Traffic X and Traffic 360

  • With this new Forum up and running, it would now be interesting to do a survey of just how many users there are of Traffic X and Traffic 360.
    Regular contributors 'Freddy', 'Soaranden' and myself are content to soldier on with our much 'worked-on' Traffic X utilities rather than moving on to the new Traffic Global unit. But I wonder just how many others are continuing to use Traffic X and/or Traffic 360 for their AI capabilities?
    If you are one of these, it would be interesting to hear from you on your experiences with these utilities.

  • A good question.

    Although I imagine responses to this question may potentially be skewed, present day, depending on …

    • How many people have not yet noticed there's been a forum change,
    • How many people have noticed there's been a forum change, but have decided not to bother registering here,
    • And how many people have noticed there's been a forum change and have registered here.

    That said, I'll try to get the ball rolling and throw in a confirmation to your statement/question above …

    I am indeed still using Traffic X and continue to enjoy what it offers. It is a little long in the tooth now, but is such that if you're willing to put in the work, you can keep its aircraft, its liveries, and its schedules well enough up to date.

  • Hi Guys...

    1. Not sure re the new layouts. I did like the 'old' format - where each subject had its own line.

    2. I use Traffic 360 with its default settings. Very happy with it. The few bugs it has - the BAe146 with its stairs deployed in flight, and the lack of 'RW' live activity doesn't really bother me - I just like the activity around me. I never seem to get the time to delve into changing anything like flight plans etc.

    I am expecting to update my system eventually - I'm running a 3770K & a 970 on a Dell 3011. Traffic 360 runs quite well. I'm waiting for the LG G-Sync LG 38GL950G-B monitor to be released, and then I'll be ordering a a 9900K system with a RTX 2080 ti 11 GB card...

    I really like flying the JF T1 around my own local EGOW scenery - with my own six Grobs programmed with AIFP. However it is brilliant seeing EGGP and EGCC populated with heavies with T360.

    OK, some do not like to see Monarch for example. Not a problem for me. Let's face it - using P3d & FSX are make believe anyway, aren't they ?

    My one gripe with JF is that the Hawk T1 is not finished - it is not flyable using the right cursor key. I am familiar enough with keyboard flying - I use it a lot. I find this aircraft very frustrating - with no 'hot start' and unfinished keyboard programming. What a great pity to be spoiled by lack of a few minor settings.

    I'm reduced to keeping FSX, in order to fly the Skysim Hawk T.Mk1 FrontSeat with the keyboard. Frustrating.

    I admire JF's output - I can imaging the pressure re getting a model out there. I only wish that the Hawk could be 'finished'....

    I did send in a ticket - twice, but got no reply. I was delighted when Rich mentioned quite sometime ago that there were 'improvements' on the way for the Hawk, but hey, I'm still waiting.

    Just installed v242 - no problems - except no hot start again - or a keyboard correction...pity. Its been out now for about two and a half years...


  • JF Staff

    Hi Bill,
    The quick start on the Hawk should be fully functional - the engine icon on the Panel Icon menu should do that for you. If it's not working, make sure you're not switching to a Hawk from another aircraft and this can set/unset default FS systems in an unplanned way. Load the Hawk from the FS menu and it should work fine.
    I'm afraid we won't be able to support piloting the aircraft from the cursor keys - it's going to be joystick flying only.

  • @Rich
    Thanks for responding, Rich.
    Yep - I use the 'Quick start'. I just required a 'hot' engine when switching vehicles.

    Pity re the right cursor keys.
    We did, once, have the ability to swap 'Air' files. Tried that....

    Been 'flying' since the Spectrum and FS1. Done lots of programming air files/scenery etc.
    Aware of the work involved.

    Anyway - thanks for all your efforts. You have a brilliant crew.

    0.9nm SW EGOW

  • JF Staff

    Hi Bill,
    The cursor restriction is from the gauge programming. We mask out the normal controls and replace them with our own system. That's the only way we can do things like have the steering inputs affected by things like hydraulic pressure.
    I went and had a look back over the code this afternoon and I worked out a way to fix this. You can download an updated gauge from here if you want to give it a try -
    Just copy it over the top of the existing version in the Hawk's panel folder.

    Thanks for the kind words.

