stabell

OK, I will try that. First flight had many ugly cloud shifts, just like ASA/ASE. But I will do some flights and see. R, Tore Stabell

Thank you for replying! One more question: If I want to fly from A to B, let's say 300nm, and I let the weather from Opus set and then disable updates. Will I then have weather for enroute and destination correct, only one hour old? It is true that with disabled updates it is still changing the weather as I fly? Thank's, Tore Stabell

I have struggled with Active Sky through all their hundreds of patches and updates, REX, everything, and now I hoped for a miracle: (from your web page): No more unrealistic clearing of the weather prior to updating. No more annoying screen flicker as METARs are slowly loaded into the sim. But then, taken from the forum: don't be too alarmed if after an update your cloud coverage thickens, diminishes, vanishes, or new cloud suddenly appears. - Which one of these extremes are closer to the actual thing? Best regards, Tore Stabell, Oslo, Norway

+1

there is a new option like "prompt to install weather influenced textures" or something. If you untick it, it will not ask you anymore.

HiFly, Craig:I hope you read this before it probably is removed from the forum:The thread you have started about making overcast possible looks like exactly like an email conversation between developers of AS2012, long before beta testing..Unfortunately it comes from a customer, after beta testing.. How this could not be descovered in the beta is very scary. And the spokesman here has already said the usual Active Sky famous words: "that is the way FSX is made".I also hope that they fix the overcast problem,but I had hoped that they had the above conversation themselves six months ago.But maybe I should not write a post like this, maybe they'll get upset and will do nothing about the problem;)

how did this problem pass the beta testing, is the big question.

Damian, you write:but since you say you can achieve the results you are expecting using manual wx configuration, we'd like to know the details of that...Short: For all versions of Active Sky, AS2004, ASX, ASA,ASE, AS2012, you have had literaly hundreds of forum posts about cloud cover not looking overcast.The question HiFly, and all the other customer ask, is why the cloud cover is not total when it is in the real world.And as he just wrote, in manual WX configuration, if you put an overcast cumulus layer in FSX, it is indeed overcast. So why isn't it in ActiveSky's products?The Simconnect-injection-part of it, I have no knowledge of, but I have my own theory about many of the overcast complaints on the forums after all these years, and have made my own thread about that a few days ago.But as speaksman for the developers, you will have to answer the following question right away:Why is it, with Active Sky products, possible that the sky can be near-overcast at takeoff, but once you climb through it, it is possible to see the ground?If you say that "with Simconnect, it is not possible to make an overcast that last long enough for you to take off and fly through it", I will blame Microsoft for it.You have to look again, and again, at the OVERCAST PROBLEM, because customers want OVERCAST when it is OVERCAST.If it is really overcast at takeoff (Active Sky produced), you will find that after three minutes of flying, you can see big gaps in the cloud cover again.So if you want ovations and "thank you, Hifisim for the new released AS2012", the ONE only thing you have to do, is to make the cloud cover totally OVERCAST when it is OVERCAST in the real world. It is as easy as that.Please read my post regarding cloud cover, and my theory for why many customers are not satisfied, and what you can do about it.

