6 hours ago, AeroMaster12 said:

Since RealTraffic doesn't have a means of a public support option (including peer-to-peer discussion), this forum on Avsim is the next best alternative. I think it would be a different story if PSXT had other functionalities that didn't take a dependency on RT, if RT had their own support channel, or if Balt offered some support directly on this forum. Balt does a great job on email comms, but the rest of us who are hesitant to reach out wouldn't be aware of what developments are happening in the RT space, or if the issues we're facing are common/widespread. I'm sure this is why a lot of us on here are voicing frustration on the lack of transparency on RT's roadmap, and how that impacts the user experience with PSXT.

Well said. This is exactly the point I have being trying to make. Hopefully there will be a forum for RT, either on it's own or within this PSXT forum, with Balthasar taking part. As AeroMaster12 says, PSXT and RT are dependent on each other so maybe RT discussions can take place in this forum?

12 hours ago, AeroMaster12 said:

t's a similar argument of calling any Adobe product "freeware" - it is free to download and install, however in order to actually launch and use it, you need an active Creative Cloud subscription which is sold separately from the download. 

I am sorry but your Adobe example is very different, the product and the subscription are from the same company. RT and PSXT are not. PSXT not even is a company...

PSXT also does not run without MSFS/P3D, Windows, AIG/FSLTL/FSTraffic, etc, but that does not mean I have to be the spokesperson for these products, do I?

Since you dont have to pay for PSXT I cannot call it otherwise then freeware, or do you rather like me to change it into payware?

🙂

 

Edited June 2, 20242 yr by kiek

7 hours ago, Harrier77 said:

Well said. This is exactly the point I have being trying to make. Hopefully there will be a forum for RT, either on it's own or within this PSXT forum, with Balthasar taking part. As AeroMaster12 says, PSXT and RT are dependent on each other so maybe RT discussions can take place in this forum?

Do not forget, RT has more user groups, it is not just being used by PSXT only.

Think of PSX (Aerowinx), Live traffic (X-plane), ForeFlight, ...

I deal with RT settings and problems related to PSXT here ( see also my FAQ)  but I cannot discuss/reveal RT business decisions or roadmaps, simply because I do not know.

Edited June 2, 20242 yr by kiek

12 hours ago, AeroMaster12 said:

You could fix this case for PSXT by, for example, allowing for AIG/FSLTL models to inject at parking positions without an RT license and position it as a static traffic generator only.... in its current state however, the software serves no purpose without a RT dependency.

No that is not possible I am afraid. The injection of static parked aircraft is based on the weekly download from RT with the real time positions. It would be illegal (and unfair) if I let users without an RT license enjoy that information.

 

Edited June 2, 20242 yr by kiek

12 hours ago, AeroMaster12 said:

Sure, you could call PSXT "freeware", but it doesn't function at all unless there is a valid RT license. 

Indeed, and that is clearly stated at my website in the "Con's?"  part,

and in the 2- page Quick Start Guide,

and in the Manual....

What more can I do?

 

Again if that makes you happy I will use the second week of my vacation studying how I can generate and check license strings for PSXT, so I can charge a fee and call it payware. However I think my wife has different plans for the coming week and would not agree me doing that 😉

Don't think I am able to use my phone in the coming week so no responses from me till June 9th. 

Enjoy the traffic and I am curious to know  your findings about the RT update.

 

Edited June 2, 20242 yr by kiek

1 hour ago, kiek said:

No that is not possible I am afraid. The injection of static parked aircraft is based on the weekly download from RT with the real time positions. It would be illegal (and unfair) if I let users without an RT license enjoy that information.

Sounds like there's a gap in the market for a parked positions licence. Either as a weekly update with a continuous subscription or as a one-off data download, similar to how Navigraph nav data can be updated for one AIRAC cycle.

It seems like I struck a nerve during my attempt to provide some constructive criticism. I'll lastly provide some responses before I bow out, because I don't want this thread to turn unproductive.

12 hours ago, kiek said:

MSFS/P3D, Windows, AIG/FSTL, etc, but that does not mean I have to be the spokesperson for these products, do

Straw man fallacy - Additionally, we already have places to go support from the respective authors for dependencies if the problem is outside of PSXT's control. If it's something PSXT can address, then we can report those here. Otherwise,

• MSFS issues usually go to the Avsim or MSFS official forum
• AIG/FSLTL - their respective Discord channels, AIG forum for the former
• Windows - we blame the Windows Update or C++ team 🙂. 

