Has to be one of those CPU/Video card/settings issues.Since I havn't noticed this, I just took the Lear & plowed through cumulous after cumulous. Only twice did I even get a hint of a thin wall. It actually get's quite opaque too! I would have noticed this, because I'm quite a fan of the original FLY clouds, and like these even better.From what I've witnessed in the last few days, is also a case of too many variations in computers, settings, and cards. http://forums.avsim.com/user_files/26571.jpgL.Adamson ---- Athlon 1900XP/Geforce3Ti500/512DDRram

In my first flight I would point the plane at some fair weather cumulus (with the clouds set to detailed) and was disappointed to see that what was supposed to be an opaque mass was in fact a translucent, see-through affair. I thought perhaps that was just how the cumulus appeared up close, but tonight a shot was posted of the Bay Area in another forum, and it clearly showed a mass of see-through cumulus in the distance, above a band of darker, solid cumulus. Well, I'm a bit put out by that because, after all, cumulus should be opaque, and if it sometimes appears as see-through that's not very realistic. But it's since been mentioned that when the clouds are in the process of being rendered they will appear as translucent, and if you have a more powerful system they'll render faster and appear opaque. Well, that's encouraging; I have an Athlon 1700XP, with a GF3 Ti 200 using the 40.72 drivers, and 500 MB. So if I move up to a 3.0 Pentium I'll get significantly more realistic clouds? I wonder.

L.Adamson, what do you have your view distance settings set to??? It seems this setting plays a part in resource management as well as the cloud distance detail settings.

That shot isn't what I'm talking about.... I get that result as well...but try flying into the cloud.... :)-John

>That shot isn't what I'm talking about.... I get that result>as well...but try flying into the cloud.... :)>John ------ I absoloutly love these clouds! I thought the original FLY/SKY clouds were good with it's excellent sky color, but this sim has even more options for clouds.With the Cessna, on my two year old Athlon 1900XP/Geforce3Ti500, there wasn't even a hint of built up 2D clouds, as you've described. I barely caught a hint of ot when in the Lear doing 350knots last evening. Last nights pic was actually the tail end & side view as I emerged from the clouds. The pics I have now, are from head on, and purely opaque. And BTW-- note the fps which was quite amazing............considering my CPU.No doubt, CPU/video cards/ and settings must make big differences in what we see.L.Adamson

The only thing that's going to help you Paul in this situation is to lower your view distance (set it to 50nm). I have a 2.6gig 800FSB, ATI Radeon9700 video card, 1gig SDRAM and I'm still haveing problems with the clouds. I don't know if a new computer will be an end all solution for framerates and clouds that can be displayed at one time...

This is my settings for the four pics in my previous reply. I've had the 3D clouds maxxed before, but began hitting default buttons when I developed a case of the "shimmers" the other day. Shimmers are now gone, and I'm kind of surprised to see my cloud settings at only 30% 3D. But they seem to look quite good, are opaque, and run at decent frame rates. So I leave the settings! :)http://forums.avsim.com/user_files/26737.jpL.Adamson ---- Athlon 1900XP/Geforce3Ti500/512DDRram

I don't see any difference when looking forward like in your example shots, nor in looking to the side when I'm outside of a cloud. The opacity issues I run into are when I am inside the cloud, looking to the side, from the aircraft. I can see the aircraft slicing through the layers that define the cloud. Looking forward, I agree the effect is there. But it doesn't seem to follow when looking to the side. I can't pin this as a system issue, simply is the way clouds are rendered when we're "inside" them. I'll have to accept that they can't be viewed out the side during flight...Also, cloud coverage in your shots is a bit higher, which reduces the effect. Only way to really test this is to set coverage to 1/8ths, and head straight for a cumulus cloud with two windows open--one for the forward view and one for the side view, so you know you're in the cloud vs. viewing the outside portion of the cloud as the one shot seems to show.-John

>I don't see any difference when looking forward like in your>example shots, nor in looking to the side when I'm outside of>a cloud. The opacity issues I run into are when I am inside>the cloud, looking to the side, from the aircraft. I can see>the aircraft slicing through the layers that define the cloud.> Looking forward, I agree the effect is there. But it doesn't>seem to follow when looking to the side. I can't pin this as>a system issue, simply is the way clouds are rendered when>we're "inside" them. I'll have to accept that they can't be>viewed out the side during flight...>It this forum wasn't so s---l---o---w, I'd pan in 22 degree angles and show you the shot's from front to side. No slicing at all, except for the two brief ones I got with the Lear at around 350 kias.When I entered several of those clouds --- straight on ---it was opaque from the front to the sides. Just as I would have hoped. L.Adamson

... or just the 3D clouds.I absolutely loved FS2002 Skyworld clouds and would be perfectly happy with improved 2D clouds for FS2004.I am experimenting with the 3D clouds and find the frame rate OK, but the pan alittle jerky - not so if you using the less pretty2D clouds.- Myles Anthlon XP2000, GF4-ti4600, 512 PC2100 RAM