(I trust that this new version of Active Sky has solved the problem that earlier versions have had for some users: A metar calls for overcast, and the sky is still completely clear. This post is not about that early (?) problem).There is one problem, however, with the way FSX weather system/ActiveSky works. The problem is that the weather is based on METARs.I feel that the developers may not have understood what happens when Metar is the only source of weather-making.First problem example: An airport has cumulus clouds only, cloud base 2000 feet, stretches up to maybe 10000 feet. Reported as "BKN020"."Broken" means 5/8 to 7/8 of the sky covered. It seems to me that Microsoft has used 5/8 for "broken" instead of 6/8 and 7/8, making the cloud cover not-so-broken.I suppose ActiveSky cannot inject 6.3/8 or something, but only "BKN"? In that case there is nothing to do if Microsoft has defined BKN as 5/8, for example.But when people look out of the window and see a completely obscured sky, and start FSX/AS2012 and see large spots of blue skyt through the cloud cover, it can be caused by the fact that real cumulusclouds, while they stretch upwards, increase in size! They can look like cumulunimbus, in a smaller scale, so that when the clouds at the cloud base cover 5/8, they will come in touch with each other at thetops, making it cover the sky completely, so that you cannot see blue sky through it.My experience is that if a single thin layer of cloud (stratus) is reported as "BKN", then it will indeed look broken, both in real life and in FSX. So my first suggestion is to make all cumulus layers morecovered than the metar calls for, beacuse of the cumulus clouds tendency to grow in size upwards, and cover the blue sky, even if it is reported as BKN.Suggestion 1: Active Sky should have a user selectable option: "make FEW=SCT, make SCT=BKN, make BKN=OVC."But the main big issue when basing weather depiction upon Metar observation is caused by the Metar reporting system itself:* A Metar will not report a cloud layer if there is a more crowded cloud layer below. If we have BKN020 they will not report a SCT030.You can have FEW015 SCT020 BKN030, but for some reason you can not have BKN020 SCT030 SCT040..A typical weather situation in my part of Europe is warm frontal systems. Different to a cold front consting of basically one thick layer of cumulus/cumulunimbus, a warm frontal system can typically consist ofBKN020 BKN030 BKN080 BKN120 BKN200 ... and on the top OVC300 cirrus.When you start your descent you go into clouds, and sometimes on the way down you can see horisontally a long way (with clouds over and below), but basically ten thousand meters of clouds over theairport.The Metar says: BKN020, causing Active Sky to put one cumulus layer stretching from 2000 to 6000 feet, and big, blue holes to see the sun through. That metar is indeed the same as in a nice summerevening, when a thin stratus layer stretches red and orange over the evening sky, stretching from 2000 to 2500 feet. Metar: BKN020.In my opinion that is the reason for why so many people have complained about the weather depiction on the ActiveSky forums for so many years.Suggestion 2: Selectable option in AS2012: "if the metar says BKN or OVC, treat this as a big frontal weather system, and not as a single layer of clouds in an othewise nice weather situation. Add cloud layersappropriate for a typical frontal system: BKN020 becomes BKN020, BKN060 OVC100stratus OVC140Stratus.....OVC250 Cirrus". And important: This will apply for airports at least 100-200nm away, so if airportsalong your flight plan route is also reporting BKN105 -RA.., then the same weather should be applied there.I understand that AS2012 cannot guess if BKN020 means a single layer of stratus, or clouds stretching up to FL350. But you don't have to be a meteorologist to know that if precipitation is reported, it is nosingle, thin, broken layer of clouds, a couple of thousand feet thick. If precipitaion is caused by big cumulus clouds, similar to CB's, they will most often be reported as rain SHOWERS, not "rain".That is why a BKN020, thin layer of cumulus, and rain, is a non-real combination.I would think that these user selectable options is not that difficult to implement? I hope that all the complaints about cloud cover will be silenced in future upgrades.

I was hoping this item was solved throug AS2004, ASX, ASE, ASA.. I really dont hope I was stupid buying the new 2012 version.I hope I have just not understood the interface.Problem: Again, as always, not enough clouds where there is supposed to be packed, you can see blue sky throug big holes in the clouds.. I am very, very disappointed to see that my first flight in heavy snow was typically disturbed by blue sky here and there..Now:To get rid of this, I decided to try the edit wx-option, that way I can decide the cloud layers myself.- I turn off automatic updates.- in edit wx-page I enter airport A, and select three solid cloud layers, snow, and a low visibility. Then I set application range 100 statue miles, and press "apply now".I enter airport B (and surprised that the weather I entered for airport A is the same at airport B, even when it is several hundred miles between them...). I select only a light cirrus layer, good visibility. Application range 50 SM, and I press "apply now".At airport A the weather is now the same as airport B..So how exactly does this work? I want weather A at airport A and weather B at airport B. Of course I would like to see the bad weather approaching as I approach airport A.FSX, ASA2012, ORDER Number: 814968

Thank you. So after the 20 percent off period, that everyone can take advantage of, it will be full price for AS2004-ASX-ASA-ASE-owners. I am not in a position to say that 60 euros is a whopping price for a weather- and environment addon, but I think it is the first time I have seen in the sim world that customers are not entitled to a upgrade price. (and I am not talking about a "crazy price-off-weekend", I mean permanently).I wonder how smart this market campaign really is.

after any discount period, will it be full price for ASE owners, IE no ASE-AS2012-upgrade price..?

