Sign in to follow this  
Sesquashtoo

Wanna see the difference between Opus/ASN depictions? Try this...

Recommended Posts

Fire up Opus (the latest update today...released..) and then get FSX going.

 

Update Live Dynamic Weather.

 

Take off, anywhere you choose.

 

At 5000 or so feet, note around you the atmospheric depictions, cloud density, type, lushness or fragged, etc.

 

Then,  put FSX in pause.  Shut down OPUS, then fire up ASN.  Take FSX off of pause...and carry on with your flight.

 

For my scenario, with doing all of the above as sequenced, ASN hand's down at the time, took the rendering crown.  The clouds (with the same REX installs) looked anemic as depicted by OPUS when ASN took over the sky and flight path.  All I can say, is that without dissing either platform, for they are both good...and Opus all of a sudden doesn't become chop liver, because a new kid is on the block..no...but I must honestly report that ASN is giving a much greater, and varied...and most importantly....a true-to-life depiction of atmospherics. 

 

I shall now continue with ASN as my prime weather injector.  It is giving me what I always wanted to see...and congratulations to the developers. This is the best weather injector program, (for what my wants are...and personally subjective) I have ever seen.

 

If you do what I suggest, you will actually see, live...an A/B comparison and approach to how each weather injector program goes about its business..and what is great, is that it will be in real time, and along the same flight path. You DO NOT have to shut down FSX to go from Opus, ( you do have to actively shut OPUS down, mind you!) to then have ASN as in control. Just place FSX in pause by the 'P' key. You will truly see how each renders....and then make up your own minds...

 

Ses 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

 

 


Take off, anywhere you choose.

 

In this case, how would you know what looks more true to life or not from a coverage perspective?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using Opus for the dynamic head movement and cameras.  Would I have to shut these off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using Opus for the dynamic head movement and cameras.  Would I have to shut these off?

 

Kattz...I don't and ASN works just fine with them enabled. What I do turn off in Opus are the turbulence-related effects...instead, I've enabled turbulence in FSX and in Accufeel, which I have installed as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kattz...I don't and ASN works just fine with them enabled. What I do turn off in Opus are the turbulence-related effects...instead, I've enabled turbulence in FSX and in Accufeel, which I have installed as well.

 

I can't figure out how the combined turbulence output works out by ASN+FSX+Accufeel yet. I read the developers mentioned ASN took it over completely with its custom interface. I don't really want  then to overload FSX with superfluous dlls (like Accufeel) running.

 

Thanks,

Dirk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ses,

what you are describing sounds nice.  I use OPUS and tried the trial version of ASN and I think it depends what you are expecting from  weather simulation software.

To me, flying around in FSX, is a kind of mental travelling. When I look at the cloudscape in the sim, for instance in San Fransisco, I want to see the same cloudscape as someone who lives in SF and who looks at the same moment to the real sky. I compared the cloud depiction of both programms with weathercams which you can find all over the internet. OPUS was always spot on, absolutely amazing. ASN hardly ever! When I get turbulence, I want to experience the amount of turbulence I would get as a rw-pilot at that moment at that place and not a kind of at random heavy shaking. I trust OPUS a bit more and tend to believe that OPUS ist more about depiction of the real atmosphere. ASN might be more about aesthetics and fun.

 

Regards, Hans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just did a similar test this past hour at my home airport where we looking out the window we have about 3/10 Cumulous and the rest  blue skies and excellent visibility (60+miles).  Opus was pretty much right on.  ASN was depicting about 9/10 overcast with low layers of stratus and much lower visibility.  I have been testing on and off with the free trial of ASN and some days it is right on, but overall Opus gives the most accurate weather depiction.  In all fairness on one test I felt ASN was more accurate, but IMO Opus does get it right more often at my location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this case, how would you know what looks more true to life or not from a coverage perspective?

Fly over your house then, and then pause, do as above, look out the window and.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ses,

what you are describing sounds nice. I use OPUS and tried the trial version of ASN and I think it depends what you are expecting from weather simulation software.

To me, flying around in FSX, is a kind of mental travelling. When I look at the cloudscape in the sim, for instance in San Fransisco, I want to see the same cloudscape as someone who lives in SF and who looks at the same moment to the real sky. I compared the cloud depiction of both programms with weathercams which you can find all over the internet. OPUS was always spot on, absolutely amazing. ASN hardly ever! When I get turbulence, I want to experience the amount of turbulence I would get as a rw-pilot at that moment at that place and not a kind of at random heavy shaking. I trust OPUS a bit more and tend to believe that OPUS ist more about depiction of the real atmosphere. ASN might be more about aesthetics and fun.

