Im on the edge of buying, tried the demo today for the weather only and it was easy, quick and seamless. I changed airports about 10 times and slew'd at 3000kt to new positions, almost instant WX updates, better than REX. Plannining a A2A B17 filight of over 4000 miles and want real time weather all the way, think this is a fab offering and a must ... Trying the camera and network view options tomorrow, if there half as good im in!

 

Rich

I have to say that I find it rather hard to believe that OPUSFSX is that much better than ASE or REX weather. Both of these other programs have been around for a while and its hard to believe that they have not found every creative way to inject the best weather into FSX. I can believe that OPUSFSX is just as good (with exception of cruise winds) but better??? Hopefully someone will do a full review and comparison.

Ur right Mark but maybe some of the other programs have there roots to deeply planted and in there present format cant do what this can. I dont envy anyone who has to do a revue/comparison!

 

Personally i think Opus would be splitting the three elements as not everone wants or need all three, also they need third party WX textures, hope there working on there own as good as the engine.

n other words, if we buy want to use Opus, we need to buy REX

 

Aharon, use HDE sky and clouds,they are the most relistic I have used.

Edetroit one of the best screenshot artists,uses this combo exclusively for all his shots.

Serch the screenshot forum.

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/387497-connie-626-preview-part-2/

 

Regards.

I have to say that I find it rather hard to believe that OPUSFSX is that much better than ASE or REX weather. Both of these other programs have been around for a while and its hard to believe that they have not found every creative way to inject the best weather into FSX. I can believe that OPUSFSX is just as good (with exception of cruise winds) but better??? Hopefully someone will do a full review and comparison.

 

I have to agree with Mark's assessment here. Don't get me wrong, I really do hope Opus has discovered a breakthrough and are able to finally present a very realistic visual depiction of weather, but I would think that at least Hifi Simulations Active Sky would have offered similar visual quality if it was possible.

 

From what I have gathered, you can have very real looking weather, including the possibility of fronts, but the winds aloft will not be accurate. And if you desire accurate winds, the visuals will suffer. I am strictly a heavy metal jetliner flyer, and as such, I stick to Active Sky's Global weather mode (DWC) to get accurate winds aloft, at any any cost. And that cost, is a less than optimal visual depiction of weather, clouds, etc. I would choose another mode of weather simulation in Active Sky to get better visuals, possibly at the same level of detail as Opus, if I were to fly GA aircraft where winds aloft is not as crucial as it is for passenger jet performance at cruise. Those "modes" are Smooth Cloud and Standard, with the former being similar to Opus and the latter the mode that causes excessive stutters and flashing when weather updates are injected into the sim. As enticing as the beautiful visuals of OPUS weather may be, I am doubtful of it's winds aloft capability, only because it has been drilled into my mind that winds aloft and cloud visuals are mutually exclusive.

 

Another reason I may have to stick with Active Sky is it's historical weather feature. I never, ever fly with live weather because I like to simulate real world flights that have happened in the past, as much as 6 months before or longer at times (i.e. mimicking past vacation flights!) Active Sky does a nifty job at letting the user download the weather of any time in the past 2 or so years and fly with that weather, including live changes to that weather as they occurred at that point in time. Can opus offer this capability, or will it offer it in the future?

 

Bottom line, if Opus is proven to offer winds aloft accuracy AND beautiful, realistic visuals, and a historical date weather download feature, I may give it a try.

 

EDIT: I almost forgot, there is one more feature from Active Sky that I cherish for airliner operations: a screen listing the winds aloft by altitude, as well as temps.

In the NGX, and most other heavy jets, the user has the ability to input the winds and temps expected both in cruise and during descent to give the Flight Management Computer the data it needs to accurately predict destination arrival time and to plan the VNAV descent profile. Also, average wind/temp at cruise altitude is a plus, as it is input into the FMC during preflight. Without this information in an easy to decipher format, I would find it hard to switch to OPUS from Active Sky.

You can import saved METAR's into the OPUS weather engine for depiction. It's not as user-friendly as AS's implementation, but it is possible.

 

I know all these claims that Opus' weather engine is that much better than 'ASE/REX sound like outrageous hyperbole....but seriously....it IS that much better.

 

I don't think you need to have lesser visuals for greater accuracy up high...well we hope. I think that's the OPUS plan at least. For now there is at least a simulation of upperwinds...but they are by no means accurate.

 

Honestly, this engine is far less clunky, no need to preload flight plans for better accuracy, and no huge overly-fancy interface (this is more of a personal preference) and you get these almost weekly updates with great community involvement.

I have to say that I find it rather hard to believe that OPUSFSX is that much better than ASE or REX weather

 

In my humble opinion it's not only better. It leaves them in the dust when it comes to weather depiction. I own all of them.

Ur right Mark but maybe some of the other programs have there roots to deeply planted and in there present format cant do what this can. I dont envy anyone who has to do a revue/comparison!

 

Good point, and one that plays in Opus's favor. It's possible that the other weather programs have too much legacy code, as well as time and money invested thus far, to start from scratch like Opus has. There could still be an argument that the other developers have added as much new features or workarounds around the buggy FSX weather engine as they can, and that due to FSX limitations ActiveSky or REX is the best one can get, but I'm hopeful that OPUS was able to find an innovative approach to create a whole new approach to FSX weather that the competition has missed. Remember, PMDG keeps amazing us with their discoveries of features that were previously untouchable due to "FSX limitations", like their Heads Up Display in the NGX. Maybe Opus will amaze us as well?

