Just Flight have issued a Service Pack for the Flight Simulator X version of Traffic/Traffic 2005:
An Update for Traffic (DVD-ROM and Download) and Traffic 2005 is now available in the Support section.
This Service Pack (7.1Mb) is only for Traffic/Traffic 2005 installed in Flight Simulator X.
It addresses the following issues:
- Voicepacks are now supported in FSX
- Voicepack switching tool is now configured for FSX
- AFCAD issue fixed. Airports should now display correctly
- Flyable Aircraft Tool issues now fixed
- Traffic Editor now compiles traffic.bgl in FSX format
Note: .NET2 is required in order to operate the revised version of the Traffic Editor tool; details of where to download it, and full installation instructions for the Service pack - are available in the Support section.
Technorati tags: just flight traffic
Related posts
{ 16 comments… read them below or add one }
PieEater 06.19.07 at 5:55 am
Thanks for that, updating now. Was a little bit underwhelmed with the performance of Traffic 2005 under FSX, this looks like it is the answer.
Ken S. Campbell 06.19.07 at 7:18 am
Good news as I have Traffic running in my sim!
mark.avey 06.19.07 at 9:22 am
Hi PieEater. I think readers would be interested why you are a “little underwhelmed”. Would you be able to provide some feedback on the product?
Mark - FlightSimX
PieEater 06.19.07 at 10:55 pm
Hi Mark. When I was using the product with FS2004 I was very happy with the way that it populated airports with approprite aircraft types and the appropriate regional airlines, the way that it busied the airport with inbound and outbound flights was great. I found that setting traffic to about 35% within FS9 gave a good balance between having to hold fire for your take-off / landing slot and getting frustrated with being in a queue holding short or being constantly told to go around.
In FSX I have traffic set to 40% and the airports & skies are much quieter than I would expect. The textures on the aircraft and ground vehicles take a few seconds to load which I don’t recall happening in FS9, so your pre-flight scan of the airport is made up of uniform grey objects until things catch up.
My impressions could be down to my personal configuration of FSX / Traffic and or both rather than a shortcomming with the product. Rightly or wrongly I do remain sceptical of FS9 products patched up for FSX as fom what I understand the FSX engine is completely re-worked.
You asked
Ken S. Campbell 06.20.07 at 5:25 am
I have to agree with PieEater on the performance of Traffic 2005. It can be a very FPS hog!
mark.avey 06.20.07 at 1:14 pm
Thanks for the heads up, guys. This is on my list of products to review, so I’ll get back to you with my finding.
Mark - FlightSimX
PieEater 06.21.07 at 10:23 pm
I look forward to your findings Mark, if you come up with any tweaks or want me to try any particular settings to help with your own review let me know. In the meantime I might have a play to see if I can make it behave more like it did under FS9.
mark.avey 06.22.07 at 6:41 am
Thanks for the offer - I’ll probably be in touch.
Mark - FlightSimX
PieEater 06.23.07 at 9:45 am
Hi Mark, I ran some tests with Traffic 2005 under FSX, it seems to confirm my initial thoughts about the overall lack of actual traffic compared to what I was used to under FS9. It would be useful if someone who doesn’t have traffic installed or who has a different traffic pack installed could run the same tests at the same airport etc. Anyhow the results are here;
http://www.pjwebster.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Traffic.xls
mark.avey 06.23.07 at 1:21 pm
Thanks PieEater. I’ll check myself when I get a chance. Anyone else any thoughts on this?
Mark - FlightSimX
PieEater 06.23.07 at 3:05 pm
When it comesto number of aircraft this may be a limitation of FSX, i.e. Traffic just forces FSX to use more appropriate aircraft / liveries on the number of aircraft that FSX is programmed to place. As for lack of movement (the only aircraft that took off was a Cessna 152) perhaps Traffic is following the database of flights and there is nothing scheduled to take off from Liverpool at 12:00. However under FS9 with traffic set to ~35% there would be plenty of movement on the ground after 5 minutes of flight prep no matter what time of day.
PieEater 06.26.07 at 7:18 pm
Bizarrely enough, after conducting the tests and putting my FPS settings back to 30 it seems that every airport I go to the parked aircraft can’t get off the ground quickly enough. For the purpose of testing I set the FPS to unlimited so I could measure the impact of increasing the traffic volume. Perhaps FSX precludes traffic movement (and maybe other nicities) when FPS is set to unlimited in order to provide the highest FSP possible !?!
mark.avey 06.27.07 at 6:27 am
That’s interesting. I’ve been experimenting a bit with limiting the frame rate to 27 or so, and it does seem to make a difference. Seems more fluid on my gear.
Mark - FlightSimX
PieEater 06.29.07 at 10:45 am
When it comes to FPS games the general concensus seemed to be that the human eye can’t really notice any differences in image quality above 35fps which is why I set my limiter to 30. I think perhaps as simming is a lot more fluid then the FPS can come down whilst still providing a quality experience so maybe I’ll try putting the slider down a couple of notches and see what happens.
mark.avey 06.29.07 at 12:07 pm
On my particular setup, it doesn’t seem to make a lot of difference to the “fluidity” of the sim whatever the setting of the Target Frame Rate, be it 27 or Unlimited.
PieEater 06.29.07 at 12:14 pm
It does seem though that FSX does strive to meet your FPS as set, and in order to do so it may be restricting non essentials such as traffic movement and perhaps other goodies that arn’t immediately apparent.