Active Sky review

[MarcG 3,029]

Just flew around the South of England using Active Preset Control (I prefer this over Passive for some reason), plenty of nice clouds to gawp at and a very realistic looking sky when landing back at base (EGKA), as I looked out my window I saw the same looking sky....'nuff said!

Couple of pics, small rain clouds an issue (happens in default MSFS weather as well) but nice to see some higher clouds.




edit, couple more;

Edited April 23 by MarcG

[vgbaron 3,704]

2 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Notice I've changed from being a sceptic to praising the product after testing it in different scenarios over the last few days

 

and it will only get better as Damian fine tunes it.

[Adamski_NZ 965]

6 hours ago, Damian Clark said:

In Europe we are finding many such stations which cap at 5K ft, and then use NCD or NSC to specify no clouds above that threshold.  We don't see this in the USA where it's typical to see clouds up to and beyond 20K ft (although some equipment does filter, some above 18K, some above 24K, etc).  It's basically different everywhere you go.  We're working on improving the interpretation and combination of GFS+Surface data to bring mid + upper level clouds to NSC/NCD METARs.

Thanks for clearing up the confusion, Damian. Good to hear there's more tweaking in the pipeline 🙂

[Stearmandriver 2,322]

7 hours ago, sloppysmusic said:

Here's a quick comparison of MSFS Live vs Active Sky Live at ENNO (Notodden, Norway)

Ground shot looking up with METAR info shown.

I need a weather expert to tell me which is more accurate! I just LIKE flying with AS. Had some minor turbulence at 30000ft during flight, most welcome.

MSFS Live Weather vs Active Sky Live Weather - Quick compare at ENNO.

Both of them are plausible renditions of the broken layer at 10,800ft.  They're different, yes, but we don't have the data necessary to know which is more accurate - we'd need to see things like a SKEW-T.  My understanding is that Active Sky is taking into account the synoptic scale and upper air data to inform their cloud depiction though?  

What really stands out though is the very distinct and separate Few layer down lower.  This stands out realistically as a separate layer in active sky, but isn't visible in MSFS.  If the sky there looked as MSFS rendered it, there would likely be no report of a separate, lower layer in the METAR.

[DModjo 122]

Thank you @Damian Clark for the huge update and particularly reverting the excessive humidity! 

[SN737 141]

11 minutes ago, DModjo said:

Thank you @Damian Clark for the huge update and particularly reverting the excessive humidity! 

Yes I noticed this, thanks for the guy that pointed this out in Hi Fi's forum. If it was you, thanks very much man. And Damian of course.

[mikeklimek 158]

Any insight into how the turbulence settings in AS dovetail with the turbulence settings in FSRealistic?  Do they double up or does one overwrite the other?  

[Adamski_NZ 965]

1 minute ago, mikeklimek said:

Any insight into how the turbulence settings in AS dovetail with the turbulence settings in FSRealistic?  Do they double up or does one overwrite the other?  

I think FSR affects only *camera* views - based on whatever turbulence is injected, regardless of what/how generates it.

[Cpt_Piett 4,797]

Short video of 36kt crosswind landings in Flinders Island, Tasmania, on the latest beta. The airport doesn't have a METAR, so ASFS is doing some interpolation: 

YFLI 232242Z 27036KT 9999 14/06 Q1015 RMK ADVANCED INTERPOLATION

I thought the turbulence seemed a bit excessive here, both with AS and default. It was extremely hard to control the aircraft close to the ground. 

I do find though, that the aircraft has a much bigger tendency to float in strong winds using default weather. 

The first landing is with ASFS in preset mode, 2nd one with default after first shutting down ASFS, then starting a new flight. 

 

[sloppysmusic 264]

6 hours ago, Baber20 said:

Share screenshots of the latest beta pls

A ton coming tomorrow.. I mean later today zzzzz must... Do... One.. More.. Flight... 🛫✈️😎

[Cpt_Piett 4,797]

On an earlier flight today (also latest beta), I noticed the considerable difference in how stratus layers are depicted by ASFS vs default. 

ASFS: 

Default:

IMHO the ASFS depiction is much more realistic.