I am doubtful of it's winds aloft capability, only because it has been drilled into my mind that winds aloft and cloud visuals are mutually exclusive.

 

Interesting, I was not aware of this limitation.

Interesting, I was not aware of this limitation.

I think it has been mentioned many times that GIB winds aloft will be implemented very soon. And historic weather. Then it will be a level playing field. Any reviews should be held off till it is implemented, to be fair to all players.

Interesting, I was not aware of this limitation.

 

Actually, that is not really a stated fact, but it's my impression of where things stand based on what I have read on the forums regarding Active Sky, especially the DWC mode (Direct Wind Control).

When I first started using Active Sky, I used it's standard or smooth clouds mode, where the weather depiction was fine but there were always sudden wind shifts, or the winds at cruise would slowly die down and I would lose all winds altogether. Then I tried DWC, and winds aloft was now very accurate and reliable, but because it is a global mode, the weather in your "bubble" at climb, cruise, descent, would be the weather all around you for miles and miles, including your destination! Therefore, the visual depiction is not good, because at cruise you will find clouds as low as 1000 feet above the ground racing at high velocity over the landscape,because they share the same winds aloft at 1000 ft as I am at a 35000ft cruise. And forget about weather fronts or varied cloud formations, all cloud formations are basically the same everywhere you look.

 

So that is where I base my assumption that there is a tradeoff between winds aloft accuracy and visual quality of clouds. Global DWC mode has been documented to be the mode to use in Active Sky for jet operations, especially long hauls where wind aloft accuracy is crucial to deciding on the amount of fuel you will load and how much you hope to have in reserve at the destination.

Actually, that is not really a stated fact, but it's my impression of where things stand based on what I have read on the forums regarding Active Sky, especially the DWC mode (Direct Wind Control).

When I first started using Active Sky, I used it's standard or smooth clouds mode, where the weather depiction was fine but there were always sudden wind shifts, or the winds at cruise would slowly die down and I would lose all winds altogether. Then I tried DWC, and winds aloft was now very accurate and reliable, but because it is a global mode, the weather in your "bubble" at climb, cruise, descent, would be the weather all around you for miles and miles, including your destination! Therefore, the visual depiction is not good, because at cruise you will find clouds as low as 1000 feet above the ground racing at high velocity over the landscape,because they share the same winds aloft at 1000 ft as I am at a 35000ft cruise. And forget about weather fronts or varied cloud formations, all cloud formations are basically the same everywhere you look.

 

So that is where I base my assumption that there is a tradeoff between winds aloft accuracy and visual quality of clouds. Global DWC mode has been documented to be the mode to use in Active Sky for jet operations, especially long hauls where wind aloft accuracy is crucial to deciding on the amount of fuel you will load and how much you hope to have in reserve at the destination.

 

Euh.. no.. see for yourself.

Remember, PMDG keeps amazing us with their discoveries of features that were previously untouchable due to "FSX limitations", like their Heads Up Display in the NGX. Maybe Opus will amaze us as well?

 

Perhaps OPUS and PMDG can work together so we can finally get a weather radar in the NGX!!!!

 

 

Well, I just tried out the demo, and I will say this about the visual aspect of the weather: IT IS THE BEST I'VE EVER SEEN!!!

Real variation in the shape and placement of clouds, the ability to see fronts and changing conditions far away, just like in real life. I'm very impressed.

 

 

 

 

However, there are some features I very much need to fully convince me to move away from ActiveSky, as they are a must for my NGX flights. I have already touched upon most of them earlier in this thread, but they are:

 

- Better winds aloft, as I was getting a headwind in cruise altitudes flying from West to East where I should have been getting a tailwind.

- A table of winds aloft speed, direction and temperature at various altitudes that match a user inputted flight plan (which both REX and Active Sky offer). I need this data for each waypoint to input the expected winds into the NGX FMC's legs page to get time and fuel remaining predictions, this is very important for us heavy metal flyers!

- Historical time feature so I am not forced to use live weather if I don't want to. Many folks like myself like to fly real routes mimicking real flights and want the same weather they experienced, or they may want to practice special scenarios like approaches that are tied to a saved flight.

 

I understand that the historical time and winds aloft features are expected to be incorporated in future builds, and for that reason I am thrilled. I was thinking that we are at a dead end when it comes to FSX weather, and to see that it may be possible to have a rich visual weather environment AND accurate winds could breathe some new life into our aging platform.

in other words, if we buy want to use Opus, we need to buy REX. Right?? So you did not pay 40 for this. You paid a lot more than 40 for this.

 

Aharon

Actually I seen a new cloud texture package on Simmarket today that is much cheaper if you don't want to spend the money on REX. Flight 1 also has Flight Environment X and there are probably some freeware packages on the Avsim library.

 

I'm also very impressed with Opus weather engine. I still have a lot to learn about the software, but with Active Sky 2012, you still get the clearing out of clouds and the reloading, which always bothered me. REX gives the flashing as it slowly loads weather.

Opus doesn't seem to do any of this.

Another thing that I like about Opus is that it is quick. Kick it on and your weather is loaded. REX takes forever to load data, and Active Sky 2012 also takes a while also.

Opus is ready when you are.

I uninstalled EZdok software, and I'm still learning to use the Opus camera control, but I'm sure it will be great also. I haven't figured out how to get the cockpit shake like I had with EZdok, but I know Opus does it too. I just have to figure out how.