Sign in to follow this  
Tony P

First ASN Hot Fix is out

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Per 'change log'........more turbulence....ah...oh boy....!

 

....installed....

 

:)

 

ASN Happy Camper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Per 'change log'........more turbulence....ah...oh boy....!

 

....installed....

 

:)

 

ASN Happy Camper

 

 

 

 

 

 

we are working on many things to improve the ASN experience. Some of these things include.....more turbulence strength adjustment capability

 

No turbalence changes in this hotfix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No turbalence changes in this hotfix.

Oh good, lol...turbulence is nothing that is lacking with the present build...and gives AccuSim a workout...visual as well as audio....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The turbulence, up and down drafts, we now get in FSX with ASN, have turned X-Plane into an "on-rails" simulator compared to FSX  :rolleyes:

 

BTW... I am an X-Planner !!!   I always thought the complains about FSX being on-rails were mainly due to the fact that weather effects were too bland... Weather injectors capable of creating not only a visual sensation of those weather effects, but actually affect the aircraft trajectory and change the relative wind and how it hits  lift / drag surfaces, for instance due to sudden updrafs, downdrafts/microbursts or wind shear, can create tricky situations for the virtual pilots, and bring to this old simulation platform a new "energy" and joy  :smile:

Add to it the super smooth cloud and wind transitions, and the possibility to use volumetric fog in P3Dv2, are the cherry on top of the cake!!!

 

I am enjoying FSX as much as X-Plane 10 now, thx to the DX10 mode  ( Steve's Fixer... ) and this ASN program, and look forward for the additional features that the Prepar3d V2 version will add...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found that 8 layers adds to the realism of "crafted" fronts and visually logical differing cloud structures within graduated transitions into clear patches and such weather variants....

 

And it only impacted 10% of my fps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The turbulence, up and down drafts, we now get in FSX with ASN, have turned X-Plane into an "on-rails" simulator compared to FSX  :rolleyes:

 

BTW... I am an X-Planner !!!   I always thought the complains about FSX being on-rails were mainly due to the fact that weather effects were too bland... Weather injectors capable of creating not only a visual sensation of those weather effects, but actually affect the aircraft trajectory and change the relative wind and how it hits  lift / drag surfaces, for instance due to sudden updrafs, downdrafts/microbursts or wind shear, can create tricky situations for the virtual pilots, and bring to this old simulation platform a new "energy" and joy  :smile:

Add to it the super smooth cloud and wind transitions, and the possibility to use volumetric fog in P3Dv2, are the cherry on top of the cake!!!

 

I am enjoying FSX as much as X-Plane 10 now, thx to the DX10 mode  ( Steve's Fixer... ) and this ASN program, and look forward for the additional features that the Prepar3d V2 version will add...

 

Hi jcomm, I've been using the FSGRW engine for a while now and that was ultimately an upgrade from AS2012 for me. At the moment I find that FSGRW seems to already have a lot of features that ASN has so based on your experience (not sure if you've used FSGRW) what would be the compelling reason for me to upgrade to ASN?

 

I've also been spending more time with X-Plane lately since getting SkyMAXX and the FF 757, so not really up for buying (yet ANOTHER) weather engine for FSX considering I've only had FSGRW for a few months. My pockets aren't that deep unfortunately  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jcomm, I've been using the FSGRW engine for a while now and that was ultimately an upgrade from AS2012 for me. At the moment I find that FSGRW seems to already have a lot of features that ASN has so based on your experience (not sure if you've used FSGRW) what would be the compelling reason for me to upgrade to ASN?

 

I've also been spending more time with X-Plane lately since getting SkyMAXX and the FF 757, so not really up for buying (yet ANOTHER) weather engine for FSX considering I've only had FSGRW for a few months. My pockets aren't that deep unfortunately  :(

 

I have FSGRW, and I've tested it VS ASN Trial few days ago. I must say, in few test scenarios, FSGRW wasn't even close how it depicted the weather (especially clouds and visibility/fog) comparing to ASN. That was quite dissapointed for me, because I was pretty sure that FSGRW is pretty good at that. I also own Opus, and after the tests, Opus won the second place and FSGRW third.

 

For me, realistic weather in FSX is one of the most important factors for visual/flight immersion, that's why I bought Opus & FSGRW. Now I'm considering to buy ASN, but it is pretty hard on FPS. I hadn't enough free time to test ASN in detail, I need another trial period for that. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have FSGRW, and I've tested it VS ASN Trial few days ago. I must say, in few test scenarios, FSGRW wasn't even close how it depicted the weather (especially clouds and visibility/fog) comparing to ASN. That was quite dissapointed for me, because I was pretty sure that FSGRW is pretty good at that. I also own Opus, and after the tests, Opus won the second place and FSGRW third.

 

For me, realistic weather in FSX is one of the most important factors for visual/flight immersion, that's why I bought Opus & FSGRW. Now I'm considering to buy ASN, but it is pretty hard on FPS. I hadn't enough free time to test ASN in detail, I need another trial period for that. :(

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk 2

 

Hi!

