12 hours ago, avhpilot said:

Please let me know when you do because I'd want to participate. Those monsters brake immersion and I suppose it;s because the whites are not white enough and the blacks are too black. So it is perhaps the lighting engine that is the weakest link in this?

But what annoys me even more is the fact you will practically always see a clear deep blue sky above them: a total lack of any stratus or cirrus clouds, letalone any convincing ones. With or without ASFS

And I have no reason to believe this will be improved in FS2024, Please correct me if I am wrong

It’s a bit surprising that they haven’t removed those clouds ages ago. The cumulus clouds look great, let’s keep them and get rid of the unnatural freakish-looking volcanic ash-broccoli-cauliflower-popcorn variants. They really don’t add anything to the sim.

Just finished a flight around the Hawaiian islands and luckily no volcanic ash - only real volcanoes popping up through the thick cumulus-layer. Interesting approach too into Kahului. Check it out if you want to brush up on your x-wind landing technique 🙂

METAR PHOG 050154Z 07022G38KT 10SM SCT060 BKN080 26/16 A2996

…

Oh, one more thing. Last flight was with 8888, but even on the previous one the transitions have been more noticeable. On the first build I used a smoothing setting suggested by @vgbaron, but with the latest beta I’ve just used default. In other words, I’m trying to find a reasonable setting to avoid abrupt transitions. For now I’ve reduced it to 20 IIRC. 

….

Yet another thing: it does seem to me that there’s quite a bit more turbulence with 8888 than before. Not excessive in any way. With the 07022G38KT METAR from above it seemed very convincing - and I think in this case the turbulence would have been exaggerated with default. So in other words, a welcome improvement.

….

Re: my statement about them removing the ash-clouds, I guess it’s probably not that simple after reading the post with quotes from Seb.

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

5 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

it’s probably not that simple after reading the post with quotes from Seb.

yes ... but ...DCS, 3 years ago:

 

I am surprised we only discuss cloud shapes. am I the only one who would also like to see cockpit brightness change as you fly in and out of clouds? DCS had this 3 years ago. but then again there is more energy in clouds than in ash, as Seb explained. 🤣

once upon a time in DCS (3 years ago), before MSFS 1.0, clouds in back light

I nearly forgot how good those clouds look. have to reinstall DCS again just for the clouds alone.

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by turbomax

2 hours ago, turbomax said:

yes ... but ...DCS, 3 years ago:

 

I am surprised we only discuss cloud shapes. am I the only one who would also like to see cockpit brightness change as you fly in and out of clouds? DCS had this 3 years ago. but then again. there is more energy in clouds than in ash, as Seb explained. 🤣

MSFS auto exposure system isn't that great either or I think is completely missing. The thing is, this was introduced in xplane 12 and was removed later due to a huge uproar of a select few because their cockpit was too dark when they looked outside. In reality this is how it should work and looked really good in xplane because the clouds can be as bright white as you want them to be but auto exposure would reduce the overblown highlights. 

There are just way too many things fundamentally wrong with MSFS. Like how did those ash clouds got past during the testing phase is beyond me. But seeing it's Asobos first attempt at developing a flight sim, Its a bit understandable. All hopes on MSFS 2024 now.

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by Baber20

@Cpt_Piett

Sorry,

what meens       "For now I’ve reduced it to 20 IIRC. "

What is IIRC

 

Frank

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by f.skywalker

18 minutes ago, f.skywalker said:

What is IIRC

If I Remember or Recall Correctly

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by turbomax

@turbomax

Thanks,

what value does he mean by 20?

1 hour ago, f.skywalker said:

@turbomax

Thanks,

what value does he mean by 20?

Sorry, I tend to use acronyms a lot to save some time. There is a setting called depiction smoothness (or similar). What it does is basically set how long the weather transitions should take. I set it to longer, as I felt the transitions were too noticeable. 

10 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Oh, one more thing. Last flight was with 8888, but even on the previous one the transitions have been more noticeable. On the first build I used a smoothing setting suggested by @vgbaron, but with the latest beta I’ve just used default. In other words, I’m trying to find a reasonable setting to avoid abrupt transitions. For now I’ve reduced it to 20 IIRC. 

I've noticed the same, will try 20 as well.

Flight Level  F 360.  Clouds below me, above me, and at my level.  Never saw that in default weather.

 

55 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Clouds below me, above me, and at my level.  Never saw that in default weather.

I have. perhaps not often but it is nothing ASFS exclusive either. clouds above FL 360 is rare though.

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by turbomax

After a while the clouds keep disappearing from me. Do I have to set something up in MSFS? I added ASN in the flow menu. I have no idea what this ASN menu does. Do I have to start the MSFS with clear sky or real weather.

Just now, f.skywalker said:

After a while the clouds keep disappearing from me. Do I have to set something up in MSFS? I added ASN in the flow menu. I have no idea what this ASN menu does. Do I have to start the MSFS with clear sky or real weather.

Click on Help in the program and there is a ton of material to read on Active Sky. 

3 minutes ago, turbomax said:

I have. perhaps not often but it is nothing ASFS exclusive either. clouds above FL 360 is rare though.

Sure is rare, couple of thousand hours, and this is the first I have seen it. 

Finally got to do some experimenting last night (used latest beta, 8888).  Early takeaways: we all know what preset-based vs regional weather means so no surprises there, but the transitions are very well done, don't bother me at all.  As far as actual weather depictions, in almost all cases the ASFS wx depiction was both more accurate and showed more variety to the sky, making it more believable.  I really enjoyed it. 

The one exception is low clouds and visibility.  ASFS does not currently render visibility low enough in fog, or with a low overcast ceiling (either in live or manual weather). If the weather is 200ft overcast and 1/2sm vis, I shouldn't be seeing the runway until 200ft or so.  As it stands, ASFS renders 1/8sm vis well above cat I mins; MSFS fog depiction is much more accurate when it comes to low visibility. 

I greatly enjoyed seeing what ASFS can do and I will likely use it for simming in many conditions, but for now low vis won't be one of those conditions.  Looking forward to see what further improvements are coming.

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by Stearmandriver

3 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

Finally got to do some experimenting last night (used latest beta, 8888).  Early takeaways: we all know what preset-based vs regional weather means so no surprises there, but the transitions are very well done, don't bother me at all.  As far as actual weather depictions, in almost all cases the ASFS wx depiction was both more accurate and showed more variety to the sky, making it more believable.  I really enjoyed it. 

The one exception is low clouds and visibility.  ASFS does not currently render visibility low enough in fog, or with a low overcast ceiling (either in live or manual weather). If the weather is 200ft overcast and 1/2sm vis, I shouldn't be seeing the runway until 200ft or so.  As it stands, ASFS renders 1/8sm vis well above cat I mins; MSFS fog depiction is much more accurate when it comes to low visibility. 

I greatly enjoyed seeing what ASFS can do and I will likely use it for simming in many conditions, but for now low vis won't be one of those conditions.  Looking forward to see what further improvements are coming.

Let them know at Hifi - if they don't already 🙂