the ole Traffic X forums so I thought I would post a question about a problem I have always had with the Dash 8's.  Simply, they have no lights.  No nav, landing, strobes, passenger lights.  Nothing but logo lights on a few of them.  It's something I have always noticed since day 1 of owning Traffic X.  I just added it up as another quirk of the software.  Now, I need those stealth Dash 8's as part of an AI scenario I'm making for myself and was wondering if anyone else has had a similar issue.
This is the entire "LIGHTS" section from the config file:
[LIGHTS]       
//Types: 1=beacon, 2=strobe, 3=navigation, 4=cockpit, 5=landing
light.0 = 1, 0, 0, 0, fx_TS_Turbo ,

It's the same for both models of the Dash 8.  I have attempted copying coordinates from a similar AI Dash 8 into the config file.  While the results were amusing to say the least, It wasn't what i was exactly looking for.  Something of note before I forget, they all do have rotating beacons.

Regards,
Rob



-------------



Replies:
Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 11 Jul 2013 at 7:57pm
Below is the [Lights] section of the aircraft.cfg for the default FSX Dash 8 on my system. As you can see, I have exchanged the default lights for A2A Shockwave 3D Lights Redux lights. However, the names of the original lights would have been mostly identical except for the word "Shockwave." Although the precise contents of the below [Lights] section would almost certainly require considerable time-consuming modification for use with the Traffic X Dash 8s, the section does provide a listing of the lights that should be present.

[LIGHTS]
//Types: 1=beacon, 2=strobe, 3=navigation, 4=cockpit
light.0 = 3,   -30.1, -42,  5, fx_shockwave_navred ,
light.1 = 3,   -30.1,  42,  5, fx_shockwave_navgre ,
light.2 = 2,   -29.9,  41.7,  5, fx_shockwave_strobe ,
light.3 = 2,   -29.9, -41.7,  5, fx_shockwave_strobe ,
light.4 = 1,  -65.0,   0.00,  18.4, fx_shockwave_beaconh ,
light.5 = 4,   -7.91,   0.00,  2.64, fx_shockwave_vclight,
light.6 = 5, -28.0, -15.5, 4.5,  fx_Shockwave_landing_light        // Shockwave light
light.7 = 5, -28.0, 15.5, 4.5,  fx_Shockwave_landing_light        // Shockwave light
light.8 = 5, -4.0, 0, -4.5,  fx_Shockwave_landing_light        // Shockwave light     

The numbers to the right of the equal signs need to be understood. From left to right, here is what they specify:

A. Type of light
B. Position fore or aft (- = back, + = forward)
C. Position left or right (- = left, + = right)
D. Position up or down (- = down, + = up)
E. Name of light

Hence:

= type of light, position fore or aft, position left or right, position up or down, name of light

(As you can see from the above [Lights] section, positive numbers don't actually have a "+" sign in front of them).

Exact names of available lights are found in the FSX "Effects" folder.

The 3D Lights Redux manual, makes the following statement, which is applicable to all FSX aircraft lights:

Numbers have to be adjusted for each aircraft you add lights to and are measured in feet from the model origin point.

If the aircraft has more than one light then set up one first then copy and paste the line for the second one.

For symmetrical lights in the wings you would just need to increment the light # and add or remove the - sign in the 3rd position numbers to switch between port and starboard.

In the above statement, "light #" refers to what is found to the left of the equal signs.

It takes a lot of trial and error to get lights into the correct positions on an aircraft. There is no quick solution...unless someone has already done the work and published the results.

Dan


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 11 Jul 2013 at 11:24pm
Originally posted by Lawgiver Lawgiver wrote:

It's too quiet around the ole Traffic X forums ...

Yes, sadly it is very much quiet around the ole Traffic X forums. Regardless, Traffic X is still a major part of my FSX world, constantly being updated by me to keep my FSX as up to date and as current as possible.

Ah yes ... Dash 8 lights ... another one of those things Just Flight missed when they released (and even subsequently Service Packed) Traffic X.