Thank you for replying."the shockwave lights don't really light up the runway they just give off a volumetric effect from the exterior view"..- that's what I was afraid of.

If I buy one of those addons, can I use the lights on my LevelD? I would love to have real lights, lighting up the runway instead of washing it out, but I am not shure the Shockwave/Redux-thing is similar to the picture above. Will it be just to add the light in the effect folder and edit the effect.cfg or similar?

I wonder if I can let ASA load weather, import a flightplan, check the "aditional stations" (for smoother changes in both wind and weather at cruise)and check "nhance route coverage" (for the same reasons), as well as "force destination weather".After the flightplan has processed, if I then turn off automatic updates, will I then have the correct weather all the way, from a sunny departure to a snowy, stormy approach? (but the weather two hours old)?I thought maybe this could cure some of the wind shifts and clouds coming and going.Tore, Norway

"Are they currently all working properlywith the latest build?"..This reply will be removed from the forum, I believe, like many topics have before.. We'll see how long this will stay..No, the visibility issue is just one of many issues which is not resolved in the unfinished ASA, along with the windshifts (which is because of a simconnect problem, they say, but don't mention in the advertisments of the program), cloud popping, clouds crowding the sky when it is supposed to be CAVOK, scattered clouds when it is supposed to be a solid overcast, and so on.I have bought AS6, ASX and ASA - unusable! And they say it is a Simmconnect issue. Why releas an expensive software if it is not working?

- so you mean that if I use the FSX weather interface and set a wind to 010/80 at FL 350, then the wind will swing around like you say?I have to try it out right away, because I have never heard of such problems - before Active Sky came on the market.

I expect that this was a very short answer while you compose a decent answer to the questions I have asked.The DWC is off, so the threas you point to doesn't apply.Looking forward to a more elaborate answer from the support department.

First I want to ask who are the developers of AS, ASX and ASA? Are they present on this forum?Is Jim, "JSKORNA" a developer of the programs, a spokesman that knows all about them?The reason for asking is that it has been some "I honestly don't know"- replies lately. If this is a misunderstanding, I hope I am excused.Now to my question.I still have problems with violent wind shifts. And mr. Skorna has written here that this is a Simmconnect issue, and there is not much they can do about it.Now here is a suggestion, that is of course too late to suggest: AS, ASX and ASA should have been try-before-buy, (30 minutes working or something). Then many people would have discovered that this (expensive) addon is useless: Flying witn 100 knots headwind suddently changes to 100 knots tailwind at cruise: Useless.It doesnt help that it is a simmconect issue, it i s useless.OR: You could write at your homepage that "New intelligent interpolation fills gaps in weather data more realistically than ever before. The 4 closest data stations in each 90-degree directional quadrant are analyzed and weighted against distance, significantly increasing depiction accuracy in areas with few (or no) reports......"AND, in big, red letters: some/most people find this program useless, because of violent windshifts. But you wrote:Using FSX

simconnect mode 1, what is that?

