Live Weather - how accurate is it in MSFS 2024? A comparison

[utd4life12]

I decided to analyse the Live Weather in MSFS 2024 to see just how accurate it actually is. I’ve made comparisons against real world conditions and also the Live Weather functionality in X-plane 12, to see just how the other sim handles such data, being a key part of any flight sim.

Test 1 - High level cloud.

For this test, I used an area of the USA where there is widespread high cloud, much of it is not being captured by the real life METARs as it is too high and the ceilometers don’t detect it.

KHVR airport

MSFS24

Unfortunately, it did not depict the higher cloud well at all, with just generic blobs of cloud.

X-plane 12 - Really accurate high cloud as per real world conditions.

KGGW airport

MSFS 2024

Unfortunately, really poor attempt again with the denser higher overcast cloud completely missing.

X-plane 12

CYYN airport

MSFS 2024 - A little better coverage, but still generally quite poor.

X-plane 12

Thunderstorm/Convection simulation

Next I decided to look at convection/Thunderstorm simulation.

SBUL airport

SBUL 142000Z 33010KT 4000 -TSRA BR BKN006 BKN030 FEW040CB BKN100 19/18 Q1015 RERA -

MSFS 2024 - Whilst it did simulate the rain and cloud, there was no lighting or thunder and no storm cells in the area.

X-plane 12 - Much more accurate, with lightning, rain, thunder and actual TS cells in the area.

MDLR airport
MDLR 142000Z 09006KT 6000 TSRA FEW014CB BKN016 BKN070 24/24 Q1010 CB/ALL/QDS- METAR -

MSFS 2024 - again it had the clouds simulated quite well, but no sign of Thunder, Lighting or storm cells.

X-plane 12 Dark miserable skies, with big storm cells in the area.

Cirrus cloud according to live conditions

For the testing of Cirrus clouds in live Weather, I tried the area around KEED airport, as this had lots of cirrus present in real life:

MSFS 2024 - the new cirrus clouds nowhere to be seen, with just the usual generic puffs of clouds.

X-plane 12 - Had lots of beautiful cirrus, just like in real life.

Despite X-plane 12 not being as visually advanced as MSFS 24, it’s obvious with the testing I’ve done that in terms of weather simulation such as cloud cover and density