SMP 4.5 is now available for download!

[Will404 0]

I tried SMP 4.5 for a few hours and I found much that I like and some aspects that I don't care for.  Cloud shadows on the ground are great, and I liked the rendition of haze, among other things.  Unfortunately, I'm thinking this program won't work for me largely due to the rotating cloud puffs. Just panning the view in virtual cockpit causes them to rotate quite a lot and there doesn't appear to be a way to prevent that. I experimented with Skymaxx settings but no solution yet.

[Bunchy 227]

I have it installed in XP 10 and 11 and find it to be very hard on frames if you go to 20,000 sqKM cloud draw range whilst leaving the other settings default. This test was conducted with IXEG 737.

This is a problem if you fly high (30k and above) but for VFR you can quite comfortably leave draw distance at 10,000 sqKM and get good results.

Noticed at FL's above 300, even max draw distance doesn't go to horizon in either sim and basically cripples frame rate in overcast conditions, plus the sim hangs for several seconds whilst redrawing. 

I lock my frames at 30fps with nvidia inspector and noticed dips below this rate during cloud redraw but that is consistent with the default clouds also.

Not tried night/dusk or dawn yet, still playing with it but the cloud textures do look very nice so far.

I have my sim setting pretty maxed out in both XP10 and 11 and get good performance in both sims with IXEG 737. (PC specs in signature)

 

In my case, the jury's still out.

 

Stu

 

[fkane 6]

4 hours ago, tonywob said:

@jcomm

Using Stellarium and https://www.calendar-12.com/moon_calendar/2017/march to compare:

<snip>

The phases aren't correct, and checking Stellarium, neither is its position in the sky. I presume it's locked to a specific year and I remember the SMP devs mentioning that they have asked LR to add in the year for this to work.

We assume the year 2014; we found it provides the best match for X-Plane's night lighting.

So if you set Stellarium to 2014, I think you'll see better results. (Remember to account for daylight savings time, etc.)

[CFIJose 5,485]

4 hours ago, michaelray said:

Hi Jay

I have recently started using Xplane in parallel to P3D. IMO Xplane desperately needs a better weather solution to the standard LR offering. I have been on the fence regarding SMP or xEnviro. In P3D I am using AS16 + ASCA.

May I ask your opinion on the following:------

In comparison to Active Sky products how would you rate the SMP 4.5 & FSGRW combination in regards to smoothing out the weather changes (clouds, winds, temp & pressure). I am expecting something different visually but would like to think abrupt weather changes were not as issue.

Thanks - Michael

When I had XP 10 installed I tried SMP v3 + RWC + FSGRW together and I was not impressed at all. I regret buying those programs. I tried these add-ons based on user feedback. As a long time FSX simmer  along with AS16 & ASCA, I can advice you to wait to see what happens with XEnviro.

[xXNightEagleXx 30]

2 hours ago, DJJose said:

When I had XP 10 installed I tried SMP v3 + RWC + FSGRW together and I was not impressed at all. I regret buying those programs. I tried these add-ons based on user feedback. As a long time FSX simmer  along with AS16 & ASCA, I can advice you to wait to see what happens with XEnviro.

this.

To everyone out there that hasn't bought anything yet, just wait to see what XEnviro will shows once it hits 1.2

[Colonel X 1,430]

Initial observations of 4.5 installed to XP 11.02b1a

- Cloud puffs (I only ever use "Soft") look better, coverage is depicted better (compared to 4.0.1).

- Cloud lighting seems to be off, especially at dusk. The advertised "blending into the sky" didn't work well in my tests.

- Sky model looks good, however is held back by it's blending into XP11's sky colors (overly blue horizon at daytime).

- SMP 4.5 seems to require a substantial  amount of CPU time, whereas 4.0.1 and XP11 default clouds only need GPU time.

 

[anden145 2,285]

Interesting... I kinda like xEnviro - even though the clouds are a bit 'flat'. Hope it's something they're working on.

Like the images of the new SMP though.

[tonywob 4,769]

I'm very happy with the update, it works great when you just want to set your own weather and fly. I did find it more of a FPS hit than earlier versions, but it performs better than the native XP11 clouds. The sky colours are a nice improvement and the clouds are looking good.

As it stands at the moment, I have both xEnviro and SMP. Since xEnviro only does real world weather, I haven't been using it much until recently (we have much nicer weather here now), but when it's nice weather outside I want to be outside . Neither product is perfect for me, and I find I switch them depending on where or what I'm flying

[MarioDonick 752]

I like SMP 4.5. I tested with maximum cloud distance, FSGRW-injected weather (which gave me full overcast sometimes) and various addon aircraft, FPS are still good for me. I also like the coloring of the new sky model.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

3 hours ago, xXNightEagleXx said:

this.

To everyone out there that hasn't bought anything yet, just wait to see what XEnviro will shows once it hits 1.2

...but when...? 

[1st fltsimguy 466]

I`m new to XP11.  I am looking to improve weather and clouds. I saw this product.

I see that the draw distance to me is an issue...IE not very far out on the horizon....I see clear blue sky in the distance on many screenshots. Is this improved. Are there other competitive packages available.

