Hi,I'll join in on the whining. I too am having a lack of cloud cover and I think this is problem. First off today I flew from KLGA to CYQB and for those who looked at the satellite photo it was stormin norman. All the metars along my route of flight were reporting multiple layers and overcast. Anyway, so my flight was mostly clear, especially right below me and w/n 40nm of my route. There was some cirrus and a small area of some believable and accurate depiction below but that was it. I have noticed this every time now and especially since upgrading to 2012. Often times in testing I will go to an airport with overcast and slew upward and as I get higher a large hole always opens up below me for some reason. This flight today was kind of like that where the clouds seemed afraid to get too close to my aircraft. This all seems the case since upgrading. General lack of cloud coverage when there should be allot more. Like I was saying it was a multilayered overcast warm front system where you should not have been able to see the ground the whole way. I realize there are some limitations with this because AS cant see what is above an overcast but this was virtually clear most of the way, somethings wrong.I have edited my cfg to the 12 setting for cloud coverage density. I double checked all my fs settings for proper orientation.I have 10 cloud layers set up but rarely if ever see more than 3 and most of the time 1 or 2.Like I was saying, while this was a problem with ASE it is more of a problem now with 2012. Seems like there could be a way so say for example if it is precipitating, program in some extra layers above the lowest, or extend the tops upward or a combination of both. The probability of having multiple/taller layers and cirrus above is very high during precipitation. This would really add a tremendous amount to the sim and remove the problem with the single ceiling metar.Thanks

Here is an example. The first pic is 20,000 feet over KEEN in southern New Hampshire. Reported as 400 overcast. At keen, the visibility was low as reported 3 miles and it looked overcast but that was just because of the color of the visibility. It was really scattered or more appropriately a big hole over my head. As I climbed the visibility improved like it should and I climbed up through a big hole above some cumulus in front. Behind it was mostly clear. I slewed forward 20 miles and you now see the view in the first pic, almost totally clear. The second pic is the ADDS metar java tool showing the area. Every single station in the Northeast reporting overcast conditions. You can see the filled in circles of red, pink and blue north of KEEN (Southern New Hampshire) and it is all total sky coverage. But from the pic in FS it is anything but.Houston, we have a problem.This is a big disappointment for me and while I will fill out a ticket I think it is good to post here in case anyone has any ideas why we are all suffering from this affliction. I do not have time to do any more today, got to work early tomorrow all day but I am interested in spurring a discussion with the community and the developers as to what may be the solution here. I think it is a workable problem with this otherwise most excellent program.I am in cloud smooth transitions here but this is the same no matter the weather mode.

^{I am glad that I am not the only one bringing this to light. I remember 40 years ago when I was first building IFR flight time I would love those warm fronts that would move north over Florida in the winter. I would get latest wx report to determine the ceiling and would file my IFR flight plan for 1000-2000 ft above it so I could guarantee I would be right in the thick of it. I could travel up and down the state and never see anything but white out the window and definitely no ground or breaks. And Microsoft, "that's as real as it gets!" I have followed the flight sim program since the days of Bruce Ardwick and his Commodore 64 version. When FSX came out, I jumped on it, but was very disillusioned by the inaccurate and unreliable wx depictions. I would have to input the weather conditions manually to insure that FSX didn't change my IMC conditions to CAVOK just when I was on final. Figured out a way to do that when the ASE program caught my eye. Worked for months with Jim Skorna to try to solve the upper-level winds problem but kept getting brushed off. When Damian came on the scene, he finally took notice and produced a couple of upgrades that finally made the program workable. Seems I did not have the disappearing overcast problem at least it wasn't as obvious with ASE. Now, once I installed AS2012, I can't seem to get my old original cloud textures back and even if I manually input an overcast it uses AS2012 textures and sky always clears above 6000 agl and I am never really in the "soup". It could just be FSX but didn't seem to notice it before. Seems I was able to create and fly thru a total overcast but now it is impossible.}

All this is puzzling, as I'm not seeing such a problem at all. Last night, I flew PHTO to PHNL, both of which were reporting mulitple layers and rain showers. I have AS2012 set on DWC, 7 layers, and I have not edited cloud coverage density in the fsx.cfg. On this flight, I was using REX for the cloud textures and AS2012.The flight was great with complete overcast near PHTO (with Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea poking up above the cloud layer) and only a few small holes as I approached PHNL. I flew up through the layers, cruised (at 16,000) above all of them for most of the flight (without the ground being visible), and then descended through those layers on approach...very realistic in my view.Given that experience, there must be some settting or combination of settings that's causing this. Hopefully, we can track it down and dispatch it.