I modified the [LIGHTS] section of the Traffic X Dash 8 ages ago to put lights on to it. A copy of my edits appears below.


Notes:

1) My edits below work for and use the default FSX lights.

2) I don't believe both of the Traffic X Dash 8s are flying in the Traffic X flight plans; only one of the them (the Dash8-x00). So that's the one I've added the lights to.

3) My positional numbers are slightly different from those shown in Dan's post above. Whether or not the A2A Shockwave 3D Redux lights used by Dan are larger or smaller (or whatever) and thus require different positioning form the FSX default lights, I have no idea. To be honest, I'd say not. We probably both just have slightly different numbers. Nonetheless, I am happy with my positioning. But, if you wish to experiment and adjust the numbers, feel free to do so.

4) I have used the high intensity navigation lights (as indicated by the "h" in "fx_navredh" and "fx_navgreh"). You may like to try lower intensity navigation lights ("fx_navred" and "fx_navgre") which may suit a smaller aircraft such as the Dash 8 better. Or, a trick, use TWO of the lower intensity lights positioned on top of, or positioned VERY VERY CLOSE TO (right next to and probably overlapping), each other to get a MID-intensity effect. Similarly, another good trick is to mix lights together with WHITE ("fx_navwhi") to increase the brightness (for example, using a low intensity red or green light positioned on top of, or positioned very very close to, a white light would give a brighter effect, and, at the same time, provides a lighter shade of color red or green). Feel free to simply use what I have used, and not make any changes at all, or, experiment with your own choices and/or changes. But, a short word on using lower intensity lights ... whilst they might look correct on a smaller aircraft such as a Dash 8 when you are viewing the aircraft from a close distance, they can tend to appear too small (and sometimes almost even non-existent) when you view the aircraft from a long distance away (hence the need to possibly use more than one on top of the other, or at least very very close together). This could be graphics card dependent (I'm not sure), so mileage may vary from machine to machine. Experimentation is thus probably the only way to find out which intensity/size light effect, and whether you need to "double them up", looks and works best for you.

5) My light settings include a WHITE anti-collision light on the rear end of the aircraft fuselage, beneath the tail/rudder. It doesn't look like Dan's settings has one of those. (Hey Dan, you might like to copy my values and perhaps add one to your model.)

6) There are no contact points on the Traffic X Dash 8 AI model for FSX landing lights to be "attached" to. Therefore, annoyingly, the Traffic X Dash 8 doesn't (and as far as I know, can't) have landing lights. That is, unless the model itself is modified and contact points are added to it. Dan's post above shows landing lights because, I am guessing, A2A Shockwave 3D Redux lights allow you to add landing lights even if the aircraft model has no contact points for them. (However, if I am wrong, and anyone out there does know how to get landing lights to work for the Traffic X Dash 8 AI aircraft, then I'd be interested to know.)


==============================

This fixes the (lack of) night lights for the Traffic X JFAI_Dash8-x00 AI aircraft. Copy this information in to the [LIGHTS] section of the aircraft.cfg file (completely overwrite and replace what is already there) for this aircraft. The aircraft.cfg file for this aircraft is found here: "C:\...\Flight Simulator X\SimObjects\TrafficX\JFAI_Dash8-x00".

[LIGHTS]
//Types: 1=beacon, 2=strobe, 3=navigation, 4=cockpit, 5=landing
light.0 = 3, -32.6, -42.9, 5.5, fx_navredh ,
light.1 = 3, -32.6, 42.9, 5.5, fx_navgreh ,
light.2 = 3, -75.9,   0.3, 1.0, fx_navwhi ,
light.3 = 2, -32.7, 43.0, 5.5, fx_strobeh ,
light.4 = 2, -32.7, -43.0, 5.5, fx_strobeh ,
light.5 = 1, -73.0,   0.0, 18.0, fx_beaconh ,
light.6 = 4, -7.91,   0.0, 2.64, fx_vclight ,


Posted By: Lawgiver
Date Posted: 11 Sep 2013 at 9:37pm
Freddy, Dan

I wanted to apologize to you both for not responding to your forum posts before now.  I am presently serving in the US Military and had to go out of town on short notice.  I didn't have a chance to reply before leaving.  I just returned yesterday and will give the updated "Lights" section a try.  Thanks again for your time.

