Active sky for msfs

[stephen speak]

Now one of the main things that turned me off msfs was the fact that my favourite weather add on..active sky wasn’t available on the platform..well this might be a game changer 

http://hifisimtech.com/asfs/

Edited April 14 by Norman Blackburn
fixed link

[Michele Benedetti]

Can’t wait for it, so we’ll finally have weather radars in MSFS. Once it comes, only the FsLabs Concorde/A330 is missing     Good times ahead for flight simmers

[stephen speak]

2 hours ago, stephen speak said:

Now one of the main things that turned me off msfs was the fact that my favourite weather add on..active sky wasn’t available on the platform..well this might be a game changer 

http://hifisimtech.com/asfs/

@Norman Blackburn..thanks norm

 

[Norman Blackburn]

11 minutes ago, stephen speak said:

@Norman Blackburn..thanks norm

 

welcome Stephen.  Screen readers just hate the additional FB parts.

[Søren Dissing]

2 hours ago, Michele Benedetti said:

so we’ll finally have weather radars in MSFS

Not so sure about that ...

Read the product description carefully. Seems this is just another preset-based program, like Rex and XEnviro. As for the historical wx bit, well historical presets would be a better term 

 

[David Arthur]

3 hours ago, Michele Benedetti said:

Can’t wait for it, so we’ll finally have weather radars in MSFS. 

MSFS already has weather radar….

[Franklyn Salomons]

34 minutes ago, David Arthur said:

MSFS already has weather radar….

Detailed I think is the missing word.

[David Arthur]

1 hour ago, Franklyn Salomons said:

Detailed I think is the missing word.

Ahhh....

Here's what Asobo's weather engine gives us at the moment;

As you can see, the wxr detects precipitation data in a 3D cone forward of the aircraft. I can introduce precipitation and the radar will paint it and I can move this precipitation layer up and down through the cone of detection. The range of detection can be changed but there is no tilt mechanism as such. This works well on preset weather and live weather.

It seems to me the problem with Asobo's live weather engine isn't wxr itself but boils down to three items;

Lack of cloud types

Lack of high level weather depiction 

Lack of turbulence within heavy weather systems; the wxr can detect it but there's no real need to avoid it in the first place.

Hopefully the release of 2024 will solve these issues. 

[Graham Collins]

The weather options in MSFS are perfectly fine for me as they are and amazingly authentic to look at.

I always fly in actual time and in the evenings here in the UK that means some night ops but if I want to fly in daylight I will fly in the US - still in real live weather.

[Johannes Lehmann]

On 4/14/2024 at 2:31 PM, David Arthur said:

Ahhh....

Here's what Asobo's weather engine gives us at the moment;

As you can see, the wxr detects precipitation data in a 3D cone forward of the aircraft. I can introduce precipitation and the radar will paint it and I can move this precipitation layer up and down through the cone of detection. The range of detection can be changed but there is no tilt mechanism as such. This works well on preset weather and live weather.

It seems to me the problem with Asobo's live weather engine isn't wxr itself but boils down to three items;

Lack of cloud types

Lack of high level weather depiction 

Lack of turbulence within heavy weather systems; the wxr can detect it but there's no real need to avoid it in the first place.

Hopefully the release of 2024 will solve these issues. 

It‘s good to see the Asobo is also making progress there. Still, let‘s see what Active Sky can bring to the sim, as none of the civil airliners available features a weather radar yet.
AS, the FSLabs Busses and the combination of the two are probably the only things that I still miss from P3D.
 

[David Arthur]

2 hours ago, Johannes Lehmann said:

It‘s good to see the Asobo is also making progress there. Still, let‘s see what Active Sky can bring to the sim, as none of the civil airliners available features a weather radar yet.

Yes, none of the civil airliners in MSFS have a working wxr…

…apart from the Maddog MD80, the Inibuilds A300, A310, A320,  the Working Title B787, B747, the ATR 42 and 72-600’s, the Asobo A320, and all the business jets using the G3000 or GNXi 1000 avionics suite…

[Steve Prowse]

I thought that this may be of some interest;

 

Advanced Historical Weather
In addition to including Live and Custom weather modes, we also offer Historical mode with comprehensive global weather data in hourly archives. Dynamic historical playback provides realistic changing weather as per the archived historical timeline. Optionally lock the historical time to your configured simulator time for easy date/time synchronization and control through MSFS.

 

 

[Tim_Marchant]

Its released now at 23 euros plus tax!

