Still unresolved - non complete overcast

[Adam4171 0]

-> HiFlyI absolutely agree with you! But “complete overcast” or something like that -- with no holes and not to take too much FPS -> that is evidently very hard to create… It would be very nice it FSX had something like this (as FS2002 had): http://www.avsim.com/pages/1201/fs2002_part3/weather_5.jpg -- and I think it's even much realistic than drawing lots of stratus clouds (which btw. require A LOT OF FPS /and unnecessarily/) -- when it would be OK if it was just 1 layer with the overcast… Yeah, as you mentioned -- the developers try to create pretty clouds, but instead, they should create something like it was in previous FS… IS IT DIFFICULT to make just 1 layer with total overcast with no holes in it? (And there are sooo many discussions about that theme…) Well, some developer could say that it's possible to get fully-overcasted sky, but you will have to improove your settings so much high that then it surely not be much smooth to run it on any average PC… BUT why?? Do you think that everybody who wanted to “play” FS98 had to have a super PC-specifics? Of course not!I still hope that someday it will be possible to see in FSX EXACTLY this:

(this is how the real OVERCAST should look like).Adam

[Zachiii 0]

Adam,You can can get the weather you want, but not through the current line of FS weather engines (FSX on line, REX, AS2012 and ASE).Sorry, but you must go to FSX weather and create your weather manually. Inside your cloud layers you must place visibility at the lowest possible (1/16th of a mile).And you have it!The current crop of weather generators can build beautiful clouds but too often their weather is not consistent with METARS weather.Good luck,zach

[Adam4171 0]

Yeah, I know, I was playing with the FSX default weather for the hole yesterday night. And the result? You really can have overcast with no holes in it, but the problem is that you can create the weather just for 1 airport (and it also takes a lot of time if there is reported OVC and you'd wish to create it using default FSX weather; and then, the weather might even change quickly, and what? :)/) -> and if you're flying a long IFR flight e.g. from KJFK —> KSFO, then it's simply unusable to create any weather using that FSX default w. engine (for the reality)… Well, the pity is that these external FS weather engine, as you mentioned, are not able to generate the real (and I really mean the real) clouds conditions, even if they're very nice … but not consistent with the METARs (it's pretty accurate just when you're on the ground that airport, but as soon as you're in CRZ phase and see the METAR (in AS) -- locked to nearest -- there, you read /for the nearest ARPT/ totally overcasted sky, so you expect, when you look out the window, that you will NOT see the ground from above, but instead, in fact, you see a lot of cumulus clouds under with A LOT OF HOLES … well, this is maybe a bit disappointing.Or, just 1 more example:You're planning a flight from AAAA to BBBB, you look at the BBBB metar and see there: 3300 -SN BR OVC018 –> so you expect that during descending, there will be absolutely no chance to see the airport from e.g. 15,000 ft; but in fact (if you're using any of these weather engines) you will see something like FEW–SCT–BKN clouds and you WILL be able to see the airport (over which there should be overcast) in the empty holes between the clouds … so, you continue to descent now from that 15,000 ft to the minimum ALT for ILS approach (which, let's say, is 4,000 ft), in 10,000 ft -- also a chance to see the airport (almost) clearly (but from different point of view, of course -- where the holes are); and until you're above 8,000 ft (or something like that), there's nothing different -- still able to see the ARPT (with, as mentioned before, OVERCAST); OK, then finally, some thousands above the ARPT ELEV, you suddenly fly into a strange haze layer and suddenly there's nothing to see (but until that, you might be thinking it's CAVOK or maybe SCT /if you would not had looked at METAR before/). :-)

So, what do you think? :)

Well, I know it's useless to write long stories about it; just my opinion of that all:

IN FSX, IT WILL NEVER BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE AS ACCURATE WEATHER (CLOUDS) CONDITIONS AS IT'S IN THE REAL WORLD. (and you can do all you want to have) -- Maybe I had better to add: AT LEAST UNTIL YOU ARE USING ANY EXTERNAL WEATHER ENGINE.

But I don't worry too much about that, cause the clouds that the AS2012 is generating are just soo pretty that sometimes I can forget that

“little” bug. ;-)Thanks guys and nice evening (if you're in Europe and reading it in the evening),Adam

[Zachiii 0]

Adam,Its oh, so sad about the current crop of weather engines, which you have nailed: The AS2012 clouds (and REX, too) are so pretty we can just forget about accurate weather.Maybe in a few years, the FS weather engines can give us a good replication of METARS weather.The FS weather company that will be first to render accurate overcasts will earn a lot of money, and I will be first in line.zach

[Adam4171 0]

Truth, truth…“and I will be first in line” BUT SURELY NOOT ALONE, sir! :)

[Driftdown 1]

