Eagle, I wouldn't go so far as to say their ignorant, they just have different perspectives, views, and priorities, all of which I accept. I don't like some if it, but I accept it. A lot here don't like me or my views, fine, not here to be popular, but they have for the most part been accepting, especially the site moderators, thanks for allowing "free speech", from all angles. This wouldn't be allowed at the .borg, oops I meant the .org.

 

To "resist is futile", although I will "NEVER" join the Borg Collective that exists around here. (humour folks, with a pinch of truth) -_-

 

I will "pay" for whatever I can get my hands on to improve any simulation or program for that matter. If developers can't supply a feature, or it's taking too long, I have no problem paying someone else for said feature. So yes, I would be in, in a heart beat. Anything, to improve some aspects of Xplane.

 

Glen

unfortunately, no one except Laminar themself could implement it, it can not be done from the outside as an addon, otherwise I would have done it already.

 

but I brought this up to gain support for this high quality feature, perhaps a petition similar to Laminars own "patent infringement" petition would help.

For me, the main limitations in the X-Plane cloud system are, in rough order of importance:

 

1) Poor performance at high puff density settings: in the first releases of X-Plane 10, there were 2 cloud sliders, and tuning them you could obtain a nice depiction of clouds and also a good performance. A step backward for me;

 

2) Clouds not moving with wind; since the weather system generates seamless cloud patterns for contiguous scenery tiles (you can observe this in the local map, moving the map to the nearby scenery tiles), making the clouds move should not be very difficult;

 

3) Lacking or poor depiction of certain common cloud types, namely cumulus humilis, cirrus clouds;

 

4) The "on/off" grey-out that appears when the aircraft is considered to be inside a cloud. Sometimes it appears when the aircraft is not inside a cloud puff. It would be better to remove this "grey-out" altogether, the final effect would be more realistic.

 

So, at a first glance, neither of these 4 points seem too much difficult to improve.

No arguments here, list is spot on.

 

Glen

exactly.

 

and it appears all these 4 issues could be implemented with that Simul weather SDK. it would leave Laminars developers more time for other flight sim related features that are missing, instead of fiddling with something others have specialised in and are more experienced with.