Would someone who is getting accurate enroute and destination weather please provide their ASE option selections. I am unable to get very low clouds to appear on approach. Say 200' overcast, or 400', or even 800'. Other clouds and visibility are good. Thanks, zach

Hello, Could you explain what problems or difficulties you are having? Which simulator version?

FSX. ASE build 647. I am unable to get very low clouds to appear on approach. Say 200' overcast. FSX is not reporting or depicting ASE wx. Other clouds and visibility are good.

Hello, I am a little confused. You say you are getting good clouds and visiiblity other than low clouds? But FSX is not reporting or depicting ASE wx? Or did you mean just for the low clouds? Can we confirm that everything is fine other than low clouds? Concerning low clouds, can you provide the location and the METAR you are using in this situation? In either case, some settings which may provide more expected results include The Stratus Occurrence % and the Fog Layer Generation option. You might want to experiment with these settings. Something to keep in mind though is that in very low ceilings depending on the terrain and the cloud type rendered they may not be very thick or restrict visibility as you might imagine... this is a limitation in FSX while providing accurate data that matches the METAR, again it depends on the terrain too. This might be what you are seeing. With the METAR and location I can hopefully answer some more of these questions and help you achieve better results.Thanks!

Damian, Does your sim depict 200' or 400' overcast?

I'd be happy to go on in and try with your parameters if you could please provide them.

Damian, Thanks. My ASE wx finder has KCMA at 10am (Sep 22) with 500' overcast and 4 miles visibility. Real METARS has the same: 500' overcast with 4 miles visibility. At KCMA the field elevation is 381', I climb to 1000' MSL and I'm clear of clouds. At 2000' I am still clear of clouds. My FSX wx current conditions is showing 5 miles visibility and 600' overcast. The altimeter settings all match, 29.93. [With ASE wx under manual wx config, I am unable to depict low clouds, ie 200' overcast, 800' overcast, etc.] With no ASE, I am unable to manually configure low overcast with FSX. Say 5 miles out I can get low clouds, but never over the airport. As I fly into these clouds they disappear. Directly below me I can see the ground and directly above I can see the clear sky. Around me are low clouds. FSX depicts a good overcast and low visibility, but nothing close to 500'. Climbing to 2600' indicated (MSL) I am getting into the base of ragged clouds. My ASE usually depicts accuate visibility, good clouds at higher levels and accurate altimeter settings. However, it will not depict low level clouds, ie 200' overcast, 400' overcast, 600' overcast...etc, as in never. I am using Jim's posted ASE settings with build 647. Any help is appreciated. zach

I have some problem with this as well. I made a test now and manually set OVC003 at ESSA. I got visual contact with the runway at about 1400 feet AGL on final. The only time I can get later contact with the runway is low clouds in combination with very poor visibilty. I use ASE in FS9. Should it be possible to get low clouds or is it a limitation in FS?

There is definitely a known limitation here guys, we've talked about this quite a few times in the past. Indeed I can tell you that much of the time low overcast isn't ideal, very paper thin sometimes and as mentioned in depends much on the METAR and other cloud layers. I will do some testing with these parameters and get back to you on my findings. Hopefully there is something we can do to improve your experience in such conditions, and if any problems are found with the software we'll of course get that addressed. Thanks again, be back soon.

I am unable to get low overcasts (200' or 400' or 600', etc) with ASE, for without ASE using FSX wx engine downloading or manually set, or using the REX wx engine. I believe the limitation is with FSX unable to dipect low altitudes, not ASE. If anyone can get these low overcasts by any means, please let me know. thanks, zach

Ok, finished a thorough review and had the same results as our prior investigations... First, please observe the attached screenshots... Shot 1 is an example of when things don't look as expected, probably what you are seeing in your tests. As you can see, the overcast layer is indeed there at the correct altitude, but it is very transparent and hard to see. This is cumulus, and my stratus occurrence % is set to 0 here. We believe that FSX attempts terrain blending for cumulus clouds and this is what happens as a result of that. Shot 2 is an example when I had upped the stratus slider up, and stratus was chosen here. It's much more solid as you can see. Shot 3 depicts cumulus, same altitude and coverage, but this time in another area with different terrain patterns. Note that the cumulus is much thicker. Shot 4 depicts the "above the clouds" shot at about 3000ft AGL of the same cumulus clouds. Conclusion: The terrain is much at play here in the results, and ASE is working as expected. The low overcast "blending" with cumulus that occurs sometimes is nothing that we have control over unfortunately. We recommend upping your stratus slider if you'd like to get a more solid look that stratus clouds provide. Another important note, we have spent much time POST-ASE working specifically on improving the look of IMC, including situations such as this. It has been one of priority focus points and after a major investment of time and resources we believe that it was worth it, and we continue to fine tune and improve things here. In short, the future looks much better for FSX and IMC.

Damian, Thanks for your work, and I am encourage that the problem is being worked on. Shots 2 and 3 look like a low overcast, but my experience with the same clouds is...when climbing up, if you have a 500' overcast, when you get to 1000' and 2000', I am still clear of clouds!