Ryan - ASN uses "thicker" clouds that AS2012 - Don't know about Opus. So if you had 5 cloud layers set in AS2012 and 5 set in ASN - you'd get a bigger performance hit from ASN due to the increased graphics load. Try lowering with the CDD in ASN and see if that makes a difference - also drop you cloud layers to test.

 

Vic

I'll play around more I guess, I've got about 3 days left of the trial.

 

Some more testing.  I left CDD the same and I've got 150 miles clouds set, with 10 min updating, plus the weather settings above.  I'm using stock king air 350 for a long haul flight.  Departed an area of IFR, +RA and 3SM vis, lots of clouds.  The fps variance was high again, with some stuttering. Once I got on top of the clouds (I use enhanced overcast on), the stutters were gone and fps variance was 0-ish.  So again, it seems to be a problem in IMC.

I'm getting pummeled by turbulence all the way up to 38000 feet. Now it is to the point I can't hold any speed at all even dropping down to 31000 feet. The depiction is nice, but it doesn't do me much good if I can't even stay airborne.

I'm getting pummeled by turbulence all the way up to 38000 feet. Now it is to the point I can't hold any speed at all even dropping down to 31000 feet. The depiction is nice, but it doesn't do me much good if I can't even stay airborne.

 

Maybe flyhing through a sigmet area?

I'll play around more I guess, I've got about 3 days left of the trial.

 

Some more testing.  I left CDD the same and I've got 150 miles clouds set, with 10 min updating, plus the weather settings above.  I'm using stock king air 350 for a long haul flight.  Departed an area of IFR, +RA and 3SM vis, lots of clouds.  The fps variance was high again, with some stuttering. Once I got on top of the clouds (I use enhanced overcast on), the stutters were gone and fps variance was 0-ish.  So again, it seems to be a problem in IMC.

Hi Ryan,

 

what do you mean "150 miles clouds set"? Min/Max Cloud draw distance (CDD) set to 150?

 

In a situation like this, I'd suggest you set through ASN options the minimum CDD to 60 and the maximum CDD to 90 (or even 110 or larger). In this case, ASN will override any setting you set inside fsx and adjust the actual CDD dynamically (based on visibility, "cloud load", aircraft altitude to help you preserve some frames when the conditions are "heavy". Also keep an eye if the frames drop when a "smooth reload" is active (clouds fading out/in).

 

Kostas Terzides

ASN developer

Maybe flyhing through a sigmet area?

 

No idea, but it was my first flight with ASN, and I had to dump the flight entirely. I couldn't stay airborne. Never seen this before.

I encountered turbulence at FL380 over NW France this afternoon enroute to Madrid. Never seen that before with a weather program. The aircraft was rocking around a bit but the a/p handled it okay and the RC4 controller never complained.

 

My congratulations to Kostas and all at Hi-Fi for making FSX a whole lot more realistic.

 

I have one question. The min and max cloud draw distances are set to 90 miles. But the cloud never stretches to the horizon ahead of my aircraft. Do those values need changing to achieve that or is it an unrealistic expectation?

 

I have a GTX 780 so it should be up to the task.

90 miles at airliner cruise altitudes looks surprisingly close, probably about half way out to the horizon. If you want cloud out to the horizon at FL350+ you are going to need at least 120 miles and more like 170. I personally use 90/200, but my PC copes with that no problem.

 

I have one question. The min and max cloud draw distances are set to 90 miles. But the cloud never stretches to the horizon ahead of my aircraft. Do those values need changing to achieve that or is it an unrealistic expectation?

 

Also wondering about this. Presumably changing the cloud draw distance in FSX has no effect as ASN has control.

90 miles at airliner cruise altitudes looks surprisingly close, probably about half way out to the horizon. If you want cloud out to the horizon at FL350+ you are going to need at least 120 miles and more like 170. I personally use 90/200, but my PC copes with that no problem.

Andy, as we have the same processor and graphics card I shall try your settings. The default values certainly look a bit odd. Good tip, thanks.

