8 hours ago, Adamski_NZ said:

and that 4pm on a *partly* cloudy day ends up looking more like 8pm ... and all the scenery is ludicrously dark.

You can play around with the Geforce filters, in particular with the HDR toning setting, to mitigate that.

2 minutes ago, Cognita said:

But, do they move is straight lines at a constant speed?

Depends on the winds.

 

1 minute ago, Bobsk8 said:

Depends on the winds.

Maybe, I am learning a lot about weather...  

1 minute ago, Cognita said:

But, do they move is straight lines at a constant speed?

In the video clouds at different heights are moving at different speeds and directions - is this what you mean?  If it isn't, I have no idea what you are referring to.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Cognita said:

Maybe, I am learning a lot about weather...  

If the wind is 130 degrees at 15 knots at the cloud level, the clouds will move in a straight line heading 310 degrees at 15 knots - how could they move in a different direction?

 

1 hour ago, fsiscool said:

The next webcam shot one hour later looks the same.

I revert to the statement I made in my earlier post...

00:09Z

 

01:09Z

 

02:09Z

I can admit to bias, so I'll say that in Cpt_piett's images that neither MSFS nor ASFS managed to capture the real conditions (per all the webcam stills) around NZTG properly.

Edited April 30, 20242 yr by F737MAX

1 hour ago, Cognita said:

But, do they move is straight lines at a constant speed?

All winds are subject to bending via the coriolis force. Or else the winds / clouds would just travel in straight line in the direction to where the local low is.

But earth rotates and low pressure weather systems are rotating counter clockwise (in northern Hemisphere) but I these systems are quite large in area and I gather it's not really notable by the human eye. However from satellite images this becomes very apparent.

* In meteorology there are actually 3 forces in action around a Pressure system.

Pressure gradient force (which acts straight from HP to LP.

Coriolis Force

Centrifugal force

So it's not as easy as a straight line when it comes to winds (and clouds). But then again, can you actually observe this from the ground?

Edited April 30, 20242 yr by SAS443

9 hours ago, fsiscool said:

And this screenshot is from Tauranga directly watching in the direction of Motiti Island at the time:
...

My conclusion in this case is, that the ASFS weather looks nicer but is less realistic.

That's not a bad idea, checking the webcam for the same time as the flight. I agree, this doesn't look like my screenshot from Motiti Island 10nm away. As a reminder, AS showed FEW040 BKN118 at the time. 

11 hours ago, Adamski_NZ said:

Never mind the clouds - just look at that scenery!!!

I hate to say it, but I think - in this case - I prefer the clouds in "Passive" mode. The problem with these "volcanic ash" clouds is that they're somehow tied into the overall brightness of the sim - and that 4pm on a *partly* cloudy day ends up looking more like 8pm ... and all the scenery is ludicrously dark. IMHO, that's a bigger immersion killer than [even] those horrid clouds.

Agree - it looks gobschmackingly good 🤩 

Not sure about the volcanic ash clouds - were there any in my screenshot? Also, I see them both with AS and default - they are the absolute worst looking clouds IMO and completely immersion-breaking. Btw with a decent amount of cloud coverage it tends to look quite dark and gloomy. The issue here I think was that ASFS available forecast data didn't correspond well with the RL situation. But I wouldn't say that the clouds looked unrealistic in any way. 

...

Just finished a flight from SEQM Quito, Ecuador to SKPS Antonio Nariño, Columbia. Tracking NE from SEQM I encountered what seemed like a high altitude CU-layer with tops at FL220. Approaching SKPS from Southeast, AS showed two stratus layers (SCT 2000 to 5400ft and SCT 8000ft to 11,400ft. 

No volcanic clouds on this flight, luckily!

SKPS 301800Z 36004KT 280V050 9999 SCT020 SCT080 22/18 Q1020

I was using the localizer for rwy 20 to set up for a visual approach to rwy 02 🙂 Just for fun - not really any wind. 

Edited April 30, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

54 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

I can admit to bias, so I'll say that in Cpt_piett's images that neither MSFS nor ASFS managed to capture the real conditions (per all the webcam stills) around NZTG properly.

As I've said before, matching EITHER AS or MSFS to real images is a crapshoot. Depending on the place, time and conditions one may be "better" than the other. Both tend to give a representation of the current situation. I live literally off the end of KBUR RWY 15 and there are days I look outside and then at the sim and they are identical, other times not so much. This is not a good criteria to judge either product. If one shows clear blue cloudless sky and the other shows overcast and rain - that is a different story.

