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.
![](/uploads/1/2/6/9/126911239/710966471.jpg)
If you want to be able to identify traffic files at a glance if they are FS9, put a checkmark in the Add 'FS9' suffix to FS9 traffic files box. If you want to be able to identify traffic files at a glance if they are FSX, put a checkmark in the Add 'FSX' suffix to FSX traffic files box.
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).
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. 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? 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. 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? 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. 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 ONEHOUR, 1 for TWOHOURS, 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.
![Convert fs9 traffic files to fsx demo online Convert fs9 traffic files to fsx demo online](/uploads/1/2/6/9/126911239/503916535.jpg)
HiI have used Ultimate Traffic (now UT2) since day one and with the UT2 Power package (free) it's just super. Have NOT noticed any significant drop in fps and the airports, also ORBX, look just beautiful with all the traffic and wounderful autentic liveries. Ok, WOAI is freeware but not in the same division as UT2. Have also tested My Traffic X (Aerosoft) but none of them matches UT2.I have, REX, ASE, FSUIPC, UT2 + some other add-ons ALLWAYS running with my FSX and have NOT noticed ANY drops in fps if I have them shut down or not.Jackthe Swede in Spain. HiI have used Ultimate Traffic (now UT2) since day one and with the UT2 Power package (free) it's just super. Have NOT noticed any significant drop in fps and the airports, also ORBX, look just beautiful with all the traffic and wounderful autentic liveries.
Ok, WOAI is freeware but not in the same division as UT2. Have also tested My Traffic X (Aerosoft) but none of them matches UT2.I have, REX, ASE, FSUIPC, UT2 + some other add-ons ALLWAYS running with my FSX and have NOT noticed ANY drops in fps if I have them shut down or not.Jackthe Swede in SpainCheers Buddy, that more or less confirms what little info I have.
Another user of UT2 - not tried anything else but pretty happy with it. Installed it, update it now and then but for the most part just forget it's there - bit like REX really. I'm sure there must be some impact on performance as with most add-ons, but I think I have my commercial aircraft set to 100% and GA to 75% - whatever the default is TBH but I certtainly don't think I'm getting the performance hit I would experience if I had turned up the default AI to 100% HTHOk can agree with you on the fps hit, but, with my rig it hasn't been noticable.Jackthe Swede in Spain. My traffic 2010,I have it set at airliner traffic at just 2% and it has no impact on fps but does take longer to load fsx.
At just 2% the traffic is perfect, it looks like I am running 50% AI. But I don't use it for GA.For big airports and flying airliners it makes all the difference. E.g at YMML you often have to hold sort because a Virgin blue or Qantas is coming to land.Agree with you too. It's well known that the amount of installed aircrafts (AI included) hits the loading time of FSX, but havn't seen it affect the fps.In UT2 I DO have ALL the sliders set to 100%, but I still have acceptable fps and that with ALL FSX sliders set to MAX.Jackthe Swede in Spain.
I have actually just been searching for a nice payware traffic add on today. I have read a lot about the fps hit from the big payware programs and then I found this: My TrafficX - Lite, just what I was looking for. All the major Airlines covering worldwide without having to move your sliders way back. If you want more traffic you can just upgrade at a reduced price. Check it out here:CheersMikeMike, maybe you'll report back with some impressions regarding any performance hit? All I really want in an AI package is to add some extra traffic in the skies and around airports. I couldn't give a pig's whiskers where they are going to or coming from.
I'm not interested at all that they are not arriving or leaving as per schedule, I simply want to add some extra realism. Above all I don't want to spend the next three weeks trying to learn something, that IMO, should be very straightforward. Crikey, I'm spending enough time learning how to fly the iFLY. I am a UT2 user as well. I like that they update flight schedules every season for about $6. This is a great package if you want to fly current real world routes.Only downside of UT2 is the unwanted formations that are spawned when two companies fly schedules at the same time. When this happens UT2 Spawns 2 or more aircraft close together.
I've seen as many as 5 commercial airliners flying too close on the same route. Many airlines fly close schedules to compete with each other on routes so UT2 just spawns those aircraft together. In the real world their would be ATC seperation.Performance is really good and aircraft models and different liveries is very good as well.Cheers. Only downside of UT2 is the unwanted formations that are spawned when two companies fly schedules at the same time. When this happens UT2 Spawns 2 or more aircraft close together. I've seen as many as 5 commercial airliners flying too close on the same route.
Many airlines fly close schedules to compete with each other on routes so UT2 just spawns those aircraft together. In the real world their would be ATC seperation.Are you sure these are in fact separate flights and not 'code share' flights. While preparing the FTX AU Traffic pack, I had to spend quite some time eliminating 'code share' flights from airline schedules where only one aircraft was used by up to five separate airlines. Are you sure these are in fact separate flights and not 'code share' flights. While preparing the FTX AU Traffic pack, I had to spend quite some time eliminating 'code share' flights from airline schedules where only one aircraft was used by up to five separate airlines.Not sure the reasons behind it but they appear to be different airlines.
I have the latest schedule now and haven't noticed it lately. When I first ran UT2 I did see up to 5 airliners grouped together over the UK, but usually you would just see 2 or 3 at times.I don't get into the reasons why as I am just an end user and these are my observance from using the software. If this issue has been sorted with the latest scheduling that would be cool. Lately I have been using the latest schedule and mostly flying in Australia with the JS4100 so this is an area that doesn't have the same congestion as over Europe or USA. Most likely this is the reason why I haven't seen it for a while.It would make sense if it was codeshare airlines as the software would spawn up to 5 aircraft for one route, their could be that many in a codeshare over Europe.