Regards,
Rob


-------------


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 12 Sep 2013 at 3:23am
Originally posted by Lawgiver Lawgiver wrote:

I wanted to apologize to you both for not responding to your forum posts before now.  I am presently serving in the US Military and had to go out of town on short notice.  I didn't have a chance to reply before leaving.  I just returned yesterday and will give the updated "Lights" section a try.  Thanks again for your time.
No need to apologise.  Serving one's country takes precedence, of course.  Smile
 
I am confident the lights information provided here will work perfectly for you, and put lights on to your Dash 8s.


Posted By: Lawgiver
Date Posted: 15 Sep 2013 at 10:03am
Hi Freddy,

The "Lights" info you provided works great.  I see what you mean concerning the taxi/landing lights.  That is odd and somewhat irritating.  I am thinking of sending off an email to JF to see if they might have an updated model.  Don't know if it will do any good or not to check.  Thanks again for the info.  You have saved me a lot  of time in trying to figure out the right position by myself.

Regards,
Rob




-------------


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 16 Sep 2013 at 5:40am
I am glad the lights "fix" works for you ... (well, really, there was no reason why it shouldn't have worked).
 
As for whether Just Flight have an updated model with landing lights, I wonder if the Traffic 360 model has been "fixed"?  Hmmm.  Actually, I do remember reading a post in the Traffic 360 forums stating that the Traffic 360 Dash 8 didn't have any lights at all (just the same as the Traffic X one) ... So, I'd say not.  (A quick Traffic 360 forum search should be able to find that post.)  And, along with other similar evidence, it further confirms my suspicions that Traffic 360 is really only Traffic X, just with some interface changes and flight plan changes.
 
Of course, you can always just source a Dash 8 AI model off the Internet and replace the Traffic X one with that.
 
Personally, I've reached the point where I am only "slightly" annoyed that the Traffic X Dash 8 has no landing lights.  I've kind of gotten used to it now and barely notice it.
 
===================
 
EDIT ..... Traffic 360 forum search, complete.
Here is the Traffic 360 post about the Dash 8 and no lights (see point #4):
http://forum.justflight.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=20102&KW=dash%208&PID=159052&title=another-ai-progsame-old-issues#159052" rel="nofollow - http://forum.justflight.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=20102&KW=dash 8&PID=159052&title=another-ai-progsame-old-issues#159052


Posted By: Lawgiver
Date Posted: 17 Sep 2013 at 12:08am
Hi Freddy,

I wasn't aware of the T360 having the same issue.  If that's the case, I doubt they have an updated model as well.  You are right.  I should be happy with what I have and not let it bother me anymore.  It's just the principle I guess.  When you purchase something you expect it to work as advertised.  I understand there are a certain amount of "bugs" in software but it seems Traffic X has been blessed with a large amount of them that "you" as the user are left to correct.  Its like purchasing a new battery for my truck from the auto parts store which I just bought.  I expect that battery to work....not have to take it home, make sure the fluid levels are topped off and then throw it on the charger for 12 hours.   Oh well.......I have come to the conclusion that my poor attitude at the moment is the result of still suffering from jet lag and I probably need to go and take another nap!! Big smile
The A2A Shockwave 3D Redux lights from Dan's post above intrigues me.  I don't have that add-on either but I have heard good things about it.

Regards,
Rob


-------------


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 18 Sep 2013 at 3:14am
Originally posted by Lawgiver Lawgiver wrote:

I wasn't aware of the T360 having the same issue.  If that's the case, I doubt they have an updated model as well.  You are right.  I should be happy with what I have and not let it bother me anymore.  It's just the principle I guess.  When you purchase something you expect it to work as advertised.  I understand there are a certain amount of "bugs" in software but it seems Traffic X has been blessed with a large amount of them that "you" as the user are left to correct.  Its like purchasing a new battery for my truck from the auto parts store which I just bought.  I expect that battery to work....not have to take it home, make sure the fluid levels are topped off and then throw it on the charger for 12 hours.
 