I see people asking what can cause windshifts at cruise, and the reply from the developers are often of the type "try the DWC on or off to see if that helps.., "I don't have the registered FSUIPC myself, but you could try that to see if it helps, other than that, I don't know.."This is not version 1.0, you have developed ASV 6, 65, ASX, several updates, betas,, and now the grand ASA." comprehensive overhaul and upgrade of all underlying weather synthesis, interpolation and depiction systems, which have enabled significant breakthroughs and features never available until now..."So instead of asking about the wind shift problem, I will ask another questions, that I hope you have aswers for. * If the wind in all of northern Europe is from the north at about 70-100 knots, how is it possible to suddently have wind from the south at 90 knots - for 20 seconds - and then from the north again?Where is ASA/ASX taking it's upper wind from? There is no station reporting wind from the south at that altitude, of course, so how can this happen?* Is it impossible - or outside your knowledge - to make a filter that makes it impossible for the wind to change more than one knot or degree per second, or something? - Like "IF OLD_WIND_DIRECTION differs by more than 1 knot in 1 second THEN DISREGARD"?This is what the FSUIPC can do, is it rocket science? If it is a user error, it would make sense that you developers say "tick that option, and you are fine". But the answers are more like "I don't know really, try to fiddle with the options to see if it gets better...".So can you please - please - in the next update make sure you develop (?) a filter that makes it impossible for the wind to change more than one knot and one degree pr. second?This would make it possible to use your program, now it is useless.Does it mean that you developers see no windshifts, only some customers?Or do you see it all the time, but you don't know what to do about it?One gentleman here in the forum nailed it:"I just want someone to TELL ME.. exactly, bit by bit.. what I need to input in the options etc and FSX options and .. FSUIPC options to set this thing up so I don't have this problem but have winds at altitude..."Looking forward for a sollution that never gives me a 180 degree windshift at cruise.And please dont say "i honestly don't know what to do.."

it is difficult to make a screenshot, because I am running TripleHead2Go, and the print screen function doesn't work as normal.But in FS9 default weather tab, if you set the visibility layer all the way up to FL350 and move the slider to 40, then everetying gets foggy. It seems to be the exact same thing.But then I am more relaxed, that it is only something with my setup, which can be corrected.So if you are flying in cruise, and move the upper altitude visibility slider in ASA, from 200 to 190 to 180..,will you see a little difference for each step? And putting the upper alt slider to max, will the ground visibility slider not have an effect on the visibility in cruise altitude?Is there a default setting, can I reset the whole thing? (like deleting the ASA.cgf file, or something)?

Does it get foggy at cruise altitude or toward the ground?I wrote:When in cruise (FL330) when moving the surface visibility slider in options:visibility tab lower than 100, and leaving the upper altitude visibility on max, it gets foggy.So it is in cruise, as you can see.The question is, and was, how can the visibility in FL330 change to a foggy condition when I am adjusting the slider for surface visibility?And the next question was why changes from 200 to about 115 has absolutely no difference, but a lot of difference between 115 and 110, on the visibility sliders.That is about what I wrote, I dont think I have told you more this time?The bottom line question I am hoping for an answer for, is* what to put the visibility sliders and other sliders to, to get what I initially wanted?Instead of asking if I have this or that on or off, is it possible to just list what I am supposed to tick in the opions pages to have the visibility clear (and adjustable) in cruise, and adjustable on the ground, regardless of reall weather, which is then more smoothed than FS default weather?

ASA, FS9 through WideFS.I am trying to use the smoothing of the visibility option.When in cruise (FL330) when moving the surface visibility slider in options:visibility tab lower than 100, and leaving the upper altitude visibility on max, it gets foggy.If the surface visibility slider is supposed to set the surface visibility, how come it gets foggy in cruise?It also seems like the slider has no effect to the right of about 113, so moving it from 113 to 110, it changes from infinite visibility to pretty foggy in cruise.Instead of asking me if I have this and that ticked, what do I have to tick in the options pages to get a hazy visibility on the ground, and a cruise like visibility, with a smooth transitionas I climb and descend?registered FSUIPC : weather settings off. ASA not updated with the beta.

thank you for the reply.Is there a reason I haven't thought of, for giving descent 145 nm out? And it seem s to be exact 145 every time, is that the logic, so cannot hope for some variation?Now, I know exactly how many nm to the destionation, and if it happens at exactly the same distance every time,it could be more realistic by random this distance a bit?Or did I miss something?