Lemme just ask you this...

 

How do you know that FSGRW wasn't even close and ASN was spot on?

 

I ask you this, because in the day ASN was released, I went to my window, took some pictures and compared to what I was seeing on both FSGRW and ASN.

 

FSGRW was spot on and ASN wasn't! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


FSGRW wasn't even close how it depicted the weather (especially clouds and visibility/fog)

 

I find that it's weather depiction is really good especially IMC conditions, much better than AS2012 which is why I decided to switch. I also really like the way it depicts cloud layers and fronts in particular.

 

 

 


For me, realistic weather in FSX is one of the most important factors for visual/flight immersion, that's why I bought Opus & FSGRW.

 

I'm all for that as well but I'm not really the sort of person who has to have the exact same looking weather that's outside my window and I don't really mind if clouds aren't placed in the exact same location as in real life. As long as visibility and winds (particularly upper air winds) are accurate and done appropriately for the conditions that's what matters to me most, I think FSGRW does a very good job of this.

 

I do notice though that HiFi may have taken a few ideas from other engines such as FSGRW by focusing more on the weather engine itself and keeping the interface simple rather than having all extras such as textures, flight planning etc which I never really used in AS2012 and are normally done by other programs anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as an AS beta tester, sin AS5, I might be biased in my answer, but I'll try not to...

 

1) I also have used FSGRW. It's a great weather injector, it's going to be updated soon, I liked it. It requires FSUIPC, and I am not using FSUIPC in FSX DX10.

 

2) ASN has features unique among what I know about all weather  injectors out there. To mention just a couple, I'd say that is uncomparable in terms of the way it places cloud systems in the simulator as well as their associated phenomena, allowing for precise and realistic radar echoes! The smooth cloud and wind as well as temperature transitions are also superbly modeled IMO. Then, ASN introduced types of turbulence, updrafts and downdrafts that, as far as I know, are a first time in the history of weather injection programs for FSX!

 

This is my oppinion.

 

As an X-Plane user, I know the FSGRW developers are planning an X-plane version. I will probably become an X-Plane FSGRW user :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys should also remember that even AS2012 was superior to OPUS in weather, in particular,  wind accuracy. OPUS looks pretty but AS2012 was where the accuracy was.

 

Now with ASN I think we have the best of both now.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that it's weather depiction is really good especially IMC conditions, much better than AS2012 which is why I decided to switch. I also really like the way it depicts cloud layers and fronts in particular.

 

I'm all for that as well but I'm not really the sort of person who has to have the exact same looking weather that's outside my window and I don't really mind if clouds aren't placed in the exact same location as in real life. As long as visibility and winds (particularly upper air winds) are accurate and done appropriately for the conditions that's what matters to me most, I think FSGRW does a very good job of this.

 

I do notice though that HiFi may have taken a few ideas from other engines such as FSGRW by focusing more on the weather engine itself and keeping the interface simple rather than having all extras such as textures, flight planning etc which I never really used in AS2012 and are normally done by other programs anyway.

 

That's why I purchased FSGRW, no fuss with UI, settings and stuff, just download the weather and fly. I don't like visibility depicition, it depicts either low visibility <16km or something like 48km or more. Very rarely saw visibility of 20 or 32km, which is default in Opus. But on the other hand Opus don't depicts visibility at all, you'll always have ground visibility you chose (in my case 32km), unless it is low vis. And on the other other hand, ASN depicts visibility at 10sm almost always, and when you pass the clouds it is suddenly at max value you set in the options, eg 100km).

 

FSGRW didn't depicted fog in LEBL in the test, and clearly METAR said it was 500m visibility. ASN decpicted it well with nice and thick cloud layer (fog), FSGRW puts ugly stratus layer, with lots of holes to see the ground, and in that test visibility was 48km below the clouds, completely off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there's not much fuss with ASN, weather injection is instantaneuos, and the UI is far better than FSGRW! Opus I gave up on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there's not much fuss with ASN, weather injection is instantaneuos, and the UI is far better than FSGRW! Opus I gave up on...

 

Never tried Opus myself but remember a lot of people jumping on it when it came out claiming that it fixed numerous issues that have been plaguing FSX, then it sort of began to drop off the radar after a while.

I stuck with AS2012 at the time as apparently wind prediction was still more accurate which mattered to me most.

 

Hmmmm....I might have to think about ASN as I can't really budget for it this year. Also need to weigh up how much more I'm willing to still invest into FSX since I'm using it less now, seems to be the sim that just never says die.

 

 

 

As an X-Plane user, I know the FSGRW developers are planning an X-plane version. I will probably become an X-Plane FSGRW user :-)

 

I really hope they stay true to that claim. Having an engine such as that for X-Plane would be revolutionary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Two Cents......(and a quick comparison)!