Also, during the last couple of flights, I've been thinking about how ASFS determines the cloud tops when there's no METAR info on this. The condition "tab" showed this on my last flight from Hobart to Flinders Island:

YMLT Launceston
@POS 232140Z 17015G25KT 9999 BKN030 BKN134 08/02 Q1012 RMK AS DEPICTED

BKN030 extends to:8000 feet (Cloud type:CU, Turbulence:Heavy)
BKN134 extends to:18456 feet (Cloud type:CU, Turbulence:Heavy)
FEW404 extends to:43912 feet (Cloud type:CI, Turbulence:None)

I thought the resulting cloudscape seemed quite convincing, with what I *think* was a high altitude cirrus layer:

I think I was above FL200 when I took the screenshot, if I remember correctly. At least I was above this layer:

BKN134 extends to:18456 feet (Cloud type:CU, Turbulence:Heavy)

One more thing: on all the flights so far I’ve barely seen any transitions.

Edited April 24 by Cpt_Piett

[sloppysmusic 264]

9 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Short video of 36kt crosswind landings in Flinders Island, Tasmania, on the latest beta. The airport doesn't have a METAR, so ASFS is doing some interpolation: 

YFLI 232242Z 27036KT 9999 14/06 Q1015 RMK ADVANCED INTERPOLATION

I thought the turbulence seemed a bit excessive here, both with AS and default. It was extremely hard to control the aircraft close to the ground. 

I do find though, that the aircraft has a much bigger tendency to float in strong winds using default weather. 

The first landing is with ASFS in preset mode, 2nd one with default after first shutting down ASFS, then starting a new flight. 

 

Sorry for 2 posts so close but you had to post that JUST as I was quitting for the night? 🌃😁

Yes.. That first one DID make for a crazy replay 👀

One thing I've noticed is that before asfs every take off from single piston to jetliner took excessive rudder just to keep even close to center line but now.. Just like it used to be in older sims? 

Mentioned it as you had rather excessive low altitude turbulence there.. Not same as crosswind but.. Reminded me of it. 

Complicated subject. I'm loving it 😍

[Cpt_Piett 4,797]

1 hour ago, sloppysmusic said:

One thing I've noticed is that before asfs every take off from single piston to jetliner took excessive rudder just to keep even close to center line but now.. Just like it used to be in older sims? 

Mentioned it as you had rather excessive low altitude turbulence there.. Not same as crosswind but.. Reminded me of it. 

Yes... I'm sure HiFi will continue to refine things, but the turbulence in that video was CRAZY! But it was just as crazy with default. Btw turb set to realistic in the sim + I'm using realistic mode in ASFS with only transition and interval tuned manually. 

In the video I did not have enough rudder authority in the TBM to keep the aircraft aligned with the runway. But... 36kts...

1 hour ago, sloppysmusic said:

Sorry for 2 posts so close but you had to post that JUST as I was quitting for the night? 🌃😁

Haha, I promise not to post anything until you wake up 😁

1 hour ago, sloppysmusic said:

Complicated subject. I'm loving it 😍

Me too! Great discussions in this thread. 

EDIT: 

Quote

Slowed general cloud transitions, especially during low/high coverage stages, approximately 50%. Now takes approximately 8 minutes to smooth from clear to overcast or vice versa, at default 50% slider setting.

So far I’ve had it set to 5K including around 2hr flight time with the latest beta. Not sure if I should change the setting based on the changes…

Edited April 24 by Cpt_Piett

[vgbaron 3,704]

Really nice stuff guys. One caution on screenshots though, a few in a post are fine but if you are going to post a bunch of them, put then in the screenshot forum and link in post. We have a lot of users who access from mobile devices and scrolling through 6 or 7 screenshots can be tedious.

Pllease keep posting the videos and screenshots, they are really informative.

And Capt_Piett - a 36kt crosswind in a TBM  900? Are you suicidal? Max cw component is 20kts , it's possible that tutb was justified. 🙂 

 

[Cpt_Piett 4,797]

28 minutes ago, vgbaron said:

And Capt_Piett - a 36kt crosswind in a TBM  900? Are you suicidal? Max cw component is 20kts , it's possible that tutb was justified. 🙂 

Haha - I was hoping for 42kts but arrived a bit too late! I tend to test everything to the limits, including my own capabilities 😜

In the previous flight I actually committed virtual suicide in the Aleutian Islands in the Turbo Arrow as I got lost in IMC low vis in icing conditions and lost visual contact with the airport. The only available navaid was an NBD station, but I didn’t get a signal… so I was flying around aimlessly in the fog with ice building up on the windshield…

I’ll keep the screenshot limit in mind.