Why some airlines havd significantly diminished presence



  • Since upgrading from 1.1.1.8 to the newest one, United and Delta have had a significant cut in flights. Newark and Atlanta are ghost Airports.

    Was this an intentional thing or was something changed that I may be able to fix?



  • They changed the flight plan database you will not see European airlines in the US like before and less international airlines in Heathrow and large aircraft, it`s down to the flight plans they put in, in my opinion we are going backwards with TG.


  • JF Staff

    I'm seeing a very busy Atlanta here. Are you using the very latest build?
    Are you using any third party scenery for these airports? If so make sure that it is above the Traffic Global entry in the scenery library, and that you had started a P3D flight before compiling the new traffic file so that the P3D scenery database had been updated.
    Also, make sure you are compiling with the "rescan airport data" option ticked so that the updated P3D database is being scanned by TG.
    If you are still having problems after that, please let me know.



  • @Rich
    If you go from 500 flight plans for an airport like EGLL down to 160 and not all will compile without errors your not going to see a full airport.
    KSFO 109
    KATL 129 down from 600
    KDFW 114
    KIAD 79
    Only the plans without errors will show in the sim.


  • JF Staff

    Where are you getting those numbers from, Ray? By my count the schedules have 390 flights for KATL by example. Remember you need to count BOTH the departures column AND the arrivals column.
    Also, some airports may have had more flights before, but if you were to examine them you'd see that you would have the same A to B flight represented multiple times (for example the A to B flight would be a single flight plan, the B to A flight would be another and so on (and so on for short hops that get repeated during the day). These have all been consolidated into a single flight plan that flies back and forth. So, if you were just using the schedules database as a yardstick you might think there are less flights, but that isn't an accurate representation. If you compare bgl sizes now compared to back then, I think they are around 80% bigger in the latest version than a few versions back.



  • @Rich said in Why some airlines havd significantly diminished presence:

    If you compare bgl sizes now compared to back then, I think they are around 80% bigger in the latest version than a few versions back.

    Just for info:
    Installed default Traffic_Global_Airlines.bgl [now TrafficGlobal_AI.bgl] file size comparison in Mb:

    v1.1.1.5 10.6
    v1.1.1.6 10.6
    v1.1.1.7 -
    v1.1.1.8 10.6
    v1.1.1.9 -
    v1.1.2.0 14.1

    v1.1.2.0
    Compiled with installed sceneries:(comparison of Error Correction effect using identical parameters)

    full left (more accuracy) 15.3
    full right (more flightplans) 17.3

    [FSX-SE]





  • So users complaining of lack of aircraft at there airports and lack of traffic are wrong!!!
    PS I only compile TG traffic and do not run other AI programs with TG like some have suggested to users.
    EGLL 160 Departure plans 158 Arrivals total 318 flights not all will compile due to errors in the database.
    Old database around 1000 flights not all will compile due to errors but gates are crammed at the start of day.


  • JF Staff

    @Ray-Fry said in Why some airlines havd significantly diminished presence:

    So users complaining of lack of aircraft at there airports and lack of traffic are wrong!!!

    Where on Earth did I state that?? I'm happy to have a dialog, but not if you are going to put disparaging words in my mouth.

    @Ray-Fry said in Why some airlines havd significantly diminished presence:

    EGLL 160 Departure plans 158 Arrivals total 318 flights not all will compile due to errors in the database.

    Lets look at EGLL as an example as you bought it up...

