Active Sky review

[turbomax 3,296]

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

The turbulence was so bad, we had black and blue marks where the lap belt crossed our waists. . 

at higher altitudes and above the clouds it gets much smoother normally. does MSFS simulate this correctly?

Edited April 21 by turbomax

[Pilot53 544]

7 minutes ago, turbomax said:

at higher altitudes and above the clouds it gets much smoother normally. does MSFS simulate this correctly?

I have not noticed msfs simulating this correctly.  Irl as soon as you climb above those low level cumulus the thermals smooth right out.  Same thing happens when you cross the coastline, over the water it smooths right out irl.

[JughedJones 220]

I feel like AS is performing really well. 

Now.. there's a caveat when I say that.  

 

It nails the METARS ive expected, (which MSFS has been doing pretty well on it's own in my experience lately)

 

But it just *looks* better. Does that mean it's more realistic? I don't know. I know it's more pleasing... and I see thunder and lighting. 

 

I saw cirrus clouds, thunder and lightning, and a rainbow where I would expect them... is that correct and realistic? I dont know... but it's cool and I like it. 

[pete_auau 1,163]

8 hours ago, Piotr007 said:

It appears pushback toolbar can prevent asfs from working, ridiculous right?? How was this tested?

lol  can you tell us  what addon  didnt  have  bugs  when  first  released

[aniiran 433]

14 hours ago, wim123 said:

rolls eyes, and just from one flight you make your conclusions?

 

No but that was the ultimate test and it failed.  It also failed to depict a front moving though Dusseldorf, thunder storms in the united states east.  I keep looking through the settings but there is no setting for maximum cloud layers anymore.  I played around with it some more today and it never was better than MSFS live weather, that to me is a total fail. And the BS preset changes don't look any smoother then REX weather force.   

[pete_auau 1,163]

1 minute ago, aniiran said:

No but that was the ultimate test and it failed.  It also failed to depict a front moving though Dusseldorf, thunder storms in the united states east.  I keep looking through the settings but there is no setting for maximum cloud layers anymore.  I played around with it some more today and it never was better than MSFS live weather, that to me is a total fail. And the BS preset changes don't look any smoother then REX weather force.   

suggest to post  at  the  hi fi forum

[vgbaron 3,702]

2 minutes ago, aniiran said:

No but that was the ultimate test and it failed.  It also failed to depict a front moving though Dusseldorf, thunder storms in the united states east.  I keep looking through the settings but there is no setting for maximum cloud layers anymore.  I played around with it some more today and it never was better than MSFS live weather, that to me is a total fail. And the BS preset changes don't look any smoother then REX weather force.   

you are entitled to your opinion. As to the preset changes, did you try adjusting the smoothing rate and download interval? I have my smoothing set to 5 (not default 50) and download interval to 15 minutes and the transitions are almost seamless. You are correct - it doesn't display fronts per se. If you pick a place where the metar shows TS, you will get TS including lightning and thunder. I've been flying in them all over the east and south eastern US all day.

[Reader 2,034]

In the UK local and national government, members are required to declare an "interest" and 
in some cases, withdraw from a meeting, if that interest is a conflict.
What a shame that such a rule does not exist on internet forums.
It would be so helpful to know from whose agenda some of these comments originate.

Edited April 21 by Reader

[vgbaron 3,702]

1 minute ago, Reader said:

In local and national government, members are required to declare an "interest" and 
in some cases, withdraw from a meeting, if that interest is a conflict.
What a shame that such a rule does not exist on internet forums.
It would be so helpful to know from whose agenda some of these comments originate.

I generally look at the number of times the person posts the same thing. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, it just gets frustrating when it is obvious the person doesn't know how to use the program or what the expectations should be. I spent 25 years flying IRL and I can honestly state that ASFS is closer to real world than anything out there.