Same here, I don't have this problem. I had a METAR with overcast at 400 feet, 10 clouds layers, no .cfg change, 2012 graphics. A real overcast.

Hi all,Contrary to what it may seem like for a user who is experiencing a problem, these kinds of things are almost always intermittent and usually isolated, and can be affected by all kinds of things including options, route of flight, existing weather conditions and how FSX decides to depict things beyond our control. For example, it is well known that low overcast cumulus layers in FSX are not perfect. We have done many things to improve the situation over the years and we continue trying to improve further within the limitations we are subject to.I do encourage anyone having issues to please open a support ticket with your details so we can look at this fully including your options and other particulars. As has been mentioned many times, we will do whatever we can to improve the situation and experience within our ability.. that requires us to understand fully the issue and experience that the user is getting (i.e. replicating with same options, wx and route) as well as understanding the users specific expectations (i.e. here is exactly what it is doing, given these specific options, route and weather, here is what I want it to do). Where/when there is a problem found and we can do something to improve it, we will, like we always have. A support ticket is the most efficient way to perform a detailed analysis, but of course we are also performing our own "unguided" analysis of this based on this feedback. Thanks!

Some wierd issues with this forum right now, unable to post, getting cryptic errors. This is my 3rd attempt and an hour spent so I will just nutshell it.Something is wrong.We can post our order number in sig but I think it is better to discuss on forum so all can figure this out.I found that...Enable DWCEnable enhance route coverageUse FPUse REX cloudsThis has greatly helped but there is something wrong in that all of these things need to happen to work but there are still some huge holes miles wide in cloud deck when all metars are overcast. This is a real problem many are having now.Your excellent textures are not being depicted well on my system, REX looks way fuller.Skies are clearing big time when they should not. Compare to ADDS aviation weather dot gov metars java tool.Thanks

Seems I am having a similar problem? Current conditions report overcast, but I have clear blue sky above with only a few scattered clouds in the distance.On the Edit WX page: CYXT 230556Z 18013KT 6SM -SN FEW008 BKN018 OVC040 02/M03 A2977I'm not getting the light snow either.

I have just purchased AS2012 last night and I too am receiving rather 'patchy at best' cloud conditions...

I don't remember this being a salient issue with ASE, but after switching back to default textures I put in the exact overcast Metar in both ASE and AS2012 and put in FIVE layers of overcast. They were both dark and gloomy when on the ground with low visibility but with visibility on default (greater than 20sm) AS2012 showed scattered clouds and lots of blue sky. ASE showed heavy broken cloud layers but still patches of blue sky. I then closed those programs and input the same wx info manually and finally got "almost" an overcast but (typical FSX) even with Metar showing a 200 ft ceiling the actual cloud bottoms were about 4000 ft BUT still better than either of HiFi programs.For me AS2012 is an expensive disappointment but it is receiving rave reviews from fair weather non-pilots. I hope there are enough of us hardcore realists for Damian to seriously consider fixing this right. Until he does, I am going back to ASE. I don't have REX so can't comment on whether those textures would produce a more complete overcast. It is a shame when default FSX with all its limitations and flaws can produce better cloud cover realism than 3rd party weather-specific addons!

Hello fellow simmers, as yet I haven't purchased AS2012 as I'm on holidays, but have spent some time reading the user guide (cover to cover in fact). Something I have noticed is that some of you are using 'Enhanced Route Coverage' while in DWC depiction mode. The guide states on page 58 that 'Enhanced Route Coverage' is not relevant to operation in DWC mode. I was wondering if having both these options set may be causing some conflict. As I understand it Enhanced route coverage would be more relevant to flying in Standard Depiction Mode. It might be worth a try repeating your flights with Enhanced Route Coverage unchecked while in DWC mode to see if this makes a difference. Just a thought.Matt Williams

Problem with that is when I went to DWC and enhance route coverage things improved but that is not absolute either. I think it has to do with the textures themselves. Will have to experiment more.