17 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Please post your SU 10 cloud video in this thread when you finish it! Thanks!

SU10 clouds in the Departure timestamp. SU9 clouds in the other timestamps 😊

 

Timestamps: Introduction 0:00 Flight Plan 0:55 Departure 1:42 Descent 3:00 Approach 5:19 DIMKE (IAF) 6:47 Configuring for Landing 7:21 Glide Slope Capture 9:58 Landing 11:45 Landing Replays External Cameras 13:23

Quite disappointed to be honest. Overcast and broken conditions at airports can still not be rendered like it should and visibility seems wrong as well...i don't really care about how beautiful clouds are looking if such basics are missing/wrong.

Climbing out of CYHZ
CYHZ 231500Z 01010KT 6SM -SHRA BR BKN005 BKN013 OVC037 12/12 A2953 RMK SF5SF2SC1 CIG RAG CVCTV CLD EMBD SLP003 DENSITY ALT 700FT

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by Tuskin38

1 hour ago, Franz007 said:

Quite disappointed to be honest. Overcast and broken conditions at airports can still not be rendered like it should and visibility seems wrong as well...i don't really care about how beautiful clouds are looking if such basics are missing/wrong.

Are you using live weather or a  preset, because I am not seeing  what you are stating. ?

2 hours ago, Franz007 said:

Overcast and broken conditions at airports can still not be rendered like it should and visibility seems wrong as well...

How do you know? Have you checked against the real weather? As I know that you didn't (how could you?) your remark appears just as unfunded criticism.

Even without this thread, I wanted to create a video, which shows a true weatherfront vs the SU10 clouds in the sim. Here is the result:

- The plane is slewed, so even at this ridiculous speed, the graphics are good, within a split second you can see the transition between the visible cloud grid and the properly rendered clouds when I stopped moving the plane for a moment.
- The video shows an overcast (click) as well as low visibility (click).
- The XPlane-like all-cloud-types-in-one fluffy depiction in the preview screenshot is owed to the fast movement of the slewed plane, the true appearance is rendered when the plane is stopped.

 

 

 

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by mrueedi

18 hours ago, Silicus said:

While I agree the clouds have improved in SU10, they are still missing most of the major cloud types.

 

High clouds	Cirrus
	Cirrostratus
	Cirrocumulus
Middle clouds	Altostratus
	Altocumulus
Low clouds	Stratus
	Stratocumulus
	Nimbostratus
Clouds with vertical development	Cumulus
	Cumulonimbus

Most clouds are based on cumulus clouds in the sim or haze/fog type of implentation. 

For example: Altostratus are missing, at least I haven't seen them after SU10. I am happy to be proven wrong.

100% spot on with that post.  What is there in MSFS shows some significant improvements! But so much is not there.  "Yet" is my concern.  I just sincerely hope "Yet" is real.

 

2 hours ago, Doering said:

SU10 clouds in the Departure timestamp. SU9 clouds in the other timestamps 😊

 

Timestamps: Introduction 0:00 Flight Plan 0:55 Departure 1:42 Descent 3:00 Approach 5:19 DIMKE (IAF) 6:47 Configuring for Landing 7:21 Glide Slope Capture 9:58 Landing 11:45 Landing Replays External Cameras 13:23

Very nice!  At the 10 second mark of your video, I couldn't tell that it was MSFS, I would have thought it was an actual real life video!

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

3 hours ago, UAL4life said:

Exactly! Though, what they need to do is revert back to pre SU7 or let 3rd party developers take a whack at it. But they won’t do either and I’ll always miss the atmosphere I had on release. 

Why? I was also there at release.  The clouds we have in SU 10 live weather is very good.

I would not want Asobo wasting a minute of their time working on the SDK for 3rd party weather developers like Rex and Active Sky. What a waste of Asobo's time, IMO, when you can see how much Asobo has accomplished up to, and including SU 10.

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

45 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I would not want Asobo wasting a minute of their time working on the SDK for 3rd party weather developers like Rex and Active Sky. What a waste of Asobo's time, IMO, when you can see how much Asobo has accomplished up to, and including SU 10.

You don't happen to work for Microsoft do you? ;)

Just now, TrafficPilot said:

You don't happen to work for Microsoft do you? 😉

No I don't.  I just see progress in the right direction and SU 10 is an example of that progress.

1 hour ago, abrams_tank said:

I would not want Asobo wasting a minute of their time working on the SDK for 3rd party weather developers like Rex and Active Sky. What a waste of Asobo's time, IMO, when you can see how much Asobo has accomplished up to, and including SU 10.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Here then are 6,000 words.  Please hazard a guess of which sim and which textures are in use.....

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by fppilot

20 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

The r/flightsim is still a garbage place though...

You think thats bad?, try visiting the MSFS  Discord🙃

11 minutes ago, fppilot said:

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Here then are 6,000 words.  Please hazard a guess of which sim and which textures are in use.....

And if Asobo were to waste time working on and SDK for Rex and Active Sky, how long will that take until the SDK is up to the level that Rex and Active Sky require?

Now assume that Asobo finally gets the SDK to the level that Rex and Active Sky require.  Rex and Active Sky still have to spend time making the 3rd party weather add-on, and make it mature enough so that you can get all the pictures you just posted.

How many years will have passed then?  4 years? 5 years?

Great, we get live weather in all the pictures that you posted above, in 2027!

Meantime, if Asobo spends 100% of their effort on live weather and ignores working on the SDK for Rex and Active Sky, we get to your pictures in perhaps 2 more years, so that's 2024.  And better yet, live weather is free, doesn't cost any owners of MSFS a single penny.

I'm just gonna say, the logic of people that want Asobo to work on the SDK for Rex and Active Sky is kind of absurd, IMO.  They don't consider how long it will take Asobo to bring the SDK up to the maturity and sophistication that Rex and Active Sky can finally do everything they want.  And when Asobo brings the SDK up to the level of sophistication that Rex and Active Sky expect, they don't consider that Rex and Active Sky may need to spend X more years developing the add-on. 

 

 

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

3 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

How many years will have passed then?  4 years? 5 years?

MS and Asobo had at least that long in advance to notice that texture technologies already existed and embrace them.  Could have been in place at first release.  We are at two years + and crawling along.  Guess weather accuracy is just more important to me than to some others.  Admit that.  Read my signature for an explanation.

We would more likely agree about tanks!  LOL!

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by fppilot

8 minutes ago, fppilot said:

MS and Asobo had at least that long in advance to notice that texture technologies already existed and embrace them.  Could have been in place at first release.  We are at two years + and crawling along.  Guess weather accuracy is just more important to me than to some others.  Admit that.  Read my signature for an explanation.

Yeah, and my expertise is software development.  I can tell you that it may take a long time for Asobo to get the SDK up to the level required by Rex and Active Sky.  And then it may take Rex and Active Sky, who knows how many more years to get the add-on to the level that you show in your pictures.

Anyways, "Could have been in place at first release" is past tense. The present is the present. And the best course for Asobo in the present is to continue their work on live weather and not waste a single minute on the SDK for Rex and Active Sky.

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by abrams_tank