RealTraffic lacks the support channel that we can go to outside of PSXT, and if RealTraffic is down, PSXT is completely down. This is the point that a handful of us are trying to advocate, which is why I brought up the second issue - PSXT not working as a standalone without RealTraffic.

12 hours ago, kiek said:

I cannot call it other then freeware, or do you rather like me to change it into payware?

This is only a semantics suggestion, respectfully. It's borderline "freemium", however the elements that make a software freemium mean that it has to be usable for free, which PSXT doesn't. It's similar to what Apple had to do with iOS, changing the text "Free" to "Get", because applications were free to download, but most required purchases to further leverage the software. Instead of changing it to "payware", my suggestion was to implement some sort of feature that non-RT users could benefit from PSXT, which could actually increase sales for RealTraffic. Whether this benefits you, however, is at your discretion.
 

12 hours ago, kiek said:

No that is not possible I am afraid. The injection of static parked aircraft is based on the weekly download from RT with the real time positions. It would be illegal (and unfair) if I let users without an RT license enjoy that information.

For "free" users (those without a RT subscription), couldn't you instead inject a random set of aircraft or airline liveries based on the airport's AFCAD? It makes sense that you lock behind more granular data for those with a RealTraffic subscription, but I was simply trying to suggest some way that PSXT can launch without an RT license.

10 hours ago, F737MAX said:

Sounds like there's a gap in the market for a parked positions licence. Either as a weekly update with a continuous subscription or as a one-off data download, similar to how Navigraph nav data can be updated for one AIRAC cycle.

I really hope I didn't open a can of worms with my feedback... 😅

In conclusion, PSXT can't exist without RT, and because there isn't an official support channel for RT, we only can voice our opinions here as frustrating as it is. In the meantime, take the time off, relax, recharge, and spend quality time with your wife - family comes first. We'll be here when you get back. 😉

So can anyone officially confirm, is there now better coverage as a result of recent developments? I’m thinking about purchasing a licence but waiting for further feedback before doing so. Thanks. 

2 hours ago, MikeyOnTheFlightDeck said:

So can anyone officially confirm, is there now better coverage as a result of recent developments? I’m thinking about purchasing a licence but waiting for further feedback before doing so. Thanks. 

It depends. You have to ask about specific airports. From my standpoint, I see an improvement in many areas, where coverage was not available before.

1 hour ago, G-YMML1 said:

It depends. You have to ask about specific airports. From my standpoint, I see an improvement in many areas, where coverage was not available before.

Thanks. I have been checking the colour scheme for various airports but sometimes purple areas aren’t that bad and sometimes they are?

1 hour ago, MikeyOnTheFlightDeck said:

Thanks. I have been checking the colour scheme for various airports but sometimes purple areas aren’t that bad and sometimes they are?

I would rather wait for the QF update for each of the add-one airports, once Nico is back from vacation. 

35 minutes ago, G-YMML1 said:

I would rather wait for the QF update for each of the add-one airports, once Nico is back from vacation. 

Airports' DB as of 06/08/24 - PSXseeconTraffic for FSX | P3D | MSFS - The AVSIM Community

 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:49 PM, AeroMaster12 said:

 my suggestion was to implement some sort of feature that non-RT users could benefit from PSXT, which could actually increase sales for RealTraffic. Whether this benefits you, however, is at your discretion.

@AeroMaster12

Point taken.

This is now possible with PSXT and PSXT_P3D version 7.4.0, thanks go to Balthasar!

🙂 

8 hours ago, kiek said:

This is now possible with PSXT and PSXT_P3D version 7.4.0, thanks go to Balthasar! 

Love this, thank you!! I've seen several other threads complain about the impossibilities of statics without RT - now this is no longer an issue; I hope to see these folks take advantage of this feature for static aircraft, and hopefully that benefit converts to future subscriptions. Thanks again for considering this.

Something I noticed is that now we definitely have better ground traffic but for me at least in Stockholm and Oslo, this only counts for inbound traffic, so taxiing to the gate after landing but for departing planes, they only appear shortly after takeoff and not from gate to runway.

Can anyone else confirm this is not only for me?