That may be your personal preference, but I would rather they iron out the bugs in the live date system they have now instead of replacing it with an offline routing.
3 Likes
We are currently in contact with Microsoft/Asobo regarding the Bugs that have a major impact on AI Traffic in SU11B. Depending on the final release we will evaluate our next development steps.
6 Likes
SU11 Hotfix for altitude of arriving airplanes has been released to our internal testers - lets hope everything is running as it should and we can keep it in the final release version.
11 Likes
1 minute to SU11
I hope they work it out for both. So that everybody can use it as they please. I prefer offline, I feel I can configure it more to my liking. Infact I can even place flightplans for airlines that no longer exist or GA all over. I really enjoyed the flexibility of fsx in that regard.
AIM 1.1.1.5 and TC 0.6.0.20 have been uploaded to our servers 
https://www.alpha-india.net/2022/11/12/ai-manager-1-1-1-and-traffic-controller-0-6-released/
10 Likes
Hi, currently (without use of Traffic controller) but with almost all AIG models and liveries installed I only have generic planes in the sim. What settings do I need in MSFS traffic to at least have AIG models if I don’t want to use traffic controller?
Internal mechanics are broken since SU11. Nothing you can do.
I guess the problem must be that Microsobo does not have the knowhow to solve AI issues. That also explains the many regressions and bugs they introduce each update. They don’t find Experten or programmers for the AI Traffic Job. They copied and pasted everything from FSX, I mean that says everything.
1 Like
Is this true, I used Ultimate traffic in FSX and landings , take offs were fine , so they must have used the AI logic then in FSX
Has this been officially said by Asobo , just curious?
In fact the ATC was better in FSX also so I find it hard to believe it was copied and put into MSFS, would like official clarification as this line gets trotted out too often and in my opinion is just not true
Hello @BladeRunner962 , @candykatx and others.
Please stay on topic of AIG and related MSFS traffic and not drift off towards discussing development practices.
There are other topics where that can be discussed and was already discussed quite extensively.
E.g. https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/if-devs-cant-but-modders-can/455764.
However, reading the comments above I feel that I should give some reply to prevent the spread of misinformation, for those interested:
It is true that FSX served as a code foundation for MSFS and reuse of code is a common practice in software development.
Creating such complex software completely from scratch may be more time consuming, expensive and error prone, so if I had a code basis such as FSX, I would think it is smart to make good use of it.
However, this does not mean that huge parts weren’t rewritten and improved upon to bring MSFS to the level that it is at today.
I find the statement that code was just copied and pasted to be a very extreme oversimplification and even if code was reused, it does not in any way reflect negatively on the capabilities of the developers.
More the contrary.
Clearly regressions and bugs should not make it into release, but preventing that is difficult.
Remember that the software is huge, multiple teams work on the product simultaneously and every small change has the potential to break something unexpected no matter the talent.
To catch the issues testing is needed which is also in no way simple and finding/fixing the issue isn’t either.
Specifically concerning AI Traffic, it seems to be an area where improvement is still ongoing.
While for some it is very important, for others it is just nice to have, as different issues may be much more pressing.
The feedback snapshots indicate that improving/fixing the AI Traffic issues, that were already reported at release of MSFS, are planned to be fixed, but havent been specifically tackled yet.
The same is true for ATC issues.
I understand that this can be frustrating for users,
but the continuous effort to bring one of the arguably best Flight Simulaters to consumers should be appreciated, rather than diminished.
4 Likes
That’s fair enough, thanks for the clarification
1 Like
We have released our first version of a Workaround for the STAR altitude bug that was added in SU11. It is far from perfect, but reduces the number of Go-Arounds at the airports by a bit.
What it does: Resets the altitude for the airplanes on approach
What it does not: Override the Waypoints set by internal ATC for the STAR.
8 Likes
Please provide link for download…
1 Like
AIGTC should update itself automatically the next time you start it.
1 Like
Not sure whether I’m the only one but since the TC was updated earlier today, it consistently crashes the game when I launch the TC while parked at any airport that would spawn commercial jetliners (GA airfields have no issue).
Does AIflow work with AIG injected traffic?
I use AIGround and it works seamlessly
Thanks
Is there any way to restore the default AI traffic? I mistakenly press YES when I run AIG AI Manager the first time and it asked me to disable the default traffic. I misunderstood that as “disabling the generic model” and use the AIG models instead. Only to realise that ever since I install AIG, I have No Traffic from the default Live traffic whatsoever. I’m not planning to use the AIG TC app as I don’t like the idea of injected traffic. I prefer to use the default MSFS Live Traffic with ATC chatter, but I’m trying to find a way to restore the setting without having to reinstall my entire sim all over again. Anyone have any idea?
Is it this trafficAircraft.bgl.aigoff file? should I just remove the aigoff extension and let it go to trafficAircraft.bgl instead?