39 minutes ago, vgbaron said:

If one shows clear blue cloudless sky and the other shows overcast and rain - that is a different story.

If anything is that far off, I'll assume that the NOAA has changed something in the backend of their data provision again!

You're right, though. No program will give a perfect match with reality.

In addition to the weather depiction ASFS is definitely making exaggerated lighting changes from what I can see.  Today at KEWR was relatively overcast but that type of bright overcast you almost needed sunglasses.  Loaded up the sim and before ASFS set the weather it was the appropriate level of brightness then ASFS kicked in and it almost turned to night.  Almost as soon as I got into the clouds on departure it brightened up but anything under the cloud base was way too dark.... I've noticed this a few times now and it's also evident in the pics a page or two earlier... 

Latest ASFS Build, no shader mods of any type in MSFS.   

11 minutes ago, psolk said:

In addition to the weather depiction ASFS is definitely making exaggerated lighting changes from what I can see.  Today at KEWR was relatively overcast but that type of bright overcast you almost needed sunglasses.  Loaded up the sim and before ASFS set the weather it was the appropriate level of brightness then ASFS kicked in and it almost turned to night.  Almost as soon as I got into the clouds on departure it brightened up but anything under the cloud base was way too dark.... I've noticed this a few times now and it's also evident in the pics a page or two earlier... 

Latest ASFS Build, no shader mods of any type in MSFS.   

I've noticed this too (that ASFS tends to make things really dark) and sometimes it's appropriate, but sometimes it's not appropriate. 

I can't really think of a solution offhand.  If you blanket make things brighter then your overall lighting under nasty thunderstorms may not be dark enough.  On the other hand if you keep it dark, then for conditions that you encountered at KEWR, it's not bright enough.  Perhaps the number and thickness of cloud layers could be taken into account in some way...

18 hours ago, RALF9636 said:

Your screenshots really make me feel like doing some GA-flying again. I have been flying airliners only since a few month because GA-flying in MSFS had somehow lost its appeal to me. But with these cloudscapes by ASFS I really need to spend some more time below the clouds again.

I think the Tomahawk re-ignited my passion for GA. Before that, like you, airliners only for quite some time. Last flight in the King Air was awesome! No Simbrief plan, no moving map on Navigraph, no GPS avionics. Cloud-surfing at FL220 then an exciting approach through several cloud layers amongst the mountains of Colombia. I really had to plan the approach to avoid smashing into the mountains on while in the clouds. Great fun!

I think what would increase my level of enjoyment from now on, is to be able to just enjoy what ASFS brings to the table, without constantly feeling the need to switch between passive and preset mode to check which one is more realistic. As well as finding arguments and screenshots to justify why I prefer Active Sky. One thing is certain - it has increased the level of immersion a fair bit.

10 hours ago, F737MAX said:

My conclusion is: people will continue to find evidence that supports their preconceived notions.

Well said! And I’m no exception to this. But I think I’ll try to “rest my case” and agree to disagree, as it’s not that important to me that other people prefer default weather.

Edited May 1, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

12 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

it’s not that important to me that other people prefer default weather.

I think it's absolutely fine if people prefer default weather—it does better than ASFS in some aspects.

What I don't like is the picking of one particular instance or a very limited sample to 'prove' that ASFS is inferior. Or "no API, no go" with the implication that users are 'dumb' for using "old tech."

Anyway, back on-topic... One reason I like ASFS is that I haven't seen a view like this with current weather in MSFS for a long time:

One thing I really love about live weather in MSFS is the way that fog and haze layers are depicted.  For instance, if you take off from an inland airport and fly towards the Pacific coast, you can see the coastal fog layer appear and start to filter through the valleys as a thin, smooth whispy haze that gets thicker and finally opaque on the coast.  

Now I know with ASFS you can't see the layer in front of you as you approach it, but the weather will slowly transition to depicting this layer around you as you reach it, but what I'm wondering is: does fog still have that smooth, whispy, soft quality to it?  Or is it more of a solid status layer, just on the ground? 

If anyone has any screenshots of coastal fog I'd love to see them.  I will be trying ASFS for myself in the next week or two either way as I get my stuff set up in my new place, but I'm curious what folks are seeing in this regard. 

Thanks!