 

Regards

Tim

[Timm Rehberg]

I dont see a need right now. MSFS 2024 is approaching and we'll see in the next coming weeks how Asobo is improving the weather.
Its clear that it needs improvements, more features and this is also noted by Asobo itself. So actually no need for 23Euro.

[Ray Proudfoot]

2 hours ago, Timm Rehberg said:

I dont see a need right now. MSFS 2024 is approaching and we'll see in the next coming weeks how Asobo is improving the weather.
Its clear that it needs improvements, more features and this is also noted by Asobo itself. So actually no need for 23Euro.

Improvements include tornadoes. There’s been no indication historical weather will be made available. In fact, it had to be explained to Jorge what historical weather is. It took a while for the penny to drop. That tells you all you need to know. There will be no historical weather in MSFS2024.

[David Arthur]

21 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

 There will be no historical weather in MSFS2024.

Latest developer livestream says there will be historical weather in MSFS 2024.

[Søren Dissing]

22 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There will be no historical weather in MSFS2024.

Let's file this one under: "Posts that didn't age well" 

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/644304-historical-weather-planned-for-msfs-2024/

[Ray Proudfoot]

2 hours ago, David Arthur said:

Latest developer livestream says there will be historical weather in MSFS 2024.

Only for the last 24 hours. About time they woke up to what many were requesting. Still won’t convince me to buy it.

[Timm Rehberg]

14 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Only for the last 24 hours. About time they woke up to what many were requesting. Still won’t convince me to buy it.

If this is a key feature that makes you decide not to buy it, then I guess everyone can live without your purchase.
I have the understanding that Jörg and also Asobo knows pretty much what the community (majority) expects and thats also why MSFS2024 is a thing.
However I personally dont care about historical weather because not even the live weather isn't real and accordingly. Until this isn't even fixed, why would we have historical weather. And we all dont know about the "limitations" that comes from the partnership with MeteoBlue and such.

Not having several API's for 3rd party addons to inject something into the core sim and or overwrites stuff from the sim is something I am very welcome WHEN the basic/core sim stuff works properly. And I think this journey is well known and understood by Asobo to deliver better core stuff (for example weather).

I dont want external addons to run next to MSFS. It shows how even GSX makes even MSFS still unstable and sometimes to crash. Only god knows if its even more up to GSX for example or not. I rather want an Flight Simulator that focus on basic aviation related topics and weather is one key feature. Including weather radar possibility and that everyone runs on the/with the same weather. That brings SO MUCH more benefits than having an API available and everyone can inject what he wants. 

Edit: And tbh.. we actually know nothing really technical about MSFS2024. Until this changes, I wouldn't really argue about MSFS2024.

[Ray Proudfoot]

29 minutes ago, Timm Rehberg said:

If this is a key feature that makes you decide not to buy it, then I guess everyone can live without your purchase.

There are several key features that make it unattractive for me. Constant forced updates; no better alternative to Radar Contact; Some AFCADs locked preventing editing; no Concorde;  loads of time required to reprogram my GoFlight units; having to repurchase (for a third time) PMDG aircraft. Starting afresh with scores of third party airports.

Was there any need for your sarcastic comment?

33 minutes ago, Timm Rehberg said:

However I personally dont care about historical weather because not even the live weather isn't real and accordingly

I see you don't list Concorde in your fleet. That aircraft more than most requires accurate weather and temps. Taking off from any time zone many hours different to yours may not show realistic weather. And a sim that has only cumulus is hardly depicting accurate weather.

36 minutes ago, Timm Rehberg said:

I dont want external addons to run next to MSFS. It shows how even GSX makes even MSFS still unstable and sometimes to crash

I run multiple addon programs outside and inside P3Dv5. All work extremely well. No CTDs.

[stephen speak]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There are several key features that make it unattractive for me. Constant forced updates; no better alternative to Radar Contact; Some AFCADs locked preventing editing; no Concorde;  loads of time required to reprogram my GoFlight units; having to repurchase (for a third time) PMDG aircraft. Starting afresh with scores of third party airports.

Was there any need for your sarcastic comment?

I see you don't list Concorde in your fleet. That aircraft more than most requires accurate weather and temps. Taking off from any time zone many hours different to yours may not show realistic weather. And a sim that has only cumulus is hardly depicting accurate weather.

I run multiple addon programs outside and inside P3Dv5. All work extremely well. No CTDs.

I totally agree ray..you know my thoughts on FSL at the minute..I did ask how they’re going to get on with the constant updates but apparently it’s not a problem..we on P3D on the other hand have to wait for an update after the sim update..the same goes for active sky..

