Jim,Just did another test. Have four viable theories after about 30-40 hours of flying with ASV, and comparing it side to side with still installed AS2004.5 and MS default real time weather. I did take into account the "2 mile ring" that you mentioned in the other post.Please pass on to Damian.KBOS 012354Z 09006KT 1/2SM R04R/P6000FT BR BKN005 OVC028 18/17 A2969 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 1 SLP055 T01780172 10217 20178 55008Flew a series of 360 climbing turns right after taking off, over the GPS center of the airport at KBOS, so as to stay within the 2 mile limit. First, hit the clouds at 3000 feet. Coincidentally, there is an approx 3000 ft layer reported. This supports my second thoery, that for some reason the first set of clouds, here, BKN 005, is not even being shown in MS. I did fly through an OVC at 3000, but no 005 anywhere to be found. This was the case when KBOS was OVC 500 a little while ago as well, no lower layer.So, four theories as to the low overcast problem that did not exist in MS default, or any previous version of ActiveSky:1. Code is not reading cloud level numbers that are reported below 1000 feet because it is misreading or ignoring any number in the hundreds field i.e. OVC00x. BKN00x, etc. Of course, if it is not reading clouds altitudes in hundreds of feet, than things over 1000 feet would be wrong too, i.e. BKN04x, BJKN 06x, etc.OR 2. The code is misreading or ignoring the first set of clouds, and/or cloud layers in the METAR when there are two or more cloud layers reported, as in the above METAR string. I never get the lower layer reported, whether in real time or after manually putting it in the weather configurator. In the Metar above, BKN005 is definately not shown in the sim, but the OVC 028 is. 3. Perhaps the code is not reading clouds below 2-3000 feet, or some other lower altitude for some reason? I hardly ever see a layer below 3000 feet or so. Maybe it is ignoring or misreading numbers below 2,3,4,5, etc. on the thousand foot spot? i.e. OVC 0x3, BKN, 0x9, etc. 4. Could this have something to with the new convectivity function? Obviously, convectivity is lift. Could that be "virtually lifting" the cloud levels to a height greater than the altitude that is being reported so the appear higher than they are reported?Based on weeks of testing, I truly think that #1 or #2 is the problem. It should be easily checked I would think and there have been plenty of posts on this topic which should suggest that there is a bit of a problem. CB

Hi,Thanks for the feedback.We are working on this! We tested extensively last week but could not duplicate the issue as reported. So far, the problem appears to have something to do with the stratus/cumulus separation feature. You might want to play with the settings for a temporary fix.Thanks for your patience... It should be "addressed" in the next update due soon.

Hi CB,I too have tried to work with your examples and I thank you for them! I took the KBOS METAR and applied it and got a low vis. white/grey soup. Now take that very same METAR and change the visibility in the METAR to 10SM, apply it, and update and close wx Config. What do you get then in FS04? I will not describe what I saw until you try!!Hope this helps,JimActiveSky Sales and Supporthttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_dev_team.jpg http://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_proud_supporter.jpg

Jim , I appreciate it. I will try tonight. Had some family in town over the last couple of days. Thank you very much for taking the time to try it out, test it, and look at the possible solutions that I posted. I will put that METAR with 10sm visibility as soon as I can tonight. Thanks!CB

Jim I tested KBOS with 10sm vis and all of the stuff after the Baro setting chopped off. I saw the rough clouds that the report gave when I took away the visibility, but I didn't fly up through them to see the altitudes. But, they looked about right. So, I am back to my original theory, which may be a FS9 limitation that cannot be overcome. I think the reason that many of the posters continue seeing the ground while climbing out from the airport, even when there is a low level reported, is that there is always a "ring" of clear sky around the airport and above the aircraft. If you look out the front and sides of the plane, you see the clouds up at altitude, but you never fly through them immediately after takeoff. You really only see them after climbing above them and looking back at the airport out of the rear of the aircraft. Or if you turn around, descend, and fly back. You can fly through them on approach sometimes, but you never can takeoff and immediately lose visibility in a layer. Thus, they are there, but due to some limitiation, and some sort of a ring, you really have to take off, and fly around for awhile to then turn around and see any low layer. Any way to alleviate the large "ring of CAVU" as I will call it around the departure airport and aircraft? Once you fly around, and come back to the airport, you can sometimes see the low clouds over the airport, and they will obscure it. BUT, this phenomenon never occurs on climbout, and it will take up to 10000 ft to lose the ground.CB

And, as I think most people will agree, and it has been said before, low vis does not provide the same effect or sufficiently cover up the problem. Yeah, you can't see the runway if you are further away than the reported visibility. i.e. 1/4 mile, but IFR approaches are as much about limited vertical ceiling, as they are about limited forward vis. CB

I have confirmed your testing as well. There is definitely a problem with ASV and low ceilings. Just did a test at KEKN reporting 1SM BR and VV001. Using default MSFS real world weather i slewed myself up slowly and hit the clouds at 150 ft AGL. unfortunately with ASV i did not hit the clouds until 2,900 feet. i have no other choice but to use the fs9 weather until the ceiling issue is fixed as this is a major problem. thanks for the support hifisim.