    In the database there are 318 flights that go to EGLL. I've stripped everything else out of the schedules and compiled only those flights.
    Those flight plans add up to over 1000 individual flights/legs. For example, EGLL to EGPF. That particular flight will only have ONE flight plan in the database, but will fly between the two locations multiple times in the same day, despite not having multiple flight plans. Previously when there were separate flight plans for each of the back and forth legs between the two airports you have the problem of the last flight of the day being generated first thing in the morning and sitting there at the gate all day until it does it flight in the evening, but having the unfortunate side effect that you appear to be missing (but others complained about) of filling the airport up to the brim in an unrealistic way with aircraft that do not move all day.
    Looking at the error log, I found that out of the 318 flights, 31 of them produced an error. The majority of these are due to either the airport not being available in the sim or had its code changed since the flight sim airport data was set (FAOR, OMDW etc). Without an updated payware/freeware versions of these airports, it isn't possible to compile the flight plan. I could change those codes to the old codes used by the sim, but then anyone who has updated their airports won't be seeing any traffic as the flight plans are using the old codes. I'm not sure there is a correct way to do that as it will always break it for some people, but I'll have a look at adding an airport code substitution feature so that users can set up which airport codes they want to use.

    Also, an airport should never be approaching full capacity. If I was to add some code that went through each airport and assigned some sort of flight to each gate to artificially fill the spaces up, it would be of no use to anyone as all that would happen is either no planes would land as they would disappear as soon as the sim realised there is no available parking, or the flight wouldn't even compile as there would not be a free parking space at the other end. None of the flight leaving the airport would ever get to their destination for the same reason - as soon as they get close enough, the lack of parking would be detected and the aircraft would vanish. There always has to be enough free spaces at an airport to account for all the incoming traffic.

    For reference, here are some pictures of Heathrow (third party version, no cargo AI enabled) I've just taken with the current version of TG.

    heathr1.png

    heath2.png

    It seems alright to me? I've had a look at some pictures of the real airport and there are plenty of images that are showing LESS traffic in the same area than is displaying in the sim.



  • Ok it must be my V5 that`s the problem then i use a custom scenery folder built up over the last 2 years, so that arrivals will load at the none addon airports using the error log to find out which airports are not loading flights,
    KSFO today 1.1.1.9 at 0915hrs.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/50810455611/in/dateposted-public/
    You will get some errors still due the 12hr rule.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/50809716048/in/dateposted-public/
    KSFO to WSSS and YSSS will return timing errors and KSFO to KOAK to short a flight under the TG rule.
    I can show you shots of loads of addon airports with loads of empty gates.
    But we have what we have and will have to put up with it.

    PS just my opinion an AI program that creates to much traffic is better larger database, the users then has a simple solution to that problem the sim slider to reduce the traffic to suit his needs and PC performance, this what some users have to do with some other AI programs that we know about.
    Again just my opinion.

    Regards Ray Fry.



  • I quite honestly really, really, really do not want to butt in here, but are Rich and Ray comparing like for like?
    It's just that I thought Ray might still be using v1.1.1.9 and there appears to me to be an increase in traffic generally in v1.1.2.0 over v1.1.1.9.
    v1.1.2.0 Just TG traffic @100% @ EGLL (UK2000 free edition) FSX-SE
    EGLL v1.1.2.0 MEGA.jpg
    Just a thought, is all...🙂


  • JF Staff

    @Ray-Fry

    PS just my opinion an AI program that creates to much traffic is better

    Creating something that can't perform if the user selects its maximum setting is not really a very good idea. Make sure you never design a hi-fi amplifier or a car engine.



  • @Derek
    And there was me thinking the reason the flight plans have traffic density setting was so that the user could turn down the traffic without loosing all traffic, and i suspect most present TG users have it set to 100% like me.
    I will now butt out and leave JF to do what they want as it appears giving an opinion is frowned on.



  • @Capt-Quirk
    If that`s 1.1.2.0 EGLL full with traffic my eyes need checking the bottom concourse almost empty and the eastern parking spaces.

    EGLL TG 2years ago.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/50810261473/in/dateposted-public/
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/50811120577/in/dateposted-public/
    Aircraft exiting the runway 2 on approach.



  • This post is deleted!

  • JF Staff

    @Ray-Fry said in Why some airlines havd significantly diminished presence:

    @Derek
    I will now butt out and leave JF to do what they want as it appears giving an opinion is frowned on.

    You're more than welcome to express an opinion - but if it's misleading we will challenge it, I am afraid. That's the way it goes.