[Ben Mathon]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There are several key features that make it unattractive for me. Constant forced updates; no better alternative to Radar Contact; Some AFCADs locked preventing editing; no Concorde;  loads of time required to reprogram my GoFlight units; having to repurchase (for a third time) PMDG aircraft. Starting afresh with scores of third party airports.

- 24H historical weather : this year

- No better alternative to Radar Contact : this year

- No Concorde : soon, hope this year

Plus the Concorde cockpit will look way way better with a triple digits frame rate looking at your PC config. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

58 minutes ago, Ben Mathon said:

- 24H historical weather : this year

- No better alternative to Radar Contact : this year

- No Concorde : soon, hope this year

Plus the Concorde cockpit will look way way better with a triple digits frame rate looking at your PC config. 

24 hours compared to two years in ASP3D. 24 hours is hardly historical. 

Name the ATC program that will be as good as RC4.

It took several years to get 64-bit Concorde for P3D. I doubt even my system would produce 100+fps with the complexity of Concorde's FE panel.

How it looks is surely down to the skills of the graphical artist. PMDG VCs look superb in P3Dv5. I'm not aware the MSFS version is better visually.  I'm one of those unusual people who is happy with 30fps. It doesn't hammer my system like a 100+ fps would.

[Thiago Braun]

While not redone from scratch to make use of the latest tech, PMDG’s VC’s in MSFS still surpasses their counterparts in P3D due to higher-definition textures. I'm confident the same leap will occur with Concorde. Even if FSL makes minimal additional improvements, the enhanced lighting alone will provide a significant upgrade.

As of system utilization, MSFS is more efficient as well. Even when rendering the simulation at 120 fps, the GPU workload is effectively halved due to FG. 

[Ben Mathon]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

24 hours compared to two years in ASP3D. 24 hours is hardly historical. 

You want to fly the Concorde inside a hurricane that happened X months ago now?

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Name the ATC program that will be as good as RC4.

Beyond ATC by far and I own RC4 on FSX

[Ben Mathon]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

PMDG VCs look superb in P3Dv5. I'm not aware the MSFS version is better visually

PMDG adapted their P3D plane cockpit in MSFS, have a look at Inibuild or Fenix for exemple

[Søren Dissing]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

24 hours compared to two years in ASP3D. 24 hours is hardly historical. 

Sorry Ray, but 24 hours easily accommodates the main justification for historical weather used by you and most other proponents of historical weather - being able to experience the correct conditions for the time of the day in the timezone(s) you’re flying.

[Ray Proudfoot]

45 minutes ago, Ben Mathon said:

You want to fly the Concorde inside a hurricane that happened X months ago now?

Not that old chestnut again. 
 

46 minutes ago, Ben Mathon said:

Beyond ATC by far and I own RC4 on FSX

Have you seen the pricing? https://www.beyondatc.net/pricing
Pay and pay again it seems. Plus I don’t want something you have to speak to. Comms via push buttons is what I prefer. I look forward to an independent review. It would take something exceptional to beat the vectoring in RC4.

46 minutes ago, Ben Mathon said:

PMDG adapted their P3D plane cockpit in MSFS, have a look at Inibuild or Fenix for exemple

Sorry, not interested. What I have suits me fine.

33 minutes ago, Søren Dissing said:

Sorry Ray, but 24 hours easily accommodates the main justification for historical weather used by you and most other proponents of historical weather

Yes, I agree it goes some way to satisfying those who want to fly earlier in the day. I only use historical weather in P3D for flights in Asia and Australasia. I set the clock to 01:00 UT for daytime flights in that part of the world. Occasionally I set the day to yesterday for flights in the US.

But will they still have cumulus and no other cloud types? Rhetorical question. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

58 minutes ago, Thiago Braun said:

Even when rendering the simulation at 120 fps, the GPU workload is effectively halved due to FG. 

I hope you realise that’s a fudge. You’re not really getting updated scenery 120 times a second.

[David Arthur]

7 hours ago, Timm Rehberg said:

If this is a key feature that makes you decide not to buy it, then I guess everyone can live without your purchase.

7 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Was there any need for your sarcastic comment?

This was a sarcastic comment? It seems more like a statement of the obvious…..

You seem determined to turn a thread about Active Sky arriving in MSFS into a thread about your own flight sim choices.

 

 

[Ray Proudfoot]

7 minutes ago, David Arthur said:

This was a sarcastic comment? It seems more like a statement of the obvious…..

You seem determined to turn a thread about Active Sky arriving in MSFS into a thread about your own flight sim choices.

