Would like to know as well 
Yes, I totally agree.
And the chances of getting this clarified from The Devs is infinitesimally small.
2 Likes
That 's actually what i think about those fog circles or rain circles around airports since su7.
Man, there are several areas that really need serious attention/improvement. Big undertakings, major projects, while being resource constrained. Even if they cloned the Working Title team (my heroes) five times over, it would still take years.
Let’s hope they prioritize wisely.
1 Like
Thank you for the link. I’ve downloaded the pdf and will dive in as time permits. Looks like an awesome resource.
Thanks again, greatly appreciated!
1 Like
What a great resource, thanks for posting.
1 Like
My pleasure! Sometimes I take those resources for granted and forget that outside of US pilots who are pretty much required, not everybody has been exposed to them. I did a four-hour deep dive into aviation weather on my stream a month or so ago and it still didn’t get into quite everything.
I just wonder, if we are planning using the data those forecast models use then the forecast model would always be accurate to the forecast model right? That means the weather would always be planable. Even more predictable than the real weather because the forecast is always correct to the weather we see in the sim. Why didn’t they add planning tools that used the data those forecast models using then we would always be able to plan our flights and the weather would have been accurate to those.
I know Active sky exports their own weather data to simbrief for example to be able to plan with their weather data source.
Planning weather that changes all the time is really hard to do in real life too. The “planning” needs to be updated and real pilots needs to be aware of weather changes all the time. The weather can’t be updated because the METAR were wrong. The METAR needs to be updated. In flightsimulators we never need to be aware because the weather should always be predictable. If it’s not we get dissapointed and complain we couldn’t land at the planned airport. What happens if the weather changes in the real world? Who can we complain to that we couldn’t land at the planned airport in the real world? Or that it’s raining instead of clear sky? I bet we accept the situation and move on with our lives.
Well, if the weather needs to be 100% planable and predictable in flight simulators i’m totally fine with that. I just hoped we could have it like an optional feature instead of change it for all of the users. I still hope that will happen
I’m going to ask you to please stop assuming and please read the publication I posted. Try to operationalize your understanding of aviation weather. Find an instructor or mentor, learn the material, use the products, and see what they’re telling you rather than saying “I bet.”
Things change all the time and we don’t just look at a single product for a single airfield, rather dozens of products and many airfields at once. This paints a broader picture when taken in aggregate, shows trends, and yes, is fairly accurate most of the time. This is with the caveat that some pilots have more access to real-time data than others and we are all taught to understand the limitations of the products.
When I first saw the introduction video of how the weather was going to be implemented before the game released I was blown away by the collaborative methods and the brilliance of people. The result was clouds that act real so much so you can watch them grow and dissipates This is in itself is remarkable.
Weather so real? When flying and looking around I do not see the clouds “grow and dissipate” unless actually looking for it. SO I’m just going to say what I think needs to be said and that, the clouds and the collective brilliance of people who have brought this weather to us, is by all accounts ahead of it’s time. It’s clear the clouds have been dumbed down. I suggest this, as an option to use static clouds clouds that don’t “evolve”. Perhaps this could give them the headroom to do it. The clouds could move as a “Whole”.
Just throwing this out there on the shading of the clouds, which there has been many topics, and I feel the reason for volcanic clouds is because the sim is using one light source. If the blue sky could be reflected onto the clouds as a second light source this might hopefully be enough to washout the volcanic look to something a bit more grey on the side of blue could result. One can wish.
Just my 2 cents.
PACO572
2 Likes
True. That’s why we struggle with all those deep orange and yellow clouds every morning and evening. The colour of the sunlight is generally ok, but is not enough to realistically render the complicated lighting condition without diffuse light from the entire sky.
2 Likes
aviation weather? do pilots get a different weather system? the one that is filled with bubbles?
dont you think the weather experts should be creating the weather and the simulators adapt their tooling?
I remember all the complaints about the looping weather and jumps with the 7 day forecast we downloaded. so glad they went to hourly jumps.
which is what most of the fuss is about and one you keep ingoring
there is no single method that will give use all the desirables. we need options to choose realism over accuracy
in the qa Jorg dodged the part about weather and talked about payware. they really dont like talking about weather do they
2 Likes
- Data source.
- Data delivery (server capacity)
- Data rendering.
Lol, the bubbles are minor annoyances. It’s much more accurate and realistic than it was, despite them.
I’d love to see them go, and I’d love to see the rendering get better (as someone said, we need more light diffusion), but it’s far better than the dive and drive multi-hour gap method when the sim first launched.
The bubbles are a product of the lag in timing and lack of granularity in overall depiction. Close that gap and the bubbles go away.
I haven’t ignored that at all. I agree with that. That’s a straw argument meant for someone else.
Accuracy is realism, full stop. Everything else is pseudo-weather, which goes back to my main point: it was neither realistic nor accurate prior, it just looked better. If we can marry the look of the prior weather with the current accuracy (and improve that by another degree), then we’re really talking. But folks keep coming in and mixing the problems together, focusing on and arguing about just the parts they understand and completely ignoring or handwaving the parts they don’t.
Weather forecasting and operational products are something you take as a whole, rarely individual parts (save for a wind check on short final). It has to use those for a large part of the realism necessary to make a simulator work.
1 Like
Just so. And the same is true for how weather is then implemented and depicted in the sim. From source to eyeball there is a chain of dependency and conditions/limits in any part of the chain have knock-on implications up and down the chain.
so if I go outside now and look at the beautiful weather that doesnt match the recent metar report that weather I see is pseudo-weather. I now see the error of my ways thanx
2 Likes
That’s between you and your local station. Your description tells me nothing useful with which I could troubleshoot.
The clouds I’m seeing in the sim are not being bound by METAR. There are significant gaps in US METAR coverage where clouds exist - they traverse those areas and enter a METAR-bound area and do not change, only the visibility does, independent of the precipitation. That can be improved. But if nothing else, it tells me METAR is not having a significant effect on the cloud depiction in the sim. Yet, once again, that’s what folks come back to like some broken record straw argument.
Again, the clouds are entities that seem to be fed by several data sources.
I don’t know what you’re seeing, but the negative way you present it and troubleshoot it is not helpful.
Although I don’t think we’re necessarily entitled to it, I’d quite like an explanation from MS/Asobo as to why we lost the looks when we went to metar injections. I still don’t see why metar injection should require such a downgrade in the clouds looks.
I really think they took something very cool away when they did that to the clouds.
5 Likes
I agree out of curiosity’s sake. It’d be interesting to know what the method is behind the scenes.
2 Likes
That sounds very interesting- would you please provide a link? I definitely want to check it out.
Thanks in advance.
1 Like