Active Sky after 2 weeks - to be or not to be?

[Fiorentoni 4,457]

30 minutes ago, Langeveldt said:

I'm still not quite understanding the "passive mode".  Okay it allows you to use the Active Sky interface, but I'm also hearing that there are more impressive cloud formations than all the cauliflower stuff you get with MSFS.  How is this so, if it's MSFS that is then controlling the weather? Is passive mode the happy medium between no "jumping" weather transitions and yet nicer looking clouds?

No, passive mode does not do weather (i.e. clouds, visibility, icing etc.), only "air effects" (many different types of turbulence). It's like MSFS default weather with realistic air effects.

[kurtb 123]

I got this with AS a few moments ago, weird

Edited May 2 by kurtb

[Fiorentoni 4,457]

Just now, kurtb said:

Igot this with AS a few moments ago, weird

This has nothing to do with AS, In my opinion. Those white ground patches I've seen for 2 years in MSFS (long before AS), it's usually a textures error with a 3rd party airport.

[kurtb 123]

Okay thanks for the info, haven't seen this before

[Sonosusto 711]

I have liked it so far. Just updated recently as well.

I have noticed more accurate representation of clouds, performance is the same but the overall weather is more accurate.

Always loved their products to begin with and now I use it every time I fly.

[EduSCA 47]

4 hours ago, Flic1 said:

I was hesitant to post my thoughts in the other threads since they seem to just be a battle of 'my screenshot looks better than yours' and end up being 40 pages.  I'll give you my summary after using it for 7-8 flights in the FNX A320.  Disclaimer...I have been a skeptic of the WX injectors since I have always been of the opinion that MSFS live WX is a huge leap forward from what we have had in the past and is very good (it obviously has issues).  I think 'Metar bubbles' are a relic from past sims that we should be moving on from.  I am mostly referring to the fact you can see the WX around you as you fly with default MSFS Live WX.  You can be in clear conditions and see a low layer of clouds ahead, storms, etc.  I do not care if conditions match Metar's exactly and that it doesn't look like it does on a LiveCam or what it looks like out my window. and this seems to be the contention in the reviews so far. Some are even showing static timelapses at an airport over 10 hours but this does not show what it is like flying from A to B. Metars have their issues and are a snapshot in time. I have taken off IRL with half the runway totally clear and near zero viz at the end of the runway.  I have also owned every version of ActiveSky since it came out in 2000-2001'ish so familiar with Damian's work and his ongoing updates.

The Good:

It does look nice.  Since it can use some different cloud types available in the sim you will see a pleasant looking sky most of the time.  One flight I did out of KJAX had the typical 'summer' cumulus clouds.  MSFS Live WX looked bad...it had the volcanic ash clouds which is my least favorite aspect of it.  I switched to AS and it looked fantastic. I did the flight to KORD using AS and did not notice any transitions in Preset Mode. (Using download interval of 15 minutes and smoothing on 30)  I also noticed some different lighting probably due to cloud thickness and humidity.  You do see more stratiform clouds which look nice from below and above and I did see several layers of clouds including 'cirrus'  They still don't really look like Cirrus clouds but we never see that due to how the clouds are generated.  The turbulence setting is also very good, much better than default.  I have had to keep MSFS on 'low' because it it very unrealistic above that but Low might as well be Zero.  AS does provide a more plausible movement in turbulence. I have not tested any Thunderstorms as of yet.

The Not as Good:

Half of the flights I did were in fair WX without many drastic changes along the way... no fronts, areas of low clouds, storms etc so did not notice any abrubt transitions with these flights.  The other half of the flights involved drastic WX changes.  One was out of KORD to KBWI.  A lot of rain in Chicago but a clear area over Ohio and West Virginia before forecasted low clouds in Baltimore. Once I got above the overcast it looked really nice.  All of a sudden, WX instantly went to clear and then back to a 'different' overcast, It then instantly went to clear WX as I moved on. I changed it to Passive at that point  Same thing happened on 2 other flights, some very drastic changes and it seems to be when going from an area of bad weather to good or the other way around.I also spotted the dreaded 'popcorn' cloud!  I will chalk that up to some cumulus clouds dissipating(?).   I did notice when under an overcast, there was a distinct 'circle' of clouds around me reminiscent of the older sims but I think that is exactly what the program does. We are flying from one WX bubble to another and AS attempts to smooth this out as best it can so you will not see the actual WX out ahead of you which to me is the biggest drawback but of course this is known and I bought it knowing this was the case.  I think in P3D you could set maximum visibilities so you could set that value lower and not see these rings around you.  AS does not do this (not sure if it will be able to in the future).

I think for me, I will default to 'Passive' mode when doing airliner flights which will provide the turbulence but you will still get the MSFS WX.  If the weather is fair along the route and no drastic changes expected, I will probably use the AS Preset mode for a bit of visual change.  For GA flyers that are not flying as high and far, Preset mode may work perfectly fine most of the time. I don't think there is a simple "which one is better" because its going to depend on the situation.  If you want to see a little different visual representation than what we are used to, AS will do that.  If you want to fly along seeing overcast to your right where a front lies and clear to the left matching the current real-time satellite conditions, MSFS default LIve does that very well and AS will not be able to depict that.

