Please, tell me what's wrong

[Kattenmoltas]

Hi,

I uses XP11pb3. Windows 8.1.

I have now switched from SMP 3.2 as worked so good, except the dark edges of the clouds. I always got all layers and smooth
transitions with the help of VenturaSky.

But now...
...I get nothing worth watching.

I've tried all sorts of different settings, with and without VenturaSky, Nooa, etc etc.
Nothing seems to help.

Somebody who has any idea
 

Best Regards

 

 

[sundog]

- Yes, that looks like broken coverage to me. If you don't like the look of the clouds, try setting the "crisp" setting in SMP to "fast" instead.

- With RWC in "always" mode, it will represent weather based on METAR downloaded directly from NOAA's web servers. This may not agree with what the NOAA plugin is showing you.

- Precipitation only occurs if you are actually underneath a cloud in an area where the METAR is reporting rain or snow.

 

Edited December 23, 2016 by sundog

[Kattenmoltas]

Hi,

My intention is not to be rude, but your response, I feel as perfunctory and wrong.

It is clear that at least one layer of cloud missing and that the area of cloud is too poor

I switched back to 3.2 and has almost exactly the same weather as the previous examples. The difference is clearly noticeable and

gives a rsultat that one can expect from a product that you pay for

I was attracted by rain effects in 4:01. But these do not outweigh the loss of a reasonable atmosphere.

Why launch a product that does not seem to be ready?

Hope you fix this, when I so far have regarded your prudukt as the best option.

But this ...

Have a good Christmas

 

[sundog]

It wasn't my intent to be rude; we're just handling a lot of customer contacts so being terse is a bit of a survival mechanism!

We're not aware of any issues specific to XP11 or SMP4, but if you can post your log.txt, metar.rwx, and maxx_metar.rwx files (any or all that exist) along with where you were flying and the result you saw and were expecting, we can dig into it further. A shot of your SMP and RWC settings would also help us track things down.

The product is "ready" - we're not aware of anything but minor issues in SMP 4.0.1 or RWC 1.1. If you can provide us with those details, we can figure out what's going on in your specific case. 

 

 

 

[Kattenmoltas]

Hi,

Ok, fine

If you are right that 4:01 is ready, then I assume that the problem must be related to beta versions of XP11.

However, all the other plugins I use, works right out of the box, even 3.2.

If it's a beta issue, then it feels a bit pointless to dig deeper in my individual files.

I will stick with 3.2 untill XP11 comes as a release candidate and I'll hope for the best.

 

Regards

[JohnMAXX]

[sundog]

I don't think this is an XP11 beta issue - if it were, thousands of SMP4 customers would be screaming at us about real weather not working.

We probably do need to dig into the specifics of your situation; it's likely some subtle setup or configuration problem.

 

[Kattenmoltas]

Hi

Here are the files that were requested.
The place is ICAO ESNU
I made a whole new download of 4.01 installed and removed most of my plugins, including NOAA and replaced it with FSGRW.
Based on the current weather in this example, then it should show further layer clouds, overcast 3500ft.
But it is missing, therefore also missing snowfall.
The area with the cloud is better in this example than in the previous examples.

I have for some days experimented with different settings, but never come close to what 3.2 delivered.

So I am still clearly unhappy with what 4:01 supplies.
Hope you can find some explanation with the help of attached files.

Regards

 

dialog SMP.7z

[sundog]

When using FSGRW, you should set RWC to "automatic", not "always" (this is spelled out in the RWC documentation.)

Because RWC was on "always," it was ignoring what FSGRW was saying, and instead was using raw METAR data from NOAA (in your MAXX_METAR.rwx file):

ESNU 021050Z 32009KT 9999 BKN029 M04/M07 Q1004 R14/75//45

That data only specifies broken clouds, so RWC / SMP was working properly there.

Hope this helps.

 

[Kattenmoltas]

Hi

Unfortunately this was not enough.

Take your time and look at this video. FSGRW will kick in after 40 seconds.

 

 

dialog2 SMP.7z

[sundog]

What's going on in this situation is a bit more complicated. According to your logs, SMP/RWC did pick up the correct cloud conditions, but it received a visibility distance of only 100 meters. So, the clouds were all washed out and invisible due to very low visibility.

100 meters is different from what FSGRW is indicating and also from what the METAR data is indicating (3400 m). My guess would be that X-Plane itself is seeing the report of light snow, and forcing lower visibility as a result. It's also possible this is some sort of issue with FSGRW, if it's directly setting visibility data via X-Plane's API.

SMP and RWC only deal with clouds, not visibility. For visibility, we just honor whatever X-Plane is telling us. My guess would be that if you raised the camera above the clouds and snow, the clouds would become visible in this particular scenario as visibility improved.