 

Regards, Hans

Can you share some screenshots of this comparison? I hear a lot of people declaring love for one product or the other. Unfortunately, most of them (not you) have only one of the products and have no basis for making comparisons. If the folks who have both programs installed could run some side-by-sides of ASN and OPUS compared to sky cams, as you suggest, we might be able to put the debate to bed.

 

Game on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the best way to get a feel for the weather engine, in my opinion.

 

I would plan a flight in the High FLs, about an hour or more enroute, choosing an area where I'm flying to a region receiving a cold front, you can easily check that on a SIGWX chart, then you would see which weather engine better models the transition of good weather, to not so good weather as you approach the front, to really bad weather when you get inside it. That for me if a good way to check for continuity of clouds, you will probably get some dramastic wind changes over the flight, so you can check to see if the wind shift bug is there, and most important, if your weather engine is keeping the wind accurate to the GRIB chart, which you can also check online, because I don't accept not having wind shifts but loosing accurate wind simulation as you climb and descent, and as you fly into different pressure gradients and all that.

 

I haven't tested ASN yet, but that's the flight I would make to see how good it is. I have done a video showing this process with Opus

 

  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Just did a similar test this past hour at my home airport where we looking out the window we have about 3/10 Cumulous and the rest blue skies and excellent visibility (60+miles). Opus was pretty much right on. ASN was depicting about 9/10 overcast with low layers of stratus and much lower visibility.

 

Looks to me like you didn't turn off the "Set Bkn Clouds to 7/8" setting. The default s on. Which will set any forecast with broken clouds to 7/8's coverage, which you describe. Turning it off will give you a more realistic depiction. Not sure why this setting is defaulted on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fly over your house then, and then pause, do as above, look out the window and.....

 

You know Dave, you are so all over the ASN vs Opus issue that you cant see two feet in front of your own face. Yes, there are several areas where ASN has raised the bar over Opus. There are also several benefits to Opus which ASN does not provide. Proclaiming that 'the king is dead, long live the king' every two minutes and hitting 'dislike' buttons to anyone who does not follow your party line is quite irksome.

 

I have said it before and I will say it again......ASN is great. I loved the demo. As many others have also stated, depending on the user situation there is not a huge amount of benefit to moving from Opus to ASN, especially when Opus is being constantly tweaked and FSI is coming out early 2014.

If the areas that ASN has improved in are worth the $50 to you then great! Go for it.

 

So, go ahead and track down every comment i make, spin it your way and hit dislike, disagree as many times as you want. Its quite amusing really.

 

Have a great day.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Current conditions at Aomori (Japan) Airport

http://imgur.com/x9UtYe4

 

Weather depiction Aomori OpusFSX

http://imgur.com/T52sARA

 

Weather Depiction Aomori ASN

http://imgur.com/zFRRNUl

 

EDIT: Sorry, posted a better picture of the current weather conditions on Weather Underground

 

Looks the same to me between the two weather engines. Not seeing the hype.

Fire up Opus (the latest update today...released..) and then get FSX going.

 

Update Live Dynamic Weather.

 

Take off, anywhere you choose.

 

At 5000 or so feet, note around you the atmospheric depictions, cloud density, type, lushness or fragged, etc.

 

Then,  put FSX in pause.  Shut down OPUS, then fire up ASN.  Take FSX off of pause...and carry on with your flight.

 

For my scenario, with doing all of the above as sequenced, ASN hand's down at the time, took the rendering crown.  The clouds (with the same REX installs) looked anemic as depicted by OPUS when ASN took over the sky and flight path.  All I can say, is that without dissing either platform, for they are both good...and Opus all of a sudden doesn't become chop liver, because a new kid is on the block..no...but I must honestly report that ASN is giving a much greater, and varied...and most importantly....a true-to-life depiction of atmospherics. 

 

I shall now continue with ASN as my prime weather injector.  It is giving me what I always wanted to see...and congratulations to the developers. This is the best weather injector program, (for what my wants are...and personally subjective) I have ever seen.

 

If you do what I suggest, you will actually see, live...an A/B comparison and approach to how each weather injector program goes about its business..and what is great, is that it will be in real time, and along the same flight path. You DO NOT have to shut down FSX to go from Opus, ( you do have to actively shut OPUS down, mind you!) to then have ASN as in control. Just place FSX in pause by the 'P' key. You will truly see how each renders....and then make up your own minds...

