Fly Away Simulation
SearchSearch 

My Traffic and Ultimate Traffic?

Orlando George Guest

I am wondering if you gents know if it is it possible to run My Traffic and Ultimate Traffic together at the same time? I went ahead and installed My Traffic but It looks like Ultimate is better. What do you all think? How about frame rate and all that? What do guys all suggest somebody who is new to FS9 should do?

Thanks sirs, -George / United States.

OrlandoGeorge Guest

By the way, I just signed up as you all have as a registered user for Fly Away and should be able to gather any info from previous posts in other forums when the acct. is activated.

Thanks again for any good word. George

Pro Member Chief Captain
tomthetank Chief Captain

I have T2004 and Radar has UT(you are the only one with My Traffic that I know of)(so far)
I did run T2004 with ProjectAI and there was just too much traffic and the odd 737 nose to tail with another 737 at 30000ft
Far too many go arounds with them both

You could allways turn them down to say 50% each

I did'nt have any REAL frame loss(may have been some,but never noticed)
I think Radar runs his with something else(he will be along shortly to tell you)

Hope it helps

Pro Member Chief Captain
RadarMan Chief Captain

As TTT said I run "UT" without any appreciable FPS hits at 100% but I also run GA-Traffic a free traffic maker for the smaller airports that UT won't add-on.
When I get to a small airport I take a major hit (FPS) because I'm using all my own high LOD aircraft.
I can't see why you should have a problem with a good computer, plenty of memory (1 gig) and a good video card with the latest drivers.
Also be sure to have DirectX 9.0c.

Radar

Guest

TTT and Radar,

Thanks a million for the feedback on the UT MT issue. I am actually suprised that MT is not as popular or what not because I actually think it is pretty good. Very realistic especially during long night flights. Outstanding in terms of assignments.

I am looking forward to getting the acct with Fly Away. Says about 24-48 hrs. for processing and then will be able to surf for myself and learn a lot about FS9 and everything else.

BTW, I did post a pic to the FS2004 gallery that backed up (illustrated)something that you mentioned in the General Section Radar, but I don't know if they will post it.

Thanks again and good landings to you both!

George/Location:USA

Pro Member Chief Captain
RadarMan Chief Captain

There isn't any reason not to post it as long as the software can "read" it. I'll be watching for it tomorrow when Flyaway posts the screens.

Radar

The Plainsman Guest

I have both. I purchased Ultimate Traffic a few months ago and recently obtained MyTraffic.

Here's my take: I like My Traffic better. It's bigger (more A.I. flights; more real world liveries; more airports with traffic) and more active, IMHO.

Ultimate Traffic is at the mercy of real-world flight schedules. If the time you are flying there aren't many travelers, there may be very little happening at that airport as far as traffic goes. I don't really care about having real world schedules. I'm not checking the airlines to verify 'em anyway. My Traffic always has activity at the airports.

Ultimate Traffic is also limited to commercial flights. My Traffic has commercial, general aviation, and military, including military flights in countries other than the USA (for example, Israeli F-16s).

FPS in My Traffic seems to be smoother, better, but not significantly.

I like 'em both but My Traffic has more features and is "fire and forget." That is, install it and you don't have to do anything else. You always have significant traffic taking off and landing.

One bug I noticed in Ultimate Traffic that caused me to give My Traffic a try: At one airport (Minneapolis, I think), I sat on the runway and watched 37 consecutive Northwest Airlines commercial jets land, each one just seconds behind the one before. Two or three seconds behind, at the same runway. That's impossible. It was crazy. They just kept landing like a needle stuck on a broken record. Had to be a bug.

Pro Member First Officer
Jason (Av8r77) First Officer

One of the things that I hate is that they don't allow adequate seperation between flights. There is supposed to be 90 seconds between flights (roughly). You get alot of "go arounds" because they don't exit the runway fast enough.

That gets real old.

Guest

Av8r77 wrote:

One of the things that I hate is that they don't allow adequate seperation between flights. There is supposed to be 90 seconds between flights (roughly). You get alot of "go arounds" because they don't exit the runway fast enough.

That gets real old.

I assume you're referring to Ultimate Traffic?

Pro Member First Officer
Jason (Av8r77) First Officer

Yes,

I have UT2004. I have the traffic set at 100% and don't noticed a frame hit. The controllers just stink at routing traffic.

I wish they had one runway for departures and one for arrivals, like they would in real life. You sometimes have to sit for 15 minutes for arrivals. That ain't real.

Pro Member Chief Captain
tomthetank Chief Captain

The taxi speed of the AI aircraft has been a pain since fs9 was released(2002 there was a d/load to increase taxi speed,but none that work in fs9)
I have Traffic2004 and if its set to 100% you will never land.80% seems ok
I have found a roundabout way of fixing aircraft not clearing the r/way quick enough,I use Afcad2 and add a new taxiway at troublesome airports,not perfect,but it works

Pro Member First Officer
Jason (Av8r77) First Officer

Man,

These guys just stop on the runway and raise flaps, etc. I've sat in my Piper and watched them land. The configure on the runway rather than after the hold short line.

Oh well, at least I have traffic and it's not all the time. THe bigger of the annoyances is that fact that they don't use dual runways for departures and arrivals. That is also another complaint that many people have.

Pro Member Chief Captain
tomthetank Chief Captain

Shocked Traffic2004 uses all available runways

Pro Member First Officer
Jason (Av8r77) First Officer

So does UT2004, but they don't have a designated arrival and a designated departure runway.

Normally you aren't taking off on the same runway arriving traffic is coming in on.

This way traffic flows smoothly and you don't get bottlenecks.

Guest

Well, I don't know any AFCAD stuff (or even what it means). But I do have both UT2K4 and MT2K4, and I like MT better for all the reasons I listed in my post earlier today. I have installs of FS2K4 on two different PCs. So I have My Traffic on one and UT on the other.

MT seems a little better.

I won't touch FSTraffic 2K4. It's too small.

Pro Member First Officer
George (OrlandoGeorge) First Officer

As it is I favor MT more as well. I have noticed good intervals and realsitic pattern senerios. Well placed liveries. I fly from Honolulu to Pago Pago and pick up Air New Zealand and Quantas enroute as is to be expected. In the islands of French Polynesia I gate with the exotic commuters from the Society Islands, Bora Bora, Tahiti etc.

In addition, upon arrival back in PHNL it is very cool to see the diamond necklace of traffic entering the pattern in the distance, (home at last!)

At certain times of the evening and at night it seems that 4-R in PHNL is dedicated to landing but I certainly could be mistaken. Seems the night takeoff runway is much more on 4-L. Of course heavy traffic generally uses the outer for takeoff at PHNL.

I have noticed no bugs in MT. Only two oddities or issues. -One time a DC-10 landed on my assigned runway when I was cleared for takeoff. Also a few AI aircraft will vanish upon landing. I hear that this is somewhat rare which I have found it to be. Someone mentioned in another forum that when an AI aircraft ends it's final leg and reaches it's final destination in a long flight plan it can simply disappear....

All in all MT is very enjoyable and satisfactory for my individual exaction.

Fly Far and Free Avsim pilots! Explore the world because it is yours!

All times are GMT Page 1 of 1

Related Questions