Since the update, it seems that I'm not getting ceilings set properly anymore.I run AS6.5 on my laptop, with FSUIPC 3.70 and WideFS 6.70. Today I was flying into KMCI and the METAR was:KMCI 261953Z 03010KT 7SM OVC005 12/10 A2983 RMK AO2 SLP099 T01220100What I got coming in was ceilings around 1200 feet OVC. Other nearby stations were reporting 500-600 OVC, so I don't think it was a problem with that.I'm attaching my configuration settings, maybe you'll spot something I'm doing wrong. I normally use VATSIM weather but lately the weather has been out of date so I had that cleared for todays flight.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/159793.jpgEdit: I also tried with AS on my FS9 PC - same results, so I don't think it's anything related to WideFS.

Hi Tim,I noticed you are forcing your Destination Wx so that is going to cause things not to match up as you get closer to your destination. Uncheck that option see what happens.Please let us know,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development Team Active Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter: http://www.jdtllc.com/AirSource Member: http://www.air-source.us/FSEconomy Member:http://www.fseconomy.com/

Huh? Isn't that option supposed to make all the nearby weather stations match the destination, so you don't get big differences at the destination as you come near other stations?I always thought it worked so that as I approached KMCI all the nearby stations would have similar weather.I'll uncheck it next trip and see if anything improves.Edit: No significant improvement. Is there any way in FS9 to see exactly what the cloud settings are from AS?

Thought forcing Destination Wx was supposed to do just that (force the Destination Wx) X miles out. So why would the Destination Wx differ significantly from the Destination METAR if you are in the forced zone?Jim Harnes

Hi,Maybe he wasn't in the forced zone?Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development Team Active Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter: http://www.jdtllc.com/AirSource Member: http://www.air-source.us/FSEconomy Member:http://www.fseconomy.com/

Hi,You can use weather set from FSUIPC. How far were you Tim when you noticed things did not match up?Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development Team Active Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter: http://www.jdtllc.com/AirSource Member: http://www.air-source.us/FSEconomy Member:http://www.fseconomy.com/

I was on FINAL, for gosh sake, how could I not be in the forced zone?Again, I'm noticing a difference between:AS showing 500 OVC (cloud bottoms around 1100 AGL)Setting 500 OVC manually in FS9 (cloud bottoms around 500 AGL)It appears that the cloud bases aren't being set properly. Visibility and precip and winds and baro do seem correct.

>Hi,>>You can use weather set from FSUIPC. How far were you Tim when>you noticed things did not match up?>>JimI was less than 10 miles from destination, coming down on the ILS, I saw the ground and the runway at a much higher altitude than I should have, almost 2000 AGL when the 500 OVC should have obscured it.The nearest station weather in AS6 showed 700 OVC at the time.

Hi Tim,I'm investigating now. Thanks for all the detailed information. Back soon with findings.Best,

Hi,Ok I've checked on it. Verified AS properly sending 500 ovc cloud, FSUIPC accepting it ok, transmitting to FS9, FS9 accepting ok (verified via FS9 weather dialogs, 500ft (1500ft msl) ceiling.In FS9 the actual depiction I experienced while slewing to 500ft AGL (~1500msl) was not ideal in that the cloud layer was not directly centered over the airport (it was slightly to the north) and the layer was extremely thin. The layer was there, but was not depicted thickly. I then restarted everything using FS9 wx dialogs only and created a local cloud overcast layer at MCI at 1500MSL (~500AGL). The same local depiction was experienced.This all appears consistent with what we've seen before at certain locations and low cloud layers. As to clouds not being centered over the airport, this is normal due to the cell-depiction method of FS wx rendering. As to the weak depiction of the layer, it is most likely due to the position of surrounding wx stations and associated cell positions. In either case there is unfortunately no fix. This has been experienced at approximately 3 locations that I am aware of (including KSFO and now KMCI). There is more to learn about why this happens, and how we can go about a potential work-around, but I can say that the situation does appear improved in FSX.I can't explain why you were able to create a solid and well-defined cloud layer with FS9 wx dialog(please show pic and cloud settings if possible), but it MAY have something to do with the cloud graphics you have installed via ASG. I am very interested in seeing the settings used to depict such a solid layer and perhaps your current ASG cloud set installed so I can try and duplicate?Best,

I tried again, and got results similar to yours.I'll validate that its specific to this airport with another trip today to seek out IMC. Can you recommend a particular ASG theme that will provide good coverage?What I'd like to see is some sort of workaround where an OVC Metar would create a layer at least 2000 feet thick, and cover the cells for a 20 NM radius around the station. Ideally I'd have no ground contact until I'm below the ceiling.Best wishes,

Today I tried Dayton (KDAY), which showed:KDAY 271456Z 12009KT 1 1/4SM -RA BR OVC003 08/07 A2982 RMK AO2 SLP102 P0003 60004 T00780072 58020Used the Dew Point sky theme since that seemed to look opaque.Once in FS9, I did go to the weather settings, and sure enough - two layers of cumulous clouds starting at 1300 feet.So, Active Sky is setting the weather properly.Then, takeoff and come back for the ILS 06L approach. I picked up the ground at about 1700 feet, and got runway at 1500 feet.Problem seems to be that the clouds are not opaque enough, as I'm certainly flying through them - in the external view I see my landing light cones.I'm using 128x128 DXT3 textures, I'll try a different set and see if it makes a difference. Would appreciate any recommendations on cloud settings in ASG that might improve the experience.Best wishes,

Hi again Tim,That all sounds about right and highlights the problem of using cloud layers only to simulate IMC within FS9. They just aren't really solid enough to provide the desired effect. I mentioned some reasons above but really it all has to do with the way the wx system in FS9 works, and station-based weather in general.I tend to use wx-influenced clouds pretty much all the time. I do practice IMC often, using vis itself as the main restriction to visibility. So I'll usually go into Wx Finder and look for vis less than 2SM (sometimes less than 1... always at minimums depending on approach) and usually snow or rain for added effect... Then look through the matching airports for something fairly well-known that has the IAPs I'm looking to practice. Sometimes if I want to practice a specific approach at a cetain airport I'll use the Wx Configurator to force something like 1/2SM OVC005 for precision approaches or 2SM OVC010 for non-precision, again, depending on the minimums.Hope that helps..Best,

Thanks a bunch! _Almost_ makes me miss the solid white overcast in FS4