Oh well.......I have come to the conclusion that my poor attitude at the moment is the result of still suffering from jet lag and I probably need to go and take another nap!! Big smile
 
The A2A Shockwave 3D Redux lights from Dan's post above intrigues me.  I don't have that add-on either but I have heard good things about it.
I think you are 100% correct.  Whilst it might be true that today's software packages seem to be released with their fair share of bugs ... it is not unreasonable, as a paying customer, to expect that beta testers have done a reasonable job, as best as possible, and within reason, to eliminate as many of the "obvious" bugs as possible.  But, sadly, in today's modern and competitive software world, the aim often seems to be "get it to release quicker and faster than the other guys" ... it's more about making money ... instead of the older adage of "be patient and release it as a solid, well-tested, bug-free as best as possible" product.
 
I think Traffic X fell in to the first category ... and it appeared, on release, to be rushed.  Unlike its predecessor, Traffic 2005 (which was a fantastic product), yes, there are many bugs in Traffic X.  The Dash-8 having no lights is indeed one of those.  There are many others.  And some of those bugs can be reproduced almost at will simply by using the product normally and as it was designed to be used.
 
As someone who works in IT and does his own fair share of software testing, I found Traffic X's bugs to be a major disappointment.  It defies logic how some of the bugs got missed in the beta-testing phase.  They are obvious and very easy to reproduce, consistently.  And the interface design, well, seriously, don't get me started ... it really could be way better.  When you use the Traffic X program and its associated tools (repaint tool) as often as I do, almost weekly, the bugs certainly stand out - persistently and constantly.  It can be frustrating, annoying and disappointing.
 
However, that said, my FSX world would not be the place that it is today if I didn't have Traffic X.  It has single-handedly transformed my FSX in to a world full of AI traffic, complete with correct and current real-world liveries (it provides me with the means to add, edit and modify liveries), current aircraft models (it lets me add new planes in to FSX such as the 787 Dreamliner), close to real-world schedules (well, as close/realistic as one can get given FSX's constraints anyway), etc etc etc.  Traffic X lets me change my FSX AI world at will.  And because of this, I have learnt to live with it's bugs.  It may not be perfect, but I am very happy with the FSX AI world that it provided by default, and has allowed me to further manipulate, mould and create.  As I fly in my FSX skies, there's always something I find which I feel needs to be changed, adjusted, or tweaked.  And I can do it.  I have Traffic X to thank for that.  Yay!


Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 18 Sep 2013 at 5:01pm
Originally posted by Lawgiver Lawgiver wrote:


The A2A Shockwave 3D Redux lights from Dan's post above intrigues me.  I don't have that add-on either but I have heard good things about it.


Hi, Rob,

Although it would be a Herculean task to add A2A 3D Lights Redux lights to all of your Just Flight AI aircraft, you may find that it would be worthwhile to add the A2A lights (particularly the landing lights) to the most commonly used Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, Beechcraft, and Cessna models.

The thing that I appreciate most about the A2A lights are the landing lights. The landing lights have the effect of illuminating dust particles in the air. That really adds realism. It also produces the effect of making the lights appear to be much brighter than default landing lights. Fuselage illumination near the lights can also be observed. My avatar in this forum shows a 747 with A2A 3D Lights Redux lights. In the case of helicopter landing lights, there's even the option to have the lights point straight forward or to have them point down at a 45-degree angle. (The helicopter screenshot below has the lights pointing down at a 45-degree angle).