I’ve nothing more to say. I’ll leave the floor to you. I’m sure you must have lots to say.

[Duncan MacKellar]

Evening All, 

I am aware that P3D vs MSFS is a polarising debate. Let's leave the dramatic showdowns to other places. It helps my blood pressure. 

In the meantime, have a photo of my snoozing Shepherd! 

Thanks

Dunc

[stephen speak]

7 minutes ago, Duncan MacKellar said:

Evening All, 

I am aware that P3D vs MSFS is a polarising debate. Let's leave the dramatic showdowns to other places. It helps my blood pressure. 

In the meantime, have a photo of my snoozing Shepherd! 

Thanks

Dunc

Dunc..I started this thread to share some information for those who don’t use p3d and don’t have access to this fantastic add on that’s been a favourite for over 20 years in different iterations..that they can now get better weather..as that’s what makes flight simulation interesting and fun.. 

Steve 

[Duncan MacKellar]

7 minutes ago, stephen speak said:

Dunc..I started this thread to share some information for those who don’t use p3d and don’t have access to this fantastic add on that’s been a favourite for over 20 years in different iterations..that they can now get better weather..as that’s what makes flight simulation interesting and fun.. 

Steve 

Steve, 

100% - perfect reason to start the thread. No dramas with that at all.

My post was more because we have seen many MSFS threads end up going off the rails recently with MSFS vs P3D debates getting heated. Didn’t want this one to go the same way as there is zero need, and much better venues for those discussions than here. 

Dunc 

[David Arthur]

47 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I’m sure you must have lots to say.

Ahhh….would this be an attempt at sarcasm Ray?

In deference to Duncan’s charming woofer I’ll resist all irony but will take up your invitation;

After much humming and harring over whether to splash out twenty-five knicker on something that might be made obsolete with the release of ‘2024, yesterday evening I took the plunge and bought, installed and started using Active Sky.

 I must say, I’m pretty pleased I did too. Obviously haven’t had much time to explore all it’s features but installation was straightforward as is the gui.

So far I’ve only used it in conjunction with live weather but it’s certainly brought a pleasing variety to both cloud structure and cloud height. Winds aloft seem different too and I’ve only scratched the surface of what this can do so far.

A good purchase in my opinion.

 

 

 

[Andrew Wilson]

20 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

having to repurchase (for a third time) PMDG aircraft

For me personally, I find it a small price to pay considering the enjoyment and value I derive from this community. Reinvesting in products like ActiveSky for MSFS or purchasing updated versions of MSFS seems reasonable, particularly when considering the significant updates and support costs involved.

Perhaps, being exposed to the work involved in development for desktop Flight Simulation titles, I have a different perspective. 

I've only heard good things about ActiveSky for MSFS. So I'm keen to try it.

[Ray Proudfoot]

Andrew, it’s a very subjective area. If buying the PMDG a third time was the only barrier to me switching to MSFS I’d do it in a heartbeat. After all, the cost compared to what this system cost me is insignificant.

I have regular exposure to MSFS at a monthly flight sim meeting I attend. The two sims in use are MSFS and…. FSX. No P3D at all. The latter used by older members unwilling to make the switch. But MSFS just doesn’t excite me. Yes, the scenery is second to none but for me that’s the only benefit. The drawbacks previously mentioned outweigh the single advantage.

Until the last few weeks there was only Live Weather but now that Damian has worked out a way to get into the weather engine I have no doubt he’ll improve it as much as he’s able. Maybe you’ll finally see cirrus and other cloud types instead of cumulus.

The time for me to make a decision about what sim I would use was six months ago when my new computer arrived. But having waited years for a 64-bit Concorde I wasn’t about to dump P3D.

I’ve now optimised my system and everything is running great.

ASFS will be a great success and perhaps Asobo could be convinced to allow Damian access the weather internals much like Microsoft eventually allowed Pete Dowson into their original Flight Sim series.

Enjoy your flights! 

[stephen speak]

On 4/25/2024 at 3:35 PM, Ray Proudfoot said:

24 hours compared to two years in ASP3D. 24 hours is hardly historical. 

Name the ATC program that will be as good as RC4.

It took several years to get 64-bit Concorde for P3D. I doubt even my system would produce 100+fps with the complexity of Concorde's FE panel.

