28 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

In that case, I'm interested to see what Matt could do with it and how much it would cost. TrueSky is one of the things I would really miss from FSW.

Indeed! I really miss trueSky as well... Hoping for an implementation into P3D as well.

3 hours ago, rjfry said:

The other problem was mentioned that it could break your present weather addons HIFI and REX, this may put of some that have invested in such software.

yes, I'm not sure how easy it would be, seeing how difficult it was for FSW to make it "changable" and "dynamic"..

 

1 hour ago, tonywob said:

My thoughts are that if it was easy or Matt Davies could do it himself then someone else would have done this long ago. Surely this would need internal access to P3D and its source code?, so I imagine the only people who could realistically do this is Lockheed Martin and Truesky together. I really hope they do so, but also in a way that would allow it to work with existing weather engines out there (obviously not texture replacements)

Still, if it happens it will be a big a change as going to 64-bit and another game changer

I'd say the same. But I wouldn't mind to be proved wrong.

This feels like a consumer want something thing.. and not something LM's Original target customers need..

3 hours ago, ca_metal said:

What LM could be looking into is the technology developed by Sundog, SilverLining Sky & 3D Clouds. LM already uses their technology for the water, Triton.

If we're going down the speculation path, I'd agree with this. The implementation and effects sure look impressive...

Edit: DUH Someone already posted about this, that'll teach me for not reading through topics carefully!

For what it's worth, there is a competitor to TrueSky, it's made by a company called "Sundog Software" and I believe it's what SkyMaxx Pro for XPlane is based on. You can find more info about it here.

Now if you scroll down the page there's a list of their customers, and I'll let you find out who's in there... eventhough it most likely means nothing at all.

Edited May 3, 20188 yr by LB777

I would much prefer TrueSky to Sundog. I think TrueSky has lots more of potential. If they had just slowed down the development of the clouds in the sim and not made it look like the clouds were waving at you, FSW would look amazing for weather. Even in the short amount of time I've used FSW, the clouds are pretty spectacular and the colors, especially at sunrise and set are on point. Sundog for most of the clouds look like several 2D textures wrapped around the center, especially when viewing from overhead. I have not used their software, but was curious if they allow for actual cloud development like in TrueSky? The stratus clouds in SD are fantastic I must stay. Either way, P3D must do something about the weather engine in the sim. 2D clouds are something we had in FS2004 and we thought were amazing, but it is time to upgrade. Even with AS or REX, as much as they say "3D clouds", we all know it is just 2D clouds and continue to spin as we move around the cloud. I hope to see some much needed improvements in the next version of P3D, but I certainly am not going to expect a lot. I would much rather be pleasantly surprised than disappointed about the changes in the sim. 

REX would definitely work with either vendor that LM decided to implement, provided there was an SDK to use.

3 hours ago, LB777 said:

iand I believe it's what SkyMaxx Pro for XPlane is based on

Dear god no. SkyMaxx Pro is one of the most awful weather products on the market.

9 hours ago, tonywob said:

so I imagine the only people who could realistically do this is Lockheed Martin and Truesky together.

I "think" it could be possible without LM but would be considerable work and might need some "hacks" similar to what HiFi AS4 does. 

Personally I'm not a huge fan of TrueSky for the following reasons (keep in mind this is from how it was implemented in FSW that uses the FSX-SP2 engine):

1.  It looked like warp effects were sporadically/randomly (not wind speed direction aware) implement on the cloud sub-elements
2.  The cloud sub-elements motion was far too rapid
3.  Performance was not great
4.  When flying "in a cloud" it would place a bubble around my aircraft so it never felt like I was really flying "in/thru a cloud", no sense of the clouds moving rapidly around the aircraft like we have in HiFi AS4
5.  Oddly there was no aircraft "lights" interaction with the cloud as one flys thru them like we get from HiFi AS4 option where the cloud motion will react to aircraft lights
6.  The clouds seemed too dark at their base which leads to an unrealistic "dark gray" interaction with mountains (very noticeable with snow on mountains).
7.  The Cloud layers seemed a little limited, I think I only ever saw two

It had some good elements:

1.  Clouds blended better with mountain intersections.
2.  Sunset cloud interaction was very nice.
3.  The cloud shapes seemed a little less repetitive. 

Of course these issues could be a result of how TrueSky was implemented in FSW ... perhaps the FSW dev team just ran out of time to progress/adjust the look and feel of TrueSky to something as good as we see in HiFi AS4?  So I'm on the fence on how "good" or "bad" TrueSky might be for P3D ... whatever the implementation I think it will need to exceed what HiFi or REX or PILOTs or ... can do.  However, if you look at TrueSky as "out of the box" (comes with product and isn't an add-on cost) then that might have an appeal to some.

Cheers, Rob.

Yep as an out of the box sky solution for the base system, it would certainly be a big improvement like it was in FSW. Another very odd issue they never managed to fix was the AO showing through the clouds which made it look like everything was covered in snow