Dan









Posted By: Lawgiver
Date Posted: 24 Sep 2013 at 12:16am
Hi Freddy, Dan

Freddy I agree with all your points as well.  Traffic X is indeed a unique piece of software to say the least.  I also have to agree with you on the interface as well.  Sometimes even with all the "tinkering" I've done with it, it is still a mystery to me.  For instance what exactly does the "Airline/Carrier Codes" option do??  I have checked, unchecked,  and saved different options all with no effect on my Traffic X universe.   
Then there is the "potluck compile" as I like to call it.  After you spend hours adjusting flight plans you might get half of them to show on the first compile.  But, seems there always is a but.  With all that being said, Traffic X has opened the door to AI for my FSX world.  Always utilized the default AI prior to my Traffic X purchase.  Now, after my experience with Traffic X, I also use WOAI packages, AIA, etc.  All play nicely together. 
I also use AI flight planner to compile some of the Traffic X planes that I really want to show up in the sim into a separate bgl.   As much as I like to throw rocks at it sometimes, I would not give up my Traffic X.  It does have its positives.  That and the fact I have a file full of forum posts from you and Dan on Traffic X.  LOL
Not to take away credit from the many other contributors here, but both you and Dan are the "go-to guys" around here in my opinion.  I have spent hours on the JF forums copying your various forum posts and how-to's about Traffic X.  I would be lost without them.

Dan,

Those are some great looking screen shots.  I think I am going to get the A2A lights and give them a try.  The software is only $17US on PC Aviator.  They also offer a 10% discount on Tues.  In your last screen with the helo about to touch down.  I notice another helo behind it on approach.  Is that the Helo AI traffic package you and Freddy sometimes talk about??  Do you have any info on that?? Is it still available??  You guys have a great day.

Regards,
Rob 


-------------


Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 24 Sep 2013 at 6:10pm
Originally posted by Lawgiver Lawgiver wrote:

In your last screen with the helo about to touch down.  I notice another helo behind it on approach.  Is that the Helo AI traffic package you and Freddy sometimes talk about??  Do you have any info on that?? Is it still available??  You guys have a great day.


Hi, Rob,

Thanks for the compliments!

The screenshot you mention was taken at Bagram AFB. The helicopter in the background is another AgustaWestland on approach from Kandahar AFB, and, yes, the helicopter is flying a Heli Traffic 2009 flight plan. Since Heli Traffic 2009 is the only game in town when it comes to creating realistic helicopter traffic, it remains available.

Heli Traffic 2009 doesn't include any helicopters. You're probably going to want to use default FSX helicopters for your AI traffic. There are many freeware liveries available for the default Bell 206B, and there is also a good Bell 206B JetRanger III freeware model that, itself, has many liveries available. There are also some freeware liveries for the default Robinson and AgustaWestand EH101 helicopters.

With good-looking default and freeware helicopters flying around, you may find that you want to eliminate the Traffic X versions of the Bell and Robinson. Since one of the quirks with Traffic X is that the "Rotorcraft" box must remained checked under the "Aircraft Types" menu on the TCC's "Traffic Movements" screen, disabling Traffic X helicopter models by unchecking the "Rotorcraft" box is not an option. The easiest way to eliminate the Traffic X helicopter models is to move their folders to a location outside of FSX or, optionally, to delete the folders altogether. The three Traffic X folders that I removed were "JFAI_BellJR," "JFAI_R22," and "JFAI_R44."

Dan


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 28 Sep 2013 at 2:42am
Yes, as Dan says, thanks for the compliments.
 
When it comes to Heli Traffic 2009, I have Dan to thank for suggesting I give it a try.  I did, and the rest is history.  It is an absolutely fantastic product.  Highly recommended.
 
Airline Carrier Codes in Traffic X are used to add new airlines that Traffic X does not already include.  For example, there is an airline called COBHAM here in Australia that mostly does chartered commuter flights to places that the major airlines don't include in their schedules.  One can add Cobham to the Airline Carrier Codes list (right-click and select Add New), add the Cobham planes in to Traffic X, and then group those planes under the Cobham heading.  Then, when one goes in to the Flight Plans menu of Traffic X, Cobham will appear in the list of available airlines.  And, further to that, if you go to the Traffic X flight plans folder in Windows, you will find an appropriate .TCC file in that folder for that airline.  You might find it interesting to note that despite this example I have given here of how to do it, I actually don't use it ... I just add the missing airlines/planes under the heading UNSPECIFIED CARRIER in the Traffic X flight plans menu. That works fine for me.
 
