If we go further down the road with your flawed premise, then I guess that comparing freeware(FSRealWx) to payware(the other two) is also invalid because you can't get the REX base package for free either, just the updates. Seriously now, lets raise the level of the debate and compare the latest generation of products rather than getting into the weeds over paid updates vs unpaid updates. The OP has screenshots from three products. Two of the products are of the latest generation, the third is not. It is very interesting, I am sure the OP meant well, I am not attacking him or anybody else. I normally stay out of the fray, but it is an invalid comparison, plain and simple.

 

I agree Scott, although as an initial comparison it does seve to instill some interest. However, I am confused why Ess is showing two layers of cumulus clouds. I have always been a keen supporter of FSrealWX...

A correction to my post, stating the lack of a simple field to check METARs while the REX-E weather engine is running. It's there, one just has to click it.

More options will appear simply by right-selecting on the frame of the REX WX weather gauge, as seen in figure 52

I should really read more into those manuals.

Not quite sure what the problem is for some regarding my original post.

 

I have bought ASE (payware), REX Essential (payware) and also use FsWxLite (freeware). I am sure many serious FS enthusiasts have at least one of these.

 

I posted to illustrate the results in my personal three weather generating programs for others potentially interested in purchasing a weather program or upgrading to REX Essential.

 

If someone reading this thread has AS2012 and REX E then please post - am sure many (me included) would be interested to see a comparison :)

Comparison shots are misleading. Angle of the aircraft taken by the OP is different in each shot. First shot is below aircraft looking up while other two are looking at same level of aircraft. ASE is older than the newer AS2012. You are comparing an old version from Activesky to a new version of REX... misleading IMO.

I posted to illustrate the results in my personal three weather generating programs for others potentially interested in purchasing a weather program or upgrading to REX Essential.

 

If someone were purchasing Active Sky (with textures) they would be purchasing 2012, and I'd like to see a direct comparison with the latest versions of each and also a comparison of AS running with 2012 textures vs. REX Essentials textures in identical settings.

This thread sure teach someone to try to post something in helping out with some information! Maybe it's political season that's getting everyone worked up ;)

Haha, so true, Timmer. :lol:

 

I hope the folks complaining did get that the comparison isn't about textures, but about how some current weather engines feed FSX with the METAR given. Easy, and described in the very first post. I for one found it to be very helpful.

Not quite sure what the problem is for some regarding my original post.

 

I have bought ASE (payware), REX Essential (payware) and also use FsWxLite (freeware). I am sure many serious FS enthusiasts have at least one of these.

 

I posted to illustrate the results in my personal three weather generating programs for others potentially interested in purchasing a weather program or upgrading to REX Essential.

 

If someone reading this thread has AS2012 and REX E then please post - am sure many (me included) would be interested to see a comparison :)

 

From the comparisons I've done between AS2012 and REX E - it isn't always the case REX E looks better on my end. Weather injection in FS9/FSX isn't incredibly accurate and random to a degree, so I've seen certain scenarios look better with REX E, and others with AS2012. One thing REX E definitely does better is fog generation. Ultimately, however, I'm much more interested in the accuracy of the weather - and this is where REX E falls behind AS2012. Plus I get the ridiculous S-Turns with the NGX with REX E no matter what wind smoothing options I put in REX E, or with FSUIPC, which just further reduces the accuracy of the winds. With AS2012 I don't use ANY smoothing and don't get S-Turning.

Can you post some screenshots, harvesl? I think it would really add to the thread and also helps the guys looking for AS2012 vs. REX-E impressions via pictures.

Perhaps do it like the OP, you know, same METAR, location and time and just switching the weather engines then. Would be much appreciated.

 

No S-turns so far with REX-E, but I've set the whole wind thingies with turbulence and windshear down to just '1'.

Can you post some screenshots, harvesl? I think it would really add to the thread and also helps the guys looking for AS2012 vs. REX-E impressions via pictures.

Perhaps do it like the OP, you know, same METAR, location and time and just switching the weather engines then. Would be much appreciated.

 

No S-turns so far with REX-E, but I've set the whole wind thingies with turbulence and windshear down to just '1'.

 

 

Sure, pictures should be self explanatory. I have no idea what REX E was doing at LICT - it kept giving the same result after restarting REX E, FSX, PC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Great shots. Thanks for the work. Lol on the the LICT case. Right you are, strange result. If the devs are reading this, perhaps they can explain it.

I hope the folks complaining did get that the comparison isn't about textures, but about how some current weather engines feed FSX with the METAR given.

 

But how can one truly compare engines if the texture sets are different? There's a big difference between complaints and criticism - I think everyone "complaining" is quite interested and simply would like to see an equitable comparison, myself included.

 

For a true comparison, the same textures should be used (most updated from any set) and the most current weather engine should be used.

 

For one, as someone who only owns ASE, I'd like to see (note I'm not sure how REX textures are chosen/substituted with others'):

 

ASE vs. REX Essential (both with stock FSX textures, if possible)

ASE+AS2012 vs. REX Essential

ASE+AS2012 vs. REX Essential (both with REX textures)

ASE+AS2012 vs. REX Essential (both with AS2012 textures, if possible)

 

This is primarily a graphic comparison; I imagine it would take a lot more time and resources to compare the "physical" weather models throughout a range of conditions. That said, I believe the accuracy of the weather data and resulting "physical" model outweighs the visuals by a long shot, especially when taking into consideration low/limited visibility conditions in which you may not be seeing much out the window for a while anyway.

 

Arguably, the most critical meeting of the two models (visual and physical) happens at approach / final / decision height, where a "whole lot" is going on at once and the visual once again becomes a critical factor. In this case, the REX treatment of low visibility/fog/mist/whatever may be better from what I've seen.

Comparison shots are misleading. Angle of the aircraft taken by the OP is different in each shot. First shot is below aircraft looking up while other two are looking at same level of aircraft. ASE is older than the newer AS2012. You are comparing an old version from Activesky to a new version of REX... misleading IMO.

 

B777ER are you being serious? There is a matter of a few feet in difference in each shot :)

B777ER are you being serious? There is a matter of a few feet in difference in each shot :)

You went to all that trouble and get called"Misleading"

It calls for

But how can one truly compare engines if the texture sets are different? There's a big difference between complaints and criticism - I think everyone "complaining" is quite interested and simply would like to see an equitable comparison, myself included.

 

For a true comparison, the same textures should be used (most updated from any set) and the most current weather engine should be used.

 

For one, as someone who only owns ASE, I'd like to see (note I'm not sure how REX textures are chosen/substituted with others'):

 

ASE vs. REX Essential (both with stock FSX textures, if possible)

ASE+AS2012 vs. REX Essential

ASE+AS2012 vs. REX Essential (both with REX textures)

ASE+AS2012 vs. REX Essential (both with AS2012 textures, if possible)

 

This is primarily a graphic comparison; I imagine it would take a lot more time and resources to compare the "physical" weather models throughout a range of conditions. That said, I believe the accuracy of the weather data and resulting "physical" model outweighs the visuals by a long shot, especially when taking into consideration low/limited visibility conditions in which you may not be seeing much out the window for a while anyway.

 

Arguably, the most critical meeting of the two models (visual and physical) happens at approach / final / decision height, where a "whole lot" is going on at once and the visual once again becomes a critical factor. In this case, the REX treatment of low visibility/fog/mist/whatever may be better from what I've seen.

 

+1

 

If I had the time (and AS2012) I'd post a comparison!