I am using Opus for over a year now. Before Opus, AS2012 was my weather application. I tried ASN - bought the upgrade- for couple of weeks now. I am back with Opus for now.

 

Thats what I like about ASN:

I like the smooth weather changes

Almost to none cloud popups

Easy to use interface

Weather accuracy is the same as Opus, both programs give me sometimes the wrong weather predictions.

 

I dont like

Turbulences needs to be tweaked - How many turbulences are there during a flight ? ASN is more like a turbulence simulator than weather program....

Sometimes ASN displays strange cloud formations - Although I read that the devs a aware of this bug and working on a fix.

 

Why did I go back to Opus ? FSX freezes/stop working with ASN after a certain amount of time into my flight. I know this might be my pc/fsx setup but still it should not happen.

Opus has its flaws like there are still abrupt wind shifts although not that frequent anymore. Weather and cloud changes are not that smooth as ASN. But Opus gives me a stable simulation.

Once ASN has been tweaked and hopefully receives an SP I am happy to try ASN again.

Steven  needs to reel himself in.   I own both products and I am testing a weather radar that would be IMPOSSIBLE with his product. ASNEXT found a way to place clouds and weather where they want it. Plus the winds are rock solid and accurate.

 

I noticed NickN chimed in on that thread...   He had a similar reaction  when FTX global came out.

 

Indeed. Opus would benefit from Stephen just shutting up and letting Cheryl handle all interactions with the community. The thing is if you're interested in a product you should really only consider the quality and price of the product itself and not let yourself be affected by the actions of those who made it. However when a developer is constantly attacking competitors calling them copycats and branding themselves as the only innovators on the scene a lot of people will get a bit hesitant to confide in them and as a result they might buy a competing product instead.

 

As I see it regardless of whether ASN actually does a better job at depicting weather or not OpusFSX is still a very competitive product that offers functionality that ASN does not so I can't for the life of me see why Stephen thinks this approach is a good idea.

 

As for NickN his reaction is more understandable as his competitor released a superior product at a lower price effectively pulling the carpet from under his feet, though that still doesn't make him appear less juvenile.

I purchased ASN and am very happy with it. I tried the demo of OPUS and wasn't convinced. It didn't look 'real' to me. Then I installed the ASN demo and was sold after 2 or 3 flights, and I bought my key. Great support, amazing program.

I dont like

Turbulences needs to be tweaked - How many turbulences are there during a flight ? ASN is more like a turbulence simulator than weather...

Which is exactly what makes it the best weather program for FSX in my experience. I've tried them all and have been using Opus since it came out. Love the DHM and cameras (finally able to quit using EZDOK...so buggy). And it had by far the best cloud simulation. But even with DHM it doesn't come very close to the experience of turbulence in real flight. That's what I've been missing, and that's what ASN does better than anything else so far.

 

To answer your question directly: a LOT. Except early morning or in colder weather, a light plane experiences a LOT of air movement. The atmosphere is a sea of air, just like the ocean, with currents and waves and eddies and turbulence at most times. Like the sea, it can occasionally be smooth as glass, but like the sea, that is an exception. A small plane, like a small boat on the sea, usually experiences some bobbing and movement. Planes, like boats, are lifted up and carried down by the movement of the fluid they are riding. Air is a fluid.

 

I've been trying the ASN demo for the past week, flying in light aircraft at the edge of the mountains in PNW and Death Valley. I will run ASN for a bit, and then Opus. ASN wins hands down. I get the kinds of bumps and down drafts I would expect with ASN, none or very little with Opus. I also experience some significant ridge lift with ASN, none with Opus. I swear I encountered a rotor once with ASN on the back side of a ridge. I've NEVER experienced that with any other weather program in FSX. Finally, it feels like a moving, fractious sea of air that I'm flying in rather than that famous FSX flying on rails. A new level of immersion for me, capturing that real world experience I've always missed so much from flying light aircraft has been provided by ASN. I'll be getting the key.

 

 

But you must disable Turbulence and bump aircraft off in the DHM settings. You do not have to turn off DHM.

 

I cannot disable it! I uncheck it, OK button. When I open DHM dialog they are selected again.

 

 

Steven  needs to reel himself in.

 

Communicating with Steven can be like going on a date with a really insecure person: "I'm better than those other people you dated!  You don't like them, do you?  Do you?"  I once made the mistake of saying something favorable to him about the way Accu-feel handles aircraft movement in turbulence (shake the aircraft, not the pilot).  My point was that the eye doesn't see the way a camera sees - the brain makes adjustments to add continuity to a scene, so what you actually see isn't exactly like camera shake.  In response, I was treated to an outburst about how only Opus is real, all the other approaches to turbulence are PHONY (his caps, not mine), and my observations were way too complicated...  So I broke off the conversation.

 

That said, Opus is an excellent program.  I use it with P3D2, and sometimes with FSX.  I'm currently working to tune ASN to get good results on my FSX setup - there are respects in which I prefer it to Opus, and I'm a longtime Active Sky user, but so far I've found it a little challenging to get the performance right.