I encountered turbulence at FL380 over NW France this afternoon enroute to Madrid. Never seen that before with a weather program. The aircraft was rocking around a bit but the a/p handled it okay and the RC4 controller never complained.

 

My congratulations to Kostas and all at Hi-Fi for making FSX a whole lot more realistic.

 

I have one question. The min and max cloud draw distances are set to 90 miles. But the cloud never stretches to the horizon ahead of my aircraft. Do those values need changing to achieve that or is it an unrealistic expectation?

 

I have a GTX 780 so it should be up to the task.

Thanks, your feedback is very much appreciated. For turbulence, there are 2 things:

- First, when it should occur: I think ASN shines at this, taking into account specific SIGMETS (or AIRMETS in the USA), jet-stream and significant interlayer wind direction/speed changes, presence of t-storms, entering a cloud (even if it is an isolated thundercloud), and combination of surface winds with terrain mesh causing CAT (clear air turbulence). We've done excessive tests for the latter one and you will be able to notice this when you cross for example the Alps. So pilot awareness of the possible conditions leading to significant turbulence is important and realistically simulated with ASN.

 

- The actual effect: This is really a multi-factorial and in the end mostly subjective thing. Depends on the aircraft itself, the actual effect produced by the weather engine on the aircraft, the g-force limitations of the aircraft and then things like DHM (either through tuning fsx itself or through the use of external programs enhancing this). The end result was a long debate we had during beta testing where other users considered our default turbulence very smooth and others very excessive. This debate seems to carry on now (post release) with users like Slait stating that the turbulence was very strong and other ones (on the hifi forum) wondering "where is the turbulence". As one of our respected beta team members actually said (I don't know if he wants me to say his name), this is like "Chasing the rainbow".

 

Back to your question about the CDD. You can play with this. I'd say setting (at least max) CDD to 150, if you don't have performance issues, will improve things significantly. With the added benefit of making the wx radar more useful for practicing weather avoidance procedures (since you can see a storm in detail radar view earlier this way). Not sure, you have to experiment on this.

 

 

Kostas Terzides

ASN developer

I'm getting pummeled by turbulence all the way up to 38000 feet. Now it is to the point I can't hold any speed at all even dropping down to 31000 feet. The depiction is nice, but it doesn't do me much good if I can't even stay airborne.

 

Yes, I've just flown the Coolsky DC-9 into Providence, RI, and the buffeting was way over the top.   The DC-9 was literally getting thrown around like a C152.  It just didn't feel realistic.   If it could be toned down to about 30% of what it was doing here, it would be fantastic.     At present I find Opus perhaps doesn't throw the plane around enough, and ASN throws it around too much      - for the same given winds and conditions.

 

So we need something in the middle!   :smile:

 

EDIT:   Just read Kostas' post above and appreciate the excessive effect of turbulance on the heavier aircraft may be to do with DHM settings that I'm using in Opus, so fair enough if that's the case.      I will reduce Opus' DHM settings and test the flight again soon. :smile:

Yes, I've just flown the Coolsky DC-9 into Providence, RI, and the buffeting was way over the top.   The DC-9 was literally getting thrown around like a C152.  It just didn't feel realistic.   If it could be toned down to about 30% of what it was doing here, it would be fantastic.     At present I find Opus perhaps doesn't throw the plane around enough, and ASN throws it around too much      - for the same given winds and conditions.

 

So we need something in the middle!   :smile:

Do you use OPUS DHM or EZDOK? I think part of the problem, is we have the DHM settings pretty high to get an effect with existing weather, that when used in ASN we get this.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/428913-active-sky-next-with-ezdok-and-turbulence/

 

I've toned my settings down in EZDOK and it does help, I'm still working on tweaking it to get a happy medium, but I think I'll get there. What was the intensity of that turbulence over Providence? My fight was Moderate.

I actually thought the visual affect was pretty exciting, but if the aircraft literally will not stay airborne that's a bit of a problem.

Another thing, not in front of ASN now so can't remember the exact name but there is an option in ASN called something like 'Enhance turbulence' and I think it's checked by default.

 

Maybe you should try unchecking that option if you didn't already try that.