The Traffic X "potluck compile" is probably Just Flight's attempt to reduce AI traffic congestion and to add an element of "randomness" to each compile.  You are probably aware, if you've read or kept any of my previous forum comments on the Traffic X compile process, that this randomness is linked to the AI aircraft percentage slider in FSX.  The Traffic X compiler will assign a random (percentage) number to each AI flight, which, in FSX, relates to your chosen AI traffic percentage.  Personally, I just manually edit the files that Traffic X creates and change the random values that it chose ... replacing those with my own chosen value ... following that with a MANUAL compile (I don't use Traffic X to do the compile), and I thus get the exact results that I want. You're probably achieving the same by using AI flight planner.
 
Finally, I think this line from you, Rob, really sums Traffic X up nicely ... "As much as I like to throw rocks at it sometimes, I would not give up my Traffic X.  It does have its positives."  100% agreed.
 


Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 28 Sep 2013 at 5:35pm
There is a change that I made in Traffic X that seems to have addressed the traffic randomness problem in a positive way. In the Aircraft.tcc file, the rightmost column is labeled "random Generation." I put "0" in that column for every aircraft.

IMPORTANT NOTE:
Initially, I tried importing the file into a spreadsheet program, editing the file, and saving it as a text file with a .tcc file extension. However, I couldn't get a successful compile after having done so. After editing my backup copy in a plain text editor, compiling was successful.

Dan


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 29 Sep 2013 at 12:19am
Originally posted by Soaranden Soaranden wrote:

There is a change that I made in Traffic X that seems to have addressed the traffic randomness problem in a positive way. In the Aircraft.tcc file, the rightmost column is labeled "random Generation." I put "0" in that column for every aircraft.

IMPORTANT NOTE:
Initially, I tried importing the file into a spreadsheet program, editing the file, and saving it as a text file with a .tcc file extension. However, I couldn't get a successful compile after having done so. After editing my backup copy in a plain text editor, compiling was successful.
 
You put a "0" in that column?  Does that mean that every aircraft shows, regardless of the AI traffic percentage slider setting in FSX?  If that is the case then it wouldn't work so well for me because I actually do use the AI traffic percentage slider in FSX to reduce the amount of traffic in "heavy" places such as Europe, and increase the traffic in "light" areas such as Asia.  So I am careful with my (manual editing) choice for that number.  But, nonetheless, that little idea is handy to know.
 
As for Excel and saving your .TCC files, remember that Traffic X files are TEXT based files, but they must be saved using ANSI encoding.  That's probably the problem with saving them in Excel but not having them compile.  Tip: Edit in Excel, and then, once complete, simply reopen the file in Notepad and do a resave.  That might work (I think).
 


Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 29 Sep 2013 at 11:24am
Originally posted by freddy freddy wrote:

You put a "0" in that column?  Does that mean that every aircraft shows, regardless of the AI traffic percentage slider setting in FSX?


Hi, Freddy,

I don't know whether putting a "0" in the column made every aircraft show or not, since another thing that I did was to delete the tcc file for random business traffic. Together, those two actions seem to have pretty much eliminated randomness. I should add that I have never changed the traffic slider. I expect that changing it could still affect traffic volume, but I don't know for sure. Additionally, I haven't used the Traffic Generator for years, and that's another thing affecting randomness. Furthermore, I don't know what affect, if any, the "0" values have on the Traffic Generator. I haven't looked at it that closely.

I'm afraid that I've given three "I don't know"s to you. Perhaps there's another forum member or two who have done some "randomness" testing and who could shed some light on the subject. After all, this posting began as a posting about missing lights.