 

 

 

Thanks for the review, it definitely helped me save money.

[RALF9636 2,006]

4 hours ago, Flic1 said:

Once I got above the overcast it looked really nice.  All of a sudden, WX instantly went to clear and then back to a 'different' overcast, It then instantly went to clear WX as I moved on.

Keep in mind ASFS is out only for two weeks and of course there is still some bugfixing and fine-tuning going on. The issue you describe is being worked on and already improved in the latest public Beta; it should be sorted out completely soon.

 

[TomCYYZ 219]

53 minutes ago, kurtb said:

I got this with AS a few moments ago, weird

😉If you weren't using "External View" it would not be an issue. "What you can't see won't hurt you". 

[mmcmah 448]

Nothing is perfect, neither MSFS nor ASFS. That said, I'm using ASFS on every single flight.

Yes, the lack of differentiated weather towards the horizon, or being unable to fly along a front are not great, but it's a limitation imposed by MSFS. For something that costs $25, which is on par with a CaptainSim plane and some sceneries, I find it to be a better buy. I use it every time I fly rather than occasionally flying a particular plane or, even less, flying into/out of a particular scenery.

I find the representation of weather, clouds (except for a strange flatness to the bottoms of some clouds, where they look too cutoff, but possibly a MSFS limitation), storms, turbulence, lightning to be much superior to the native MSFS weather system.

The addition of historical weather (which for the longest time MSFS refused to understand why people wanted it) and the resultant ability to truly fly anywhere at any time with the corresponding weather, has been great. Combine that with their addition of a Passive mode that allows those that want to use of MSFS Live Weather depictions and add ASFS air effects, like turbulence, and you have a product that is as complete as MSFS will allow.

I have been very happy with it despite its shortcomings and hope against reason that MS/Asobo might allow 3rd party weather developers to write weather data more broadly than the current weather presets allow. Also, the development and refinement continues apace as others have said. 

 

[Alti 68]

Watch the video and decide whether you like the transitions or not. ActiveSky MSFS works in 
"Active Sky Prest Control" 
mode during the whole flight. It went from Dublin to Edinburgh.
Weather data is displayed, as well as the position of the aircraft.
Have fun watching. If it's a bit too chaotic, please bear with me, it's my first video of this kind.

MSFS2020 B736 ASFS Dublin - Edinburgh

sorry maybe bad englisch.. translated by Deepl.

[vgbaron 3,727]

Very good points by all. It really does boil down to your personal preference. To me, the different cloudscapes and cloud levels is a major plus. I spent over 25 years flying around and AS is much closer to what I remember seeing in the air. Sure, I also do not like the lack of fronts etc but, to me, that is less important than varying realistic clouds.

If you just like to see pretty clouds and fly around them, MSFS is perfect. The clouds are beautiful. And if you like that but are interested in checking out wind effects etc - then passive mode is your thing - the best of both.

And, for those on the fence, which seems to be the main focus of this thread - one major thing to consider - this is HiFi and Damian Clark - he has consistently been one of the good guys in the sim world - ASFS has been out only 2 weeks and it is growing rapidly - responding to user suggestions has always been HiFi's forte.

I don't think one can lose by using AS but the degree of enjoyment and usefulness lies directly with the way you fly.

[filou 2,771]

I can no longer do without it,I'm using also ASFS on every single flight. I take great pleasure in using active sky! I look forward to the next improvements.

[rocketlaunch 617]

The default weather engine is already excellent but Active Sky does add something different, it is a case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder. 

[ahsmatt7 1,213]

5 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

To me its really confusing why people have such disdain for METAR.  METAR is everything in real aviation.  Some company policies prohibit airliners to land or takeoff without reception of the METAR (atis/asos/awos).  So much is planned around metar and taf too.  It's an accurate depiction of the weather at the airport.  Occasionally it's out of date, but not if the station provides a SPECI which transmits weather every 5 minutes.  Nothing is more accurate.    

And people don't want that in the sim....  Quite frankly I believe the reason is many aren't pilots - and that's fine.  I understand the draw of weather systems as you fly across a country etc - it can be really cool.  The weather systems in MSFS tend to be several hours behind too.  But to delete metar functionality is to go further away from a more realistic simulator.

METARs don’t mean squat at altitude. Frontal and whole weather systems do. It’s not just really “cool.” It’s a fact of life. When I’m at the gate and looking at the weather, I look at my whole route AND the terminal weather, not just one or the other. 
 

I completely understand what you’re saying but it’s not the only part of the story.  METAR weather must be included in a weather simulation. Agreed. Just can’t use meters to map out the world wide weather.

[ryanbatc 13,086]

1 hour ago, ahsmatt7 said:

METARs don’t mean squat at altitude. Frontal and whole weather systems do. It’s not just really “cool.” It’s a fact of life. When I’m at the gate and looking at the weather, I look at my whole route AND the terminal weather, not just one or the other. 
 

I completely understand what you’re saying but it’s not the only part of the story.  METAR weather must be included in a weather simulation. Agreed. Just can’t use meters to map out the world wide weather.

I completely agree - but my post was about people wanting to remove metar.  That's ridiculous.