Thank you, Kostas, nice idea. I thought that the gauge, even if its window is closed, could anyway affect the fps. Glad to know that it won't  :wink:

Too many defenders of Opus here... 

 

 

Rubbish.  

 

I have not seen one post from people "defending Opus", just people discussing whether or not it is worth the move over to ASN if you do have Opus.  

 

All you are doing is stirring up trouble, in saying that.   <_<

 

If you are referring to me, read my last post - I said how good ASN is, just that when you are already using the latest Opus, then ASN is not such a big improvement, for the cost.

 

 

This is the FSX forum: Enough forum space for all of us - OPUS/AS/REX/FSGRW users ... whoever!

 

Exactly!

 

That is the approach to take (a positive one), rather than trying to stir up trouble.    Jose must have expected there to have been a 17 page thread on ASN, that was not allowed to even mention it's main alternative...  :rolleyes:

Can I be the first Opus Defender ?

 

I AM DEFENDING OPUS !!!!

 

Hurray ! I am now the first Opus defender

Use Opus for a year and until now nothing had surpass it.
I never used the cameras and DHM I really did not like it over EZDOC. But if you need that side of Opus then I think it's got something over ASN.
 
But if we are talking pure weather engine ASN is where it's at. I do find the weather engine war funny.
REX come out with REX4 just before ASN comes out.
OPUS have said OpusFSI is coming out.

OPUS in the last few days have added Opus FSI cloud smoothing into there latest beta, I wonder why? I wont quote them but if you read it though it still not going to do what ASN does because it fsx bound, ASN is not. I bet OpusFSI is like ASN and not fsx bound because in Opus own words you have to work outside fsx it get rid of popping and cloud redraw and wind shifts properly.

As I said earlier, the one great thing about all of these commercial weather programs is that we have a lot of competition. Competition is good... Don't know why we really need to go on a "defend OPUS" kick or a "defend REX" kick. They are all good and they will continue to get better.

 

Best regards,

Mephic, I'm looking for balanced accufeel v2 settings with a wx engine. Could you share yours please?

(never mind the sounds and water)

 

Thanks,

Dirk.

Dirk - accufeel has config database for all default planes and a lot of non-stock planes. I just used the default 737-800 config as this was the one which I was flying. Each plane has its own settings in accufeel because each plane behaves differently. I heard that PMGD also has its own settings if You are using it. I will soon

As I said earlier, the one great thing about all of these commercial weather programs is that we have a lot of competition. Competition is good... Don't know why we really need to go on a "defend OPUS" kick or a "defend REX" kick. They are all good and they will continue to get better.

 

Best regards,

Fully agree, although Rex is missing a lot - they pushed more for their other more important and complex projects. And I think that they will develop them more. But I don't feel that I wasted money on REX - textures are top notch and it works with AS. What else would I need to be happy?

Presently, for P3D V2, 3.38 OPUS sounds best for me.

Presently, for FSX, ASN sounds best for me.

 

Now if ASN got their P3D V2 option working, I would purchase ASN for sure.

 

Right now I am toying with the demo, but I would prefer to get back to P3D V2....

Use Opus for a year and until now nothing had surpass it.

I never used the cameras and DHM I really did not like it over EZDOC. But if you need that side of Opus then I think it's got something over ASN.

 

But if we are talking pure weather engine ASN is where it's at. I do find the weather engine war funny.

REX come out with REX4 just before ASN comes out.

OPUS have said OpusFSI is coming out.

OPUS in the last few days have added Opus FSI cloud smoothing into there latest beta, I wonder why? I wont quote them but if you read it though it still not going to do what ASN does because it fsx bound, ASN is not. I bet OpusFSI is like ASN and not fsx bound because in Opus own words you have to work outside fsx it get rid of popping and cloud redraw and wind shifts properly.

 

 

And to add to your 'neck and neck' description, David:

 

ASN was released with the broken clouds layer option forced to '7/8' by default (= any reported 'broken' coverage will be displayed as a 7/8 coverage) - if you disable that checkbox, the 'broken' cloud coverage suddenly becomes very, very sparse ...

 

In all fairness, this is the only detail in ASN that I've noticed so far which isn't quite "there" - still I am a very happy ASN "bunny".

As I said earlier, the one great thing about all of these commercial weather programs is that we have a lot of competition. Competition is good... Don't know why we really need to go on a "defend OPUS" kick or a "defend REX" kick. They are all good and they will continue to get better.

 

Best regards,

I totally agree. At the end it is what you are most comfortable with. I am no real pilot. I would not know the difference flying with ASN or Opus compare to real situations. I will only notice cloud,graphical abnormalities or rapid wind shifts etc or wrong weather display on my pc.

 

If one weather program gives me those errors frequently then I would consider buying another one. However with all the competitions in wx at the moment. I think ASN, Opus or FSGRW are of good quality and get better and better.

Count me in as one who enjoys hearing from users of other wx engines.  I am one too, after all, currently using REX and Opus.  Informed discussions are always best, so long as none of us get defensive.

 

It is curious that some of us seem to feel there's a larger difference between Opus and ASN than others.  I haven't installed the latest Opus beta, as I'd decided to stop using the betas and simply stay current with each stable "release" version as it comes out.  I probably will try this latest before the end of the week, but I don't think that will sway me much.  There are too many other things I like about ASN after a couple of days testing.

 

BTW, one comment about the Flight Planning tool.  I flight plan outside of FSX using real-world tools (Foreflight) and then input those manually to my RXPs for most flights, so I'm not anxious to deal with a third piece.  I understand that the system will probably work better if I at least enter departure and destination airports, but that's turned out to be a bit problematic, as the tool will only accept ICAO designators and many of the airports I fly to/from are small enough that they don't have official ICAO designations.  For example, I did a short flight the other day from KSFF (Felts Field in Spokane, WA) to 65S (Bonners Ferry, WA) which does not have an ICAO designator.  Is there an easy way to deal with this?  Leave it blank?  Try to find and input the nearest Kxxx field?  Don't bother with the tool at all?

 

I guess what I'm asking as much as anything is, how much does having a flight plan in place impact wx generation?

 

Thanks,

 

Scott

I was wondering the same. I fly TEC routes on PE, it could be a pita to manually add the required waypoints. Will the wx generator still give me an excellent rendition along my route?

 

Is it really a necessity to enter a FP?

Same here. I'm one of those heathens that uses the FSX flight planner 

 

ASN can automatically load the flight plan if you import a plan into FSX, its off by default. I do this all the time when Aivlasoft's EFB loads my plan for me into FSX, ASN then automatically updates the route as EFB activates it. If you make anymore changes in EFB those are also automatically seen by ASN too.

 

 

Just to make sure I understand this correctly Andy, are you saying you've found a way to "connect" ASN and EFB so whatever flightplan I load in EFB and activate this flight plan will automatically also be loaded into ASN?

 

I've tried this myself but I wasn't able to make it work but surely I did a wrong turn somewhere...

I don't think anyone is Kicking Opus Jim. Another over reaction not thought through, :wink: like the one you made last Saturday

 

Just joking with you Jim ofc :smile:

 

Thanks Oliver I did not know that....hmmm

Also looking for an answer to ttocs, ryan's question.

 

In previous versions of AS, normally using an airliner's FMS, rarely bothered to make a flight plan in FSX planner, much less import it into AS.  Sometimes I would enter the departure and destination airports simply for the sake of AS Atis, sometimes I wouldn't.   Always wondered how much having an FP actually impacted the weather generation or if I was losing something by not doing so.