Dan



Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2013 at 3:20am
Ahh.  Fair enough.  My experience quite simply shows that Traffic X merely generates a RANDOM number value in the .TCC file(s) ... whether that be when you use the Traffic Generator, or, if you do a compile.  And, that randomly generated number value represents this: "At what AI traffic percentage should this particular individual aircraft appear in FSX?".  The value is generated for each and every individual aircraft, and will be different even if the aircraft types are the same.  For example, Cessna 1 might get allocated the random number 28, Cessna 2 might get allocated the random number 86, Cessna 3 might get allocated the random number value 64, and so on.  If the randomly generated number value is 60 for an individual aircraft, then this aircraft will only show in FSX if your AI traffic percentage slider is set to 60% or higher.
 
Interestingly, and perhaps also confusingly, is that this randomly generated number value CHANGES each time that you do a new compile.  So, even though you didn't change your AI traffic percentage slider in FSX, a plane that appeared in FSX with your first compile, may not show if you then decide to do a second compile ... and then may actually show up once again after a third compile.  And therein is the definition of the word "random" in this context.
 
From this, I would "assume" that manually assigning the number "0" in a .TCC file for an aircraft would mean that it will NEVER appear in FSX.  But, to be honest, I've never tried that ... and don't really have any need to try it.  (If I want a plane to not show up, I would just delete it from the flight plan(s).)
 
Hehehe.  But, all of that said, you are right ... this posting began as a posting about missing lights.  Smile


Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2013 at 4:33pm
Originally posted by freddy freddy wrote:


I would "assume" that manually assigning the number "0" in a .TCC file for an aircraft would mean that it will NEVER appear in FSX.


Freddy,

I have been running the same Traffic X configuration for quite some time.

Here's what I have done:

1. Deleted the random business traffic tcc file.
2. Refrained from ever rerunning the Traffic Generator.
3. Refrained from ever moving the traffic slider.
4. Entered a "0" at the end of the line of each livery in the Aircraft.tcc file. (All lines in the file have "0" at the end).


Here's the result:

I have not been able to discern any random traffic, whatsoever. (Since I have noticed that the compiler log sometimes shows that no available parking can be found for the flight plans of different aircraft from compile to compile, it's possible that there are random flights occurring that I have not noticed, although there is the possibility that the foregoing is the result of differences in the order in which flight plans are compiled from compile to compile). Making sure that there is a "0" at the end of each line in the Aircraft.tcc file certainly does not mean that the aircraft will never appear. Just the opposite seems to be true. Furthermore, the "0" at the end of each line in the Aircraft.tcc file never changes to a different value. Although I think that I have made no changes to the default _compile.bat file, I should mention that my _compile.bat file includes "/AutoSchedule=no."

Dan


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2013 at 10:07am
Ahh.  It just occurred to me that you are I are talking about two completely different things.
 
You are talking about .TCC files.
 
I am talking about the "Schedules.dat" file.  (It is in THIS file that the Traffic X compiler randomly generates the AI traffic percentage slider value that I have been talking about.  And it is THIS file that I manually edit as per below.)
 
Like you, I too have (essentially) been running the same Traffic X configuration for quite some time.  I keep MY OWN copy of the "Schedules.dat" file and use Traffic X merely as a tool that creates the files I need which I then use to subsequently copy/paste the relevant data in to MY "Schedules.dat".  I then redo the compile (manually this time, using _compile.bat; not via Traffic X) and substitute MY newly modified "Schedules.dat" file as the source file (complete with my own chosen and manually modified numbers for the AI traffic percentage slider values).  So, like you, I too have (essentially) been running the same Traffic X configuration for ages ... only manually adding/modifying things when and as the need arises.


Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2013 at 2:02pm
Freddy,

Thanks for detailing what you have been doing. That's very interesting and certainly worth knowing. Out of curiosity, I made a backup of my Schedules.dat file. Then, without making any changes to my Traffic X flight plans, I did a new compile using the TCC. I used TextPad to compare the backed-up Schedules.dat file with the newly-generated Schedules.dat file. Both the original file and the new file contained 428,191 lines, but there were 45,505 lines in the new file that were different. I'm wondering if the fact that both files contained the same number of lines had anything to do with my having "0" at the end of each line in my Aircraft.tcc file, or would everyone get the same number of lines in backed-up and newly-compiled Schedules.dat files if they were to recompile without making any changes to flight plans?