OK made some more testing, and the result is clear : enroute can be very well depicted as OVC, but there is a HUUUUUUUGE problem when it comes to destination clouds ! Especially when using "Prevent redraws" option. This was not the case with ASE after SP2 so here AS2012 is going backwards which is a shame. Two examples (among others) :Arrival on EGKK on the 31st of january 2012. METAR : EGKK 311450Z 03006KT 2500 -SG OVC008 01/M00 Q1026And it had been like that for more than three hours so more than the flight I had done, which means when I first started AS2012 for my flight the weather was already pretty much like that at EGKK, meaning that AS2012 could depict it very accurately from the start : there can be no excuse such as "but the weather changed just prior to your arrival so AS2012 didn't have time to adjust".I had had a perfect OVC depiction during all cruise, and (why oh why ???) the skies started clearing when descending on EGKK, which was supposedly OVC too !!! Why did the depiction change there ???!!! It would have stayed the same, it would have been perfect !!! But no, here is what I got :Does it look OVC down to 800ft to you ? I was so upset I tried unchecking the "prevent redraws" and indeed it changed. Only... I'm not sure which one is ugliest and less realistic :Made a few other flights, other tests with other settings, but the main idea is : for cruise the "prevent redraw is excellent", but from the descent to final approach, it is total crap ! Usually before starting descent the depiction is excellent, and -god knows why- from a very good depiction, AS2012 decides to change something for no reason towards worse instead of better depiction. Better not change if it's to go worse !Another example coming back to EGLL. Again a wonderful metar on descent : EGMC 061350Z 00000KT 0400 FZFG OVC001 M01/M02 Q1033and arrival EGLL 061350Z 32004KT 3200 HZ FEW008 BKN011 05/03 Q1033 NOSIGAs one can see, AS2012 has detected that the weather was very poor on all the area. Detected but... will it depict it corretly in FSX ?See for yourselves :Does any of this look like 0400 FZFG OVC001 to you ? Or even 3200 HZ FEW004 BKN009 ?So again I tried unticking the "prevent redraws" but this time, in order to avoid the flat ugly layer of so-called "overcast" we had seen in the previous approach, I also prevented AS2012 from using anything to replace the Cumulus. ANd instantly I got this :Now THAT's what I'm taking about ! But why oh why isn't it possible to have this directly ? Without having to fiddle inside AS2012 in order to get something at least half decent ?There is a huge area for improvement there !And Chris, Damian, could we have some feedback on this please ? Don't say we haven't been supportive, but no word from you for weeks now...

[Flaps30 3]

Hi,I have AS 2012 and it's working fine but in my area right now it is snowing lightly with a completely overcast sky. In flight sim the snow is coming down but the sky is mostly blue with some puffy cumulus. Hardly enough to make snow. I have seen this in FSX before I got AS2012. After several weather updates the sky got a little more cloudy but still lots of blue. Any ideas why it won't go to complete gray overcast? Thanks. Tom

[kand 205]

I am seeing this also, getting a bit disappointed with FSX weather, nothing out there appears to be truly capable of controlling it, its also very quiet round here in terms of developer input? there has been a distinct lack of participation recently

[Zachiii 0]

Driftdown,I second your findings.This is my experience, too.zach

[FrankFasi 0]

Would be nice to see this problem resolved. I bought AS2012 last night, haven't installed it yet (I also have all the old ones including ASA, ASE, REX 2.0, etc). Reading some of these comments makes me wonder if I want to bother installing it. If I'm flying IFR, and I expect (and plan for) near-minimums visibility and cloud cover at my destination, then that's what I want to see. I'd rather not spend a lot of time scratching my head wondering why the overcast is incomplete, and tweaking weather settings to no avail, when that should be something that is handled seamlessly in the background.

[jwhorfin 0]

I also agree on hearing any update or status on service pack for the weather aspect of this program. At the time AS2012 released the previous version was highly recommended on this site.

[FrankFasi 0]

I'm hoping AS 2012 isn't the flight sim equivelant of The Eagles' "Let's get back together and make a lot of money" tour. :(

Edited February 15, 2012 by VonStalhein

[FrankFasi 0]

I went home and downloaded/installed the latest ASE beta (build 655 I think), and enjoyed a flight where the crappy weather I dialed in stuck around right through touchdown at my destination, and remained crappy as I taxi'd to parking. I think I'll hold off installing AS2012 until I notice via these boards that a corrective update is available fixing the disappearing IMC. At least the huge download is out of the way. :(

[PerWel 23]

Did a flight today and landed at Vancouver CYVR 8R. I have AS2012 but used ASE on this flight (just to test the OVC thing) and for the first time since I got AS2012 I did a approach and landing in lots of clouds.Metar said OVC 3500 and it was that looking out, inside clouds at 4000 until locked on ILS and during descent I broke out of the clouds. Never seen this with AS2012 so the fix in ASE never made it to AS2012 before release.So ASE with DWC and Prevent Cloud Redraw ticked worked OK. Yesterday I played around with AS2012 and the Prevent Cloud Redraw and unticked did cause more clouds during approach but instead they popped in/out.No popping with ASE.So AS2012 can not have all the fixes that ASE have in this area. Hopefully Damien and the rest are working to implement ASEs fixes into AS2012. ASAPThis happens all the time in software developing, I know I work as a programmer/developer.When there is a major change coming we just take a Branch from the main code line and start working on the very new different version. In the mean time the main code is maintained and fixed. Later we merge the main with thenew version. But sometimes there is a lot of work to merge code lines. In worst case we have to rewrite things here and there.That is my experience with software develpment.

[Driftdown 1]

I am also back to using ASE for a while as AS2012 has been very disappointing lately. Especially during the past fews days when most of Europe was OVC045 and all I got was OVC for approx 30 seconds when lauching AS2012 and after 30 seconds it would revert to a nice SCT. I I can't understand why the depiction would be almost perfect during the first seconds, only to disappear after less than a minute.I will keep testing both to compare, as I know Damian, Chris and the entire team are hard at work to solve these issues.

Edited February 17, 2012 by Driftdown