How it looks is surely down to the skills of the graphical artist. PMDG VCs look superb in P3Dv5. I'm not aware the MSFS version is better visually.  I'm one of those unusual people who is happy with 30fps. It doesn't hammer my system like a 100+ fps would.

why would anyone need 100fps when its wasted..the human eye can only keep up with 30-40fps anyway..you'll just be burning out your system quicker for no reason

steve

[stephen speak]

10 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said:

For me personally, I find it a small price to pay considering the enjoyment and value I derive from this community. Reinvesting in products like ActiveSky for MSFS or purchasing updated versions of MSFS seems reasonable, particularly when considering the significant updates and support costs involved.

Perhaps, being exposed to the work involved in development for desktop Flight Simulation titles, I have a different perspective. 

I've only heard good things about ActiveSky for MSFS. So I'm keen to try it.

andy..it also adds to the fact fslabs products are built with ad on's like this..gsx etc in mind..also it might add to a shorter development time for both msfs and the NEO and A330 for p3d..with that in mind have a good weekend

steve

[Thiago Braun]

10 hours ago, stephen speak said:

why would anyone need 100fps when its wasted..the human eye can only keep up with 30-40fps anyway..you'll just be burning out your system quicker for no reason

steve

Incorrect. It's truly astonishing that despite the prevalence of AI LLMs and the readily available correct information, such clearly erroneous conclusions continue to be spread.

In the context of flight simulation, this nonsense is usually shared by people who either have eye issues, or those that perhaps are not able/willing to run their programs in higher frequency rates for whatever reason.

I wonder if you have ever used TrackIR. The difference between lower/higher frame rates while panning is evident. I know because I used to jump between P3D and MSFS all the time.

Anyway, it's fine to enjoy simming at 30fps. However, it's important not to assume that others can't tolerate it and may actually prefer the smoothness of a 60+ fps experience. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

2 hours ago, Thiago Braun said:

Incorrect. It's truly astonishing that despite the prevalence of AI LLMs and the readily available correct information, such clearly erroneous conclusions continue to be spread.

In the context of flight simulation, this nonsense is usually shared by people who either have eye issues, or those that perhaps are not able/willing to run their programs in higher frequency rates for whatever reason.

I’m not sure you accusing those who can live with 30fps are in some way talking nonsense or have eye issues. In fact, my eyes have never been better since twin cataract ops last year. It all depends on how you use your sim especially when changing views.

I agree that when panning 30 will result in stuttering. That is cured with 60.

But when coming in to land your eyes should be fixed on your instruments and the runway. Absolutely nothing else and certainly not panning around admiring the view. In that situation 30 is absolutely fine.

Also, if you’re taxiing around a large airport with many Ai you’re lucky to get 30 in P3D. Even with my system I have to compromise.

And if you have a 30Hz monitor with VSync enabled as I have that gives me the smoothest views possible. I’m not hammering the CPU/GPU to get the maximum possible fps. I’ve tried it and you get microstutterers because of the demands placed on those items.

TrackIR is something completely different with different requirements and far more demanding of any sim.

[David Arthur]

3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

TrackIR is something completely different with different requirements and far more demanding of any sim.

Not wishing to sound like a contrarian all the time Ray but I’m not sure that’s true. I’ve run TrackIR continuously for over fifteen years.

It makes no extra demands on either software or hardware in my experience and has no detrimental effects on fps. Compared to panning with a hat switch it’s much smoother as the image isn’t being whipped around through a sudden 90 degrees.

If you’re struggling to reach 30fps with your state of the art system it would seem to suggest that P3D is giving hardware much more of a hammering than MSFS will in similar situations.

[Ray Proudfoot]

@David Arthur, you misunderstand me. I’m not blaming any software. I’m saying the action of panning around the VC requires a higher fps than 30 for smooth action.

As for struggling to reach 30 with my system I could reduce the number of Ai but prefer my airports to have realistic traffic. But by far the biggest consumer of system resources is the new Concorde. It’s the most demanding aircraft I have and significantly more hungry than the PMDG737.

I can just get 30 at Simwings Heathrow with Concorde and 160 Ai in the 80nm bubble. Several settings are well below max.

You don’t list your system but it had better be a good one if you plan to buy Concorde irrespective of the sim used.

[Ray Proudfoot]

I forgot to mention I'm running P3Dv5.3HF2 in 4K - 3840*2160. That has an impact over lesser resolutions.

[Craig Baillie]

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

You don’t list your system but it had better be a good one if you plan to buy Concorde irrespective of the sim used.

Individual systems, software setup and user environmental choices have a material impact on available P3D resources.

There are plenty users with older PC’s available to them, than 2024 PC hardware, having a lovely time.

Indeed my CPU & associated hardware is several generations older than current technology and there’s plenty of life in it yet.