  • I did lose MFS for a few weeks when I had a calamity with the computer, and the SSds I had windows 7 and MFS were destroyed, + one with trains on steam,
    I have since rebuilt two new computers, one now with win7, MFS, and now with trains on steam, with three SSDs, the other with win 10 and steam with trains, two SSDs.
    I am still using trafficX, I did pre order 360 when it first came out as it was supposed to be an upgrade to traffic X, but like Raym I found it was not,
    I think I only got my system going again as I rebuilt with same type of motherboard, and other parts, so it looked the same to Microsoft. and I clone my drives, so I still had
    SSDs with MfS on, When I first started with MFS I found it was a job to find parking for any flights I made up, as it was already filled up, Plus problems like a float plane
    landing at Marham and getting stuck on the runway, so the way I made way for my flights to park, was to delete all aircraft parked on U/K airfields, I know RayM would most likely create his own parking , I did learn a lot when I first started making up flights, from Freddy Soaranden aqnd RayM about how to do it, As the manual only told you part of the method, I mostly fly a Lancaster, as that is near the same as the Lincolns I worked on as a electrician in 1951/2/3 at Watton and Hemswell, ollso did quite a few hours fliying in them, including one 8 hour flight the long way to Gibralta, and a flight over the mediteranian dropping window to jam the navy radar,
    I have at the moment got 320 of my flights on the computer, I compile using only VFR traffic u/k, and only Europe as country, I think I must be getting to old to be playing around with these computer things,

  • @BillCusick

    Hello Bill,
    thanks for replying in this TrafficX/Traffic 360 topic saying that you are still using T360 and that you are mainly using it to give you an 'active' background of aircraft whilst you do your flying. T360 does the job despite any shortcomings.

  • @pathfinder00199

    Hello Harry,
    pleased to hear that you have got your computer systems up and running again.
    Good that you are using the flexibility of Traffic X to suit what you want to achieve. You will be getting faster load up speeds and frame rates.
    Enjoy your nostalgic flying.

  • @Rich
    Wow !
    Thanks very much. You have made my day.
    Tried it. Works great.
    Thanks for your time - I appreciate it.

    I'll say it again - what a beautiful aircraft to fly in P3d.


  • @freddy

    I have been watching a post in the ADE forum for a few days concerning the replacement of SABA with TNCS and how it has to be done. I thought I would give it a go out of interest.

    Before starting, I had a look at seeing what flights my Traffic X had scheduled for SABA. Much to my surprise there were several B777, B747, A340 and MD11 aircraft all 'hoping' to use this tiny airport which is only suitable for Islanders and Twin Otters. It was very interesting to watch a 747 approach and go-around. All have now been re-routed or deleted of course but I wonder what other 'interesting' schedules' have been come across by Traffic X / Traffic 360 users?

  • Not much of a response to this thread! However, I have only just found this forum!
    I have been an MSFS flyer since 3.1.
    I am using Traffic 360 upgraded from X which was upgraded from Traffic 2005.
    I mainly fly ORBX Australia and New Zealand plus occasionally some flights into Kai Tak (old Hong Kong).
    I have adjusted the database , added some flights in and out of certain airfields, added some repaints.
    I find T360 does all I want it to.
    Still have some issues with ATC not referring to airlines correctly - of course some of that was due to the ATC codes not correctly used in the cfg files.

    Yes, I like T360.

  • @geoffk79
    Pleased to hear from another user of TrafficX/Traffic 360. Welcome.
    You seem to be working and flying in the same areas as our friend "Freddy".
    Adding and modifying schedules can be a great way of 'passing the time' whilst not actually flying and, yes, both of these programs contain a lot of poorly constructed 'aircraft.cfg' files. I have found loads of missing or wrong ATC names and, sadly, quite a few instances of aircraft being designated to an airline incorrectly when another airline of a similar name exists.

  • Longtime user from Traffic X > T360 >TG.
    I've replaced the airline traffic for something more up to date but retained the airport vehicles and Military AI components of T360.

  • @Capt-Quirk said in Traffic X and Traffic 360:

    Longtime user from Traffic X > T360 >TG.
    I've replaced the airline traffic for something more up to date but retained the airport vehicles and Military AI components of T360.

    Good to hear from you and interested to hear that you are combining your usage of old and new JF AI packages. Makes sense - seems it is taking a long time for TG to get the package into a complete state - airlines, military and business/private schedules.

  • @RayM
    Apparently, there are no immediate plans to add military traffic to TG and, although they do say that there will be an upgrade the current GA (which is just a mix of a few T360 and default planes), probably after final release.