Dan


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2013 at 11:38pm
Originally posted by Soaranden Soaranden wrote:

Thanks for detailing what you have been doing. That's very interesting and certainly worth knowing. Out of curiosity, I made a backup of my Schedules.dat file. Then, without making any changes to my Traffic X flight plans, I did a new compile using the TCC. I used TextPad to compare the backed-up Schedules.dat file with the newly-generated Schedules.dat file. Both the original file and the new file contained 428,191 lines, but there were 45,505 lines in the new file that were different. I'm wondering if the fact that both files contained the same number of lines had anything to do with my having "0" at the end of each line in my Aircraft.tcc file, or would everyone get the same number of lines in backed-up and newly-compiled Schedules.dat files if they were to recompile without making any changes to flight plans?
 
That's a simple question to answer ...
 
(Note: For people who are unaware, "Schedules.dat" can be opened in a text editor, which may be helpful to aid understanding of what I am talking about below.)
 
With every (Traffic X) compile, a brand new "Schedules.dat" file is created (other files are also newly created, but for the purposes of this discussion I will not go in to those details).  However, if you have not added any new flight plans, or not added/removed any legs to/from any of the existing flight plans, then the only thing that changes in the "Schedules.dat" file is the FLIGHT NUMBER and the RANDOMLY GENERATED AI TRAFFIC PERCENTAGE number for each flight in the file.  In other words, if you make no flight plan changes, then the newly created "Schedules.dat" will indeed contain the same number of lines, every time.  But, if you DO decide to ADD a new flight plan, or ADD/REMOVE LEGS to/from an existing flight plan, and then do a compile, you WILL get lines added (or removed) in the "Schedules.dat" file.
 
This web page here explains the compile process (and contains information about the format of the "Schedules.dat file"): http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526965.aspx" rel="nofollow - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526965.aspx
 
An example flight as it would be shown in "Schedules.dat" :
 
DH8A-1,N681UA,66,FOUR_HOURS,IFR  <== It is THIS line that changes with each (Traffic X) compile.
{
0130,KSEA,240,5220
0330,KEUG,230,5221
}
 
 
(The details shown in RED are the flight number [which usually does change with each (Traffic X) compile, but sometimes it doesn't], and the randomly generated AI traffic percentage number [which DOES change EVERY TIME with each (Traffic X) compile]).
 


Posted By: Soaranden
Date Posted: 03 Oct 2013 at 6:59am
Thanks, Freddy. Much appreciated.


Posted By: Lawgiver
Date Posted: 04 Oct 2013 at 7:32pm
Well...........I have just added more notes to my  Freddy/Dan  file.  This is very interesting.  I too have never adjusted my sliders either for FSX or Traffic X when dealing with AI traffic.   After I got them to where I like them, I just left the sliders alone compiling with the TCC if I made any changes.

I am going to give editing the Aircraft.tcc a try.  Replacing with "0" and see what I get after making the appropriate backups.  Curiosity is getting the better of me.  Smile

On a side note, I picked up the A2A lights.  I had no idea the things you can do with this little piece of software.  I thought they were just replacement lights.  I have spent the past several days tinkering with the all the options.

Freddy thanks for the explanation of the Airline Carrier Codes section.  That thing was a complete mystery to me.  I am basically doing the same thing with AIFP adding new carriers and routes.

Regards,
Rob


-------------


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2013 at 5:00am
Careful Rob ... you'll become an "expert" if you learn/understand too many things.   Smile


Posted By: Lawgiver
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2013 at 4:14am
Originally posted by freddy freddy wrote:

Careful Rob ... you'll become an "expert" if you learn/understand too many things.   Smile


LOL...Thanks Freddy.  I am looking forward to receiving my "Expert" FSX Id card in the mail.  Big smile

Regards,
Rob


-------------


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2013 at 10:53am
 
Clap



Print Page | Close Window