 

It would be nice if we could like all our developers as people, but I suppose that isn't a realistic hope.  I do wish Steven would throttle back a bit and just let his program succeed on its (considerable) merits, and I found the linked thread  more than a bit off-putting.  But I have gotten enjoyment out of Opus, so that's something, too.

 

 

I was treated to an outburst about how only XXXX is real, all the other approaches to YYYY are PHONY (his caps, not mine), and my observations were way too complicated...

 

You don't even have to show the details to know what the product is and who said it. 

 

The whole idea of bumping the camera to simulate turbulence may well be the absolute worst way to do it.  Can anyone think of a worse one??  Besides the fact that they used Very Highly Accurate accelerometer readings to get the movement;  it's a case of "measure with a micrometer, mark with chalk, cut with an axe."  Which aircraft did they measure?  Aren't ALL other aircraft off because they aren't the same aircraft they used to get the measurements?  Is a 737 the same as a Piper Cub?

 

Has anyone noticed that that "Cheryl" is just as bad as Stephen?  At least it was that way in the early days.  Lately I've tried to avoid most Opus-related stuff because it gives me tourettes.

 

Three times I was about to purchase Opus.  The first two times I was put off by the competitor-bashing on his web site, the third time by his treatment of a customer.  Pretty much the same kind of thing in your quote.  After that, I decided that Opus wouldn't ever be something I used.

 

I honestly don't understand the early gushing.  It's only appropriate if those people had never used real world weather before.  Now, there's a phenomenon where people will go for anything, better or worse, just because it's different.  Opus could have been just good enough to trigger it.  I've used Active Sky since the beginning, and nothing they said about competitors matched what I'd been seeing for years.  They may have been comparing to REX, but somehow I doubt REX was that bad either.

 

For those who like Opus, I'm glad you found a good weather program that you like.  I did too, and sorry, it wasn't Opus.  Good luck.

 

Hook

I did like ASN from the trial.  It handeled VV (indefinite ceiling) very well and opus didn't.  And OPUS has been acting up lately with windshifts galore and really bad winds aloft forecast vs in-game.

 

Unfortunately I just cannot get ASN...  I got horrible stutters in ASN and no idea why.  It may have been because of the enhanced overcast.  But I'm not about to disable that because that's how ASN looks like OPUS.  Otherwise I don't find the OVC as good as in OPUS.

 

 

Unfortunately I just cannot get ASN...  I got horrible stutters in ASN and no idea why.

 

I was able to tame mine by restoring an affinity mask setting to my fsx.cfg (14 in my case, no hyperthreading) and reducing cloud layers from the default 5 to 3.  I don't have enhanced overcast enabled, so you may not be satisfied if you follow my lead.  I'm still working on it, though, and haven't settled on any settings, so if anyone has suggestions, I'm open.  I also had windshift problems with Opus, and I prefer the overall ASN look, as well as the way it handles turbulence.  I'd like to get it tuned... and am looking forward to the P3D2 version as well.

I cannot disable it! I uncheck it, OK button. When I open DHM dialog they are selected again.

Are you trying to disable Turb in the DHM in the Configuration page or for each individual aircraft you have cams set for ?

It won't work if you try to disable from the main config page. For example, the NGX, you must load in FSX, start Opus, press the Cameras button, click "DHM", then un tick Turb, and Bump. You must do that for each cam position you have DHM set for.  Press save all cameras at the end.

 

 

I did like ASN from the trial. It handeled VV (indefinite ceiling) very well and opus didn't. And OPUS has been acting up lately with windshifts galore and really bad winds aloft forecast vs in-game.

 

Yeah, I completely agree with this.  Opus, IMO, has gotten worse when it comes to cloud popping/shifts even though they say they now know how to prevent it.  If I leave things at their default settings and don't disable weather updates in flight, I see way too many cloud pops on climb and descent for my liking.

 

There are only two reasons why I am still using it.  1, budget to buy another FSX addon(ASN) isn't quite available yet and 2, when I did the trial of ASN, I did experience a couple CTD's.  Since completely removing ASN, I haven't had a single one.  So, I'm a little hesitant to buy it.  Opus, even though it can't come close to ASN for "smooth" weather, at least hasn't caused a CTD yet for me.

Are you trying to disable Turb in the DHM in the Configuration page or for each individual aircraft you have cams set for ?

It won't work if you try to disable from the main config page. For example, the NGX, you must load in FSX, start Opus, press the Cameras button, click "DHM", then un tick Turb, and Bump. You must do that for each cam position you have DHM set for.  Press save all cameras at the end.

Why must you disable Turbulence and bump?  It's a camera thing, right?  How does having it on interfere with ASN?  Did I miss something somewhere about this?

Why must you disable Turbulence and bump?  It's a camera thing, right?  How does having it on interfere with ASN?  Did I miss something somewhere about this?

Because, Turb/Bump is programmed to function when Opus is injecting the weather. It is tied together so to speak.

If you have Turb/Bump on,using ASN, you will get camera shake all the time, regardless if there is turbulence or not.

That's not been my experience.  I've run the DHM from Opus will all options ticked with ASN weather and it's been, if anything, a bit "quieter" camera shake-wise.  

Ok, interesting. Was going by reports from ASN users that got continual turb with it enabled. Go figure. Will turn it on and see what happens.