 

Ses 

 

Without pictures this post is all but useless. You say it "looked better" but was it more realistic? What was the METAR? If it is, as you say, "what you always wanted to see" then I guess it's working. What I always want to see isn't necessarily what Mother Nature is showing for real though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Looks the same to me between the two weather engines. Not seeing the hype.

 

Trying to do back and forth picture comparisons between two weather engines misses the point a bit and can even mislead.  Weather is dynamic.  I've always contended, going back to when I first bought Opus and began comparing it to REX, that you can't just compare single screen shots - you have to fly at a variety of times and in a variety of conditions to see how each weather engine responds in a dynamic way.  Whole flights, not bouncing back and forth.

 

None of these packages will be "right" all the time, and you need to be careful not to overly limit how you define "right".  That's why having trials is so important.  Often the biggest differences I thought I saw when I did direct comparisons between multiple packages were due to the fact that between try one and try two a new METAR had come in.

 

Doing the "I looked out the window and... " test is nice, but has its limits and is only one part of what needs to be right.  The representation at a given station under a given set of conditions can be wonderful, but what happens when you're 10 miles away?  20?  30?  What about other scenarios.  METARs are snapshots in time, they age and contain only so much info.  Some are based on automated sensors of varying accuracy, others on human observation.  Even the best of wx engines has to do some sort of interpolation between stations.  If your window isn't near a reporting station, or the METAR for that station is old, well... you get the idea.

 

Then there are all the variables.  All of the packages I've tried allow settings to balance between smoothness and accuracy and both Opus and REX are using flight plan information to prioritize route of flight.  Are these included in any comparison?

 

Following the trial, I purchased ASN, as it improved on several things that I personally find important in wx depiction.  But I'm still happy to be an Opus customer as well and look forward to their future efforts. 

 

Use the trial.  Use it for the full time period and in a variety of conditions.  Think big picture and multiple flights, rather than trying to grab onto one thing and tell yourself - "See!  This one's better."  Then decide based on the things that are most important to you.

 

Scott

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the trial, I purchased ASN, as it improved on several things that I personally find important in wx depiction. But I'm still happy to be an Opus customer as well and look forward to their future efforts.

 

Glad to hear it's working out for you.. ASN was a bit of an improvement in a few things but not worth the upgrade price for me. Just in my experiences with ASN, I personally don't enjoy flying through clear air to suddenly find myself in IFR conditions. I find it odd to come out of volumetric fog, look back towards the airport and see no visibility problems. 5 more days of the trial period to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to hear it's working out for you.. ASN was a bit of an improvement in a few things but not worth the upgrade price for me. Just in my experiences with ASN, I personally don't enjoy flying through clear air to suddenly find myself in IFR conditions. I find it odd to come out of volumetric fog, look back towards the airport and see no visibility problems. 5 more days of the trial period to go.

 

 Let's face it...if we are honest about it...you can have a 'used all the time' program, that when a new kid on the block comes, with execution and features that you like, you will mostly 'migrate' to that new program and use it more often than not.  OPUS is a great program, with a huge value/cost factor.  It will be interesting to keep running a flight, starting with either one for a while, and then half way through the flight plan, swtich to the other, and see how each program provides its rendition of atmospherics.  I really like the 'fat/lushness' of ASN's cloudscape.

 

It has the effect upon me, of actually going through atmospherics that have substance to them.  I dunno...hard to describe to others, but I feel that I am passing through the clouds, mist, fog etc...than just,OK...it's there on the monitor, and we move on....   I didn't even get this 'involvement' with any of the prior products from Hi-Soft.  Just this one....again, after I stopped OPUS, (it could also have been ASE...and don't want to be seen like I'm picking on one injector...for I am most certainly not intending that!) and fired up ASN and took FSX off of pause...man-oh-man, within the space of 15 seconds...I got that 'you-are-there-and-passing-through-this' cloud/haze/fog structure that as I broke out of the top...made me FEEL like I had just broken through the top of that cloud structure.  It must be the combination of graphics textures that ASN is calling up from my REX Extreme install.  So for me, that is the reason I am more than compelled to fire up ASN, over any other weather injector as I type this...  Perhaps, somebody will up the ante, and with their glasses supplied, will holograph my weather to sit between myself and the monitor screen, complete with getting damp with the condensation, lol.  ASN is the darling right now...but sim users are uber fickle and will shed off their present 'weather main squeeze' if something catches their eye and attention.  I remember when OPUS was being sung like the national anthem.  Their 'sin' right now, is simply not being the latest to appear on the block. Competition is wonderful...and both the developers behind Opus and ASN, between ASN, and Opus, have major talent displayed, in this field.  2013 was a great year for a few platforms, and I welcome the offerings with an open mind, and non partisan leanings.... :)

 

Ses 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superb Video Alec!!!! Now you have to do one with ASN!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know Dave, you are so all over the ASN vs Opus issue that you cant see two feet in front of your own face.