It is annoying to see it when it happens. What's the actual visual quality of the AI traffic Mike!? Also does anyone have any opinions of the freeware WOAI?Personally I'm a big fan of WOAI. Yes, you have to convert the FS9 bgl's to FSX bgl's but this is very quick and easy to do.
I find the packages easy to install plus they give me the flexibility to have what I want. Being a bit of a twiddler and tweaker, I enjoy adding airlines, updating the flightplans, installing liveries etc - perverse, I knowThe aircraft look good enough to me, there are GA and military options available, especially if you get hooked and start adding in the MAIW packages as well. And the price is right - spend the extra bucks on another ORBX airport or 2Jack. Personally I'm a big fan of WOAI. Yes, you have to convert the FS9 bgl's to FSX bgl's but this is very quick and easy to do. I find the packages easy to install plus they give me the flexibility to have what I want. Being a bit of a twiddler and tweaker, I enjoy adding airlines, updating the flightplans, installing liveries etc - perverse, I knowThe aircraft look good enough to me, there are GA and military options available, especially if you get hooked and start adding in the MAIW packages as well.
And the price is right - spend the extra bucks on another ORBX airport or 2JackI think I will give WOAI a try and see if it gives me anything, if not then nothing lost! EDIT: Sheesh, I thought that was going to be easy. I've just been on the website and me thinks. Why can't things just be simple? I cannot understand why there is not a simple utility that works very easily like the Orbx AI add on.
That is superb. IMO it shouldn't be any more difficult than that, surely? Anyway, at the moment I think I will take Mike's advice and look at MyTraffic X Lite. Is there anyone else with some experience of this. I have a concern and that is, I am a bit of a perfectionist, a pain in the arse some might say. So I will be really peed off if I sit on the apron surrounded by a load of aircraft that has crappy textures.
What is your opinion on this aspect of the add on Mike? I have used WOAI untill now and it works OK when you think it is free. It takes a while to get started because you have to read how to use it but then it is easy to use BUT. You have to download and install each and airline one by one. Then you need the program to convert the fs9 traffic files to FSX.
And then the reason why I am changing to MTX Lite: You can't have shadows activated, that will make all your AI invinsible.About best textures: MTX is better or the same as WOAI. UT2 has the far best textures if you read the thread on Avsim and google around. So it is a tough decision. Apples or oranges, you can't have them both.CheersMike. I have used WOAI untill now and it works OK when you think it is free. It takes a while to get started because you have to read how to use it but then it is easy to use BUT.
You have to download and install each and airline one by one. Then you need the program to convert the fs9 traffic files to FSX. And then the reason why I am changing to MTX Lite: You can't have shadows activated, that will make all your AI invinsible.CheersMikeOK I think I need to follow your lead.
So forgive me, but are you saying you have got MTX lite or you are about to get it? Hi HowardI have been watching this post since you started it. Personally I will only use FSX with DX10 running, I know there are a few glitches there but they are very easy to live with. Since I use DX10 all my AI has to be compatible, UT2 does a very good job with little impact especially since it dosnt use a bgl file.
I have bought a lot of good quality payware GA planes and like to see them used in the AI. As you can imagine this would cripple any machine and its frame rates so to combat this I use UT2 for all the liners and then a small freeware program that has been mentioned here before FSX GA-Traffic.
Although this software can be finnicky when you first start to use it I find it exceptional when fully programmed in. You can use the program to make fully compatible AI craft with lower res so that your frame rates stay good.
I have models of all my payware GA ploanes and Helos that FSX GA-Traffic has made running with all there associated repaints I use, by the way the only software I use for the helos once I have made the AI models for them is Heli Traffic 2009. There is a bit of work to get all your Ai models made this way but I personally cannot see any other way after you have spent good money on planes you like and then not be able to see them flying, its an immoressive site landing at any field and seeing full of high quality GA craft.I hope this gives you some ideas.Ken. Hi HowardI have been watching this post since you started it. Personally I will only use FSX with DX10 running, I know there are a few glitches there but they are very easy to live with. Since I use DX10 all my AI has to be compatible, UT2 does a very good job with little impact especially since it dosnt use a bgl file.
I have bought a lot of good quality payware GA planes and like to see them used in the AI. As you can imagine this would cripple any machine and its frame rates so to combat this I use UT2 for all the liners and then a small freeware program that has been mentioned here before FSX GA-Traffic. Although this software can be finnicky when you first start to use it I find it exceptional when fully programmed in. You can use the program to make fully compatible AI craft with lower res so that your frame rates stay good. I have models of all my payware GA ploanes and Helos that FSX GA-Traffic has made running with all there associated repaints I use, by the way the only software I use for the helos once I have made the AI models for them is Heli Traffic 2009. There is a bit of work to get all your Ai models made this way but I personally cannot see any other way after you have spent good money on planes you like and then not be able to see them flying, its an immoressive site landing at any field and seeing full of high quality GA craft.I hope this gives you some ideas.KenCheers Ken, that is very helpful. Particularly interesting is that I see flight 1 does a demo version, which I cannot find for the MTX lite.
![Fsx Fsx](/uploads/1/2/6/9/126911239/827303325.jpg)
So to be able to try it first is a big incentive. I don't want to spend any money, no matter how little, if I end up with something that is over complicated, has aircraft with crappy textures or has a hit on performance. So it seems I will be first going to get the UT2 demo version. However, I have just got myself FS2 crew, Alicante airport and pre-purchase on the CNRM!
So I will have to wait a while before ordering the full version I think. That's cool though as it gives me time to research and make a calculated decision.
![](/uploads/1/2/6/9/126911239/710966471.jpg)