 

I am a past user of ActiveSky (v6, 2012 and Evolution), and currently own and use Opus FSX (v3.38 beta) and FSGRW, and have spent the last week with the trial version of ASN, performing direct comparisons between Opus FSX, FSGRW and ASN.

 

My findings:

 

Opus-Pros:

 

In my opinion, some of the best weather depiction available (some people will disagree, I know). Frame rate hit is low, even in bad weather. Easy to use. Works well for short GA flights. Good product support, and continuous program development.

 

Opus-Cons:

 

Wind smoothing is improving, but still not always smooth. For longer distance flights, weather depiction and winds can suddenly change greatly (expected to improve with upcoming versions).

 

FSGRW-Pros:

 

Weather depiction is adequate, although not as realistic as Opus or ASN for frontal weather, but still somewhat believable. Frame rate hit is the lowest of the three weather engines tested (on my system - see specs below). Decent wind and cloud smoothing, with no sudden radical changes (even on longer flights). I tend to use FSGRW for most of my flights, mainly due to the minimal impact on frame rate. Smoothest performance of the three WX engines in bad weather, on my system. Good product support and continued product development.

 

FSGRW - Cons:

 

Visibility modeling is not always accurate. Frontal weather depiction does not produce accurate renditions (cold fronts with primarily stratus cloud layers, poor CB (Thunderstorm) modeling).

 

ASN Pros:

 

Weather depiction using at least 5 cloud layers and enhanced overcast is great. Rain areas are associated with cloud placement - most realistic precipitation depiction to date. Visibility modeling is excellent (except for situation noted in Cons section below). Wind, turbulence, updraft and downdraft modeling are the best to date. I expect that product development and enhancement of ASN will continue at a rapid pace. Good product support.

 

ASN-Cons:

 

Frame rate hit is sometimes significantly higher than Opus or FSGRW, mainly in heavy weather conditions around larger cities (sometimes around 40 to 60 percent decrease, versus less than 30 percent decrease worst case for Opus and less than 20 percent decrease worst case for FSGRW). I tried reducing the number of cloud layers to 3 and disabling enhanced overcast, but ASN still performed worse than either Opus or FSGRW, with some stuttering around dense scenery/airports in bad weather. Also, when climbing out of a ground visibility layer, the visibility will quickly improve not only above the ground layer (as expected), but also below the aircraft all the way to the ground surface. No depiction of the top of the lower visibility layer - not a deal breaker, but very unrealistic IMHO.

 

Summary:

 

I will go ahead and purchase ASN because I believe in supporting product development for FSX, then likely use the weather engine which best fits a particular flight scenario. I believe that competition amongst many developers and continued weather engine development for several competing products is good for the users of FSX, and will accelerate weather engine technology breakthroughs. I understand that the selection of a weather engine is very subjective, and depends greatly on the hardware used for FSX. My recommendation - if your hardware can handle it, then ASN would provide the best overall experience. If not, then Opus and FSGRW are both great choices, subject to personal tastes and opinions.

 

FYI, my test system is 17-2700k overclocked to 5.0 GHz (stable), EVGA GTX-680FTW+ 4GB, Three Acer 27" monitors running at a total resolution of 6020x1080 (bezel-corrected) using Nvidia Surround graphics, 8GB 2100MHz RAM, 64GB OS SSD, 600GB WD Velociraptor SATAIII 6Gbps FSX Hard Drive (10,000 rpm), Windows 7 64-bit. ASN running on same system as FSX (will be moved to networked computer in the future). Frame rate locked at 30 using FSX internal frame rate limiter.

 

Cheers,

 

Gerald

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is one of the best posts on the three weather engines to date. Thanks for a an excellent review Gerald.

I also have Opus and FSGRW, and will be getting ASN next Wednesday

Like you, I will be using the weather engine that suits my flying, Opus for GA flying ( which seems to be suited for best), ASN for the high stuff, and FSGRW for some parts of Europe where it seems to excel.

Also ASN works better with FSCaptain, especially using historic. It is great having a choice.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I went ahead a downloaded ASN since they offer a 7-day trial which I didn't know about. Am in mid flight with the PMDG 777 and yeah.....think I might have to go ahead and uhh, get this one  :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk 2

 

Hi!

Lemme just ask you this...

 

How do you know that FSGRW wasn't even close and ASN was spot on?

 

I ask you this, because in the day ASN was released, I went to my window, took some pictures and compared to what I was seeing on both FSGRW and ASN.

 

FSGRW was spot on and ASN wasn't! :-)

 

I see daelight disagreed with your comment. Was he standing next to you looking out the window ???  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

 

Gotta love these guys that disagree, but wont back it up with a fact. I have to admit ASN is very good and I can't wait for the new P3Dv2 version of FSGRW, as that has served me well in FSX. Opus appears to be a lot of talk, yet constantly falling a little short of their sales pitch. The weather future looks bright indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this