[jcomm 5,932]

Thx Tony!

Good shots anc comparison.

The answer came a few posts down in the thread - reference is 2014, so, maybe when Austin finally decides to add a full date to the sim....

[Kuragiman 227]

11 hours ago, michaelray said:

May I ask your opinion on the following:------

In comparison to Active Sky products how would you rate the SMP 4.5 & FSGRW combination in regards to smoothing out the weather changes (clouds, winds, temp & pressure). I am expecting something different visually but would like to think abrupt weather changes were not as issue.

Let me be the 5 ton blunt elephant in the room.    They suck compared to AS16+ASCA.   The XP weather engine STILL manages to suffer from sub par depictions even with the likes of xEnviro and SMP.   They are trying but falling short again and again.   This may be due to the SDK for the weather in the XP engine.    I've heard people say 'It looks just as good' and then I stare at them blankly and think maybe they had a DIFFERENT AS16+ASCA then I did.    That program nails weather almost 100% of the time for me in P3D with billowing thunder clouds, the smoothest of weather transitions (like SMOOOTH.  You NEVER know the weather actually was read and changed because it does it all OUTSIDE your field of view), gorgeous cloud textures in the HUNDREDS, not a single BMP texture sheet like XP.   How does anyone think they could possible make realistic spot on weather with a single sheet of BMP textures?     Rex and ASCA have hundreds of bitmaps to put together the many many dozens of cloud types.    xEnviro and SMP have very few and so are limited in how they can portray a weather pattern.      I think to many people sugar coat this issue and give XP a pass.

[letec 6]

9 hours ago, Bunchy said:

I have it installed in XP 10 and 11 and find it to be very hard on frames if you go to 20,000 sqKM cloud draw range whilst leaving the other settings default. This test was conducted with IXEG 737.

This is a problem if you fly high (30k and above) but for VFR you can quite comfortably leave draw distance at 10,000 sqKM and get good results.

Noticed at FL's above 300, even max draw distance doesn't go to horizon in either sim and basically cripples frame rate in overcast conditions, plus the sim hangs for several seconds whilst redrawing. 

I lock my frames at 30fps with nvidia inspector and noticed dips below this rate during cloud redraw but that is consistent with the default clouds also.

Not tried night/dusk or dawn yet, still playing with it but the cloud textures do look very nice so far.

I have my sim setting pretty maxed out in both XP10 and 11 and get good performance in both sims with IXEG 737. (PC specs in signature)

 

In my case, the jury's still out.

 

Stu

 

Thanks for message 

Luckily, this update is free. The previous update cost $ 20 and it was for nothing better. Still equally impossible for us to fly at high altitudes.

[Paraffin 2,197]

I'll try to post some screen shots later, but my short take on the new v4.5 is that it's still a mixed bag.

On the positive side, I think it's the best depiction of low-lying clouds and mist among mountain valleys that I've seen in X-Plane, and I love that for the kind of bush plane and helicopter flying I do. For anything under about 10,000 feet in VFR and IFR flight, I think it looks better than default XP11 clouds, and far better than what XEnviro does at lower altitudes. The current version of XEnviro has some very odd quirks with rain and clouds at low altitude.

I'm not 100% convinced by the new skybox coloring in v4.5, but maybe I just need to get used to it. Scattered cumulus clouds still show an odd beige tint at noon on a sunny day when seen from below. Not sure what's going on with that. Clear sky color at 30,000 ft. doesn't look deep blue enough, but that's the default color setting and there are other options I haven't tried.

The big Achilles Heel remains the limited (and very noticeable) draw distance for clouds at higher altitude. I bumped it up a little from default to 20,000 sq. km. radius, and the cut-off isn't as noticeable flying under 10,000 ft where the edge of rendered clouds tends to blend more with the horizon. But get up around 30,000+ feet and it's very obvious that you're flying within a radius of clouds with a noticeable cut-off at the edges.

With the slider all the way to the right (100,000 sq. km.), the cut-off was much less noticeable (although still there if you look for it). However, that setting absolutely killed my frame rate, dropping it from 30-40 fps to just 10 frames per second. That's not flyable, so I'm back to a 20,000 sq. km. radius for cloud rendering that doesn't affect the frame rate.

The only way it looks realistic with clouds at high altitude is if you use the "Solid Stratiform" layer for Overcast, which shows a solid sheet of cloud base out to the horizon. That actually looks pretty good (IMO), but there is no equivalent when the weather is scattered or broken cumulus. They still haven't solved this problem by blending in something less resource-intensive out to the horizon, at the edges of the cloud render.

I can't use EXEnviro (even though I bought it) because the devs confirmed it will never have manual adjustment of the injected real weather, and I need that for the lighter GA planes and helicopters in the places I like to fly. Weather can be brutal up here in the Pacific Northwest in the winter months.

I mostly fly at lower altitudes anyway, so for me, it's an easy choice to use SkyMaxx Pro for now. It has nice smooth cloud shadows, and special effects for rain and snowflakes that I didn't get to test, but I know it's there from earlier versions. I do think the developer needs to find a way to improve the high altitude look of the plugin, because (for all its faults), XEnviro does a better job up there.