This seems much worse s/ SU5 than previously-HAZE

[Republic3D 1,229]

In good summer weather, high pressure and low wind you do get haze in real life. 

In low pressure, more wind, the haze becomes less visible. 

But I don't know if the weather system in MSFS takes that into consideration.

Edited August 13, 2021 by Republic3D

[Noel 4,484]

2 hours ago, Republic3D said:

In good summer weather, high pressure and low wind you do get haze in real life. 

In low pressure, more wind, the haze becomes less visible. 

But I don't know if the weather system in MSFS takes that into consideration.

Yes, haze is fine except when it's the same haze everywhere regardless of the pressure, winds, etc.  More range approximating reality is always a very good thing.

[David Mills 4,722]

Kick up the contrast and saturation on your MONITORS if you don't like what's on the screen.

[Noel 4,484]

13 minutes ago, David Mills said:

Kick up the contrast and saturation on your MONITORS if you don't like what's on the screen.

Thanks, that was the first thing I did was go get into NvCP and primarily adjust gamma down, then tune the rest.  It's better, but doesn't really address the issue well enough for me, which is why I brought it up.  Hopefully as Dave reminds the major weather update will improve on this can't wait!

[arnaud_clere 13]

Hi, it sounds strange to me that noone mentioned the "aerosol density" slider in the custom weather "settings" tab. It can be improved but it should do most of what you are asking for...

[ADamiani 470]

On 8/13/2021 at 7:53 AM, hansb57 said:

Some want boats, rockets, go into space, cars, want to drive busses around, complain about scenery at street level, want unlimited visibilty AND want maximum realism. There are even people who want to see a Bonzai tree at 50 miles out.

I'm ok with all that as long as it doesnt distract Asobo from improving a flight sim.

 

We all want to see MSFS improved. Some would be happy to see it return to the state in which it was one month ago. It shouldn't be too hard to achieve.

A.

[Mace 1,901]

2 minutes ago, arnaud_clere said:

Hi, it sounds strange to me that noone mentioned the "aerosol density" slider in the custom weather "settings" tab. It can be improved but it should do most of what you are asking for...

Aerosol density slider was mention in the first post of the thread.  Noel said:

This was around Pisa Italy, and I switched to Clear Skies from Live, w/ aerosols down to the lowest setting and this is what it looks like.

 

[arnaud_clere 13]

Sorry missed it! 

[arnaud_clere 13]

Actually I always thought clear skies were too clear to me and I used to increase the value so I would be happy if the default value is not zero anymore but it would be strange to not be able to move it to zero anymore

[ryanbatc 12,773]

I don't get it.  That first screenshot looks pretty clear to me.

[Espana Pete 357]

On 8/13/2021 at 3:20 PM, Noel said:

Here are some real world photos of deep blue skies from on high.

It looks very much as though polarising filters were used in this photography? 

[Noel 4,484]

34 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

I don't get it.  That first screenshot looks pretty clear to me.

I agree out in the distance, when you're looking thru miles of atmosphere, it's okay.  But looking downwards out of plane, especially at this altitude, and considering aerosol density is turned to the lowest possible setting, I'd much rather be able to dial that down a least few more notches and clarify it more, that's all.  I've already said for sure w/ Live Weather you want to depict what's actually happening at that moment from that altitude and viewing angle, driven by humidity, smoke, i.e. aerosols.  But for custom weather, I see absolutely no downside to turning over control to the user by make the aerosol slider move the lower level much lower is all.  I know fidelity is highly prized in the sim world, but quite frankly I like being able to make things look BETTER than they do in the real world.   Heck go to my old town and the smoke density can be so bad w/ the fires it's just really ugly.  I don't need to see that always in the simulator I see enough of it right in the Front Range which has had some of the world AQI in the world of late from the wester firees.  Hopefully there is more control w/ the 'impressive' weather update to come.   

[Chock 17,769]

To be fair, that first screenshot looks pretty realistic for what you'd see in Europe on a clear day when flying about. A few factors affect that: The viewpoint is from just over 11,000 feet AGL. So, two miles up above the surface of the Earth, which means we're looking down and across diagonally through the atmosphere to the horizon, a.k.a. its a 'slant-range' distance to the horizon.

It's very frequently the case in Europe that you get an inversion layer at between two and four thousand feet on bright days like that one. These trap pollution particles under the inversion, meaning you'd also be looking down through a lot of particles when trying to observe the horizon. Then of course you have Rayleigh Scattering to contend with as well, which is a function of air particles and moisture in the atmosphere that are always there. Contrary to what a lot of people imagine, there is a lot of water in the air even on pretty clear days; it's estimated that the average cumulus cloud in European skies on a nice sunny day weighs about 900,000lbs owing to the water content and dust particles in it, which is roughly the same as the MTOW of a Boeing 747-400

Looking diagonally across all that clag in the atmosphere is an entirely a different proposition to staring straight up at clouds where there is little, if any, slant-range and even if if there is an inversion layer, you are looking straight up through it, so it has little effect on blocking details in the way it does when you are looking though a great big slant-range mass of it. So yes, looking up at clouds on a sunny day from the ground makes it appear as though there shouldn't be any haze on such days, but fly around at 5,000 feet and you'll quite likely lose sight of your home airfield when you get maybe ten miles distant from it.

What a slider which took all of that away would sort of simulate, is a polarising filter, and that would sort of be a bit like having a 'put your Aviators on' option, which might be kind of cool although it would affect frame rates to have to load in a draw things out to a greater distance.

[scotchegg 4,159]

1 hour ago, ryanbatcund said:

I don't get it.  That first screenshot looks pretty clear to me.

Same. Sounds like OP might be looking for a scene with no atmosphere.

[Noel 4,484]

51 minutes ago, Chock said:

What a slider which took all of that away would sort of simulate, is a polarising filter, and that would sort of be a bit like having a 'put your Aviators on' option, which might be kind of cool although it would affect frame rates to have to load in a draw things out to a greater distance.

Yep, that   Thank you, perhaps that will sell it a little better than I could.  Thanks Alan!