[aniiran 433]

44 minutes ago, vgbaron said:

you are entitled to your opinion. As to the preset changes, did you try adjusting the smoothing rate and download interval? I have my smoothing set to 5 (not default 50) and download interval to 15 minutes and the transitions are almost seamless. You are correct - it doesn't display fronts per se. If you pick a place where the metar shows TS, you will get TS including lightning and thunder. I've been flying in them all over the east and south eastern US all day.

In most weather scenarios I'm only getting one layer of clouds when I should be getting several.  One of the first things I did was change the smoothing to 10. Which helped.  But I'm still not seeing these amazing multi layered cloud structures.  Over France this morning there were some foggy patches in the hills, some little popcorn clouds in the mid levels and then faint little popcorn clouds at 20k feet. Was not impressive at all. I keep hoping to find something good but I have entered about 15 scenarios in areas where the weather should be interesting but it just isn't. I haven't seen any of these high level clouds people are saying they are seeing.  I did see an altostratus layer over Germany but it didn't look great.  I was hoping someone could compare what they are seeing to what I am seeing so we can make sure I don't have like UAC issue or server issue or something. So far I have not seen a single depiction better than default MSFS weather engine. 

Edited April 21 by aniiran

[Fielder 3,696]

 

[Bunchy 227]

I absolutely agree with the video creators comments about the cloud texturing being below what native MSFS can generate.

It looks very poor to my eye.

I hope future updates can remedy this. Damien has been such an important provider to the world of flightsims for so long, I really wish this product well.

I'm glad I purchased it, but it's not there for me in texture quality yet.

Stu

[Fiorentoni 4,295]

8 minutes ago, Bunchy said:

I absolutely agree with the video creators comments about the cloud texturing being below what native MSFS can generate.

It looks very poor to my eye.

I hope future updates can remedy this. Damien has been such an important provider to the world of flightsims for so long, I really wish this product well.

I'm glad I purchased it, but it's not there for me in texture quality yet.

Stu

It's just another type of cloud. MSFS default always generates CU clouds (AKA volcanic ash), which - also in real life - are less flat and more expressively textured. MSFS default however does not create stratus clouds, which are more flat and look rather boring compared to CU clouds.
AS can do both types of clouds and will do both types, depending on other factors. So it's not like AS "degrades" cloud quality (see the picture of the thunderstorm at Singapore depicted by AS, these clouds are massive CU clouds with heavy texturing; the pic is in the other thread about AS), it just makes clouds look more realistic by also offering the "boring" types together with the more exciting ones. Another example would be Cirrus clouds - MSFS does not do them at all, AS does.

[vgbaron 3,702]

12 hours ago, aniiran said:

In most weather scenarios I'm only getting one layer of clouds when I should be getting several.  One of the first things I did was change the smoothing to 10. Which helped.  But I'm still not seeing these amazing multi layered cloud structures.  Over France this morning there were some foggy patches in the hills, some little popcorn clouds in the mid levels and then faint little popcorn clouds at 20k feet. Was not impressive at all. I keep hoping to find something good but I have entered about 15 scenarios in areas where the weather should be interesting but it just isn't. I haven't seen any of these high level clouds people are saying they are seeing.  I did see an altostratus layer over Germany but it didn't look great.  I was hoping someone could compare what they are seeing to what I am seeing so we can make sure I don't have like UAC issue or server issue or something. So far I have not seen a single depiction better than default MSFS weather engine. 

If you are not getting multiple layers, I really suggest you post on the HiFi support forum. They can look at your log and give you some help. I can tell you that I get cirrus, stratus, cumulus etc in multiple layers depending on the metar so I suspect something is preventing you from seeing them.

The support at HiFi is top notch - give them a try.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,883]

13 hours ago, aniiran said:

So far I have not seen a single depiction better than default MSFS weather engine. 

I almost find it hard to believe.  From my first flight with ASFS I have seen many cloud types, and the cumulus itself looks more natural to me in ASFS.