When the next version of opus comes out I will buy it. As Opus was a good step up over AS2012. When you repeatedly post that "honesty" you cannot see the difference it make be lol because ASN is a good step up on opus weather engine.

 

I look forward to the next Opus or even REX might pull something out the bag. I don't really care who it is I just like progress and try to use the best there is. Unlike you I can see the differences. Be it opus REX who ever.

It just bugs be when people cannot see the gains ASN have made.

For the first time we have, no redraw of clouds, true turbarlance and a real radar, that alone is worth the price, so when you repeatedly say " I cannot honesty see any difference in opus and ASN" I dispair at what you really see and you have the nerve to say I cannot see two feet in front of me! Lol

I will support them all if it means we keep getting better weather engines, bring it on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You get really aggressive about this debate you know Dave? ...   :smile:

 

We are not talking about something objective here, where you can state;

 

"it is better. fact. so what is wrong with you people?!?!?".      

 

Personally, I think ASN tries too hard in some areas; like the "disappearing visibility effect" that it throws in a you pass through some clouds.   I can see what they were trying to do... but it's O.T.T to me, and I just don't like it.    ASN also looks worse from higher altitudes, where you had thick coverage down below IMHO.    So in Opus, if I had some Pea soup at 2000, then I climb to 6000, I will still have some reduced visibility;   but with ASN, once I am a couple of thousand feet above the thick cover, I can just look straight through some broken clouds and see the ground below.... clear as day.      I am not saying Opus is perfect in this area either, but IMHO it is just more natural and realistic a weather depiction than ASN.

 

..........and how many times have we told you that the last 2 Opus betas don't kick your plane any more, during cloud updates.   You don't seem to want to hear that.

 

But you know what - they're just two different styles, two different depictions at the end of the day.   Some will prefer ASN some will prefer Opus.   That's pretty natural and cool huh?   :smile:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some more comparisons...

 

Airport is SLSU in Bolivia. 3 miles visibility, thunderstorms in the area.. Weather station on the airport with no rain measured.

 

Weather Underground report for SLSU

http://imgur.com/ytyTkeo

 

Weather depiction i Opus

http://imgur.com/HOdmTOI

 

Weather Depiction in ASN

http://imgur.com/XbxF5oC

I think I know why ASN is reporting heavy rain, at the time. Setting ASN to that time (4:44PM BOT 20:44Z) loads in the METAR for 18:00Z and the TAF data for SLSU is timestamped at 16:30Z. Don't know whether ASN is loading the wrong METAR/TAF, or those are all that was available to it from whatever source it gets the data from, but that may explain the discrepancy.. The METAR in your posted weather underground shot was timestamped 20:00Z So there was a later METAR ASN should have used. It did however properly depicted the conditions for the METAR loaded and reported in ASN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave please don't put words in my mouth,

"it is better. fact. so what is wrong with you people?!?!?".

out of order mate. Come on please.

Yes I have tryed the latest opus beta and I don't like the repeat patten I get in ASN, as a matter of fact I hate it. ASN is just come out and somethings do need work on for sure and if we could but the best of opus and ASN together then wow.

All am saying is

No redraw and it's very smooth

Turbarlance like we have never seen before

A real radar

Winds never shifting out of order

Are "better" than we have seen before. Because we have not had that before.

The looks that your talking about is a matter of taste and I do agree that opus is and always has looked fantastic. There updates are second to none and I will support then by buying there next engine. But I will say what I see be it if people like it or not.

Am not a fence sitter or a happy clapper Dave. I've wasted £100's on flavour of the month aircraft over the last few years, but a weather engine is one of the few things we can enjoy on every flight, so to me its money well spent. Am very picky on aircraft now. But I alway want the best simple as that.

 

Kind regards all the same Dave, I do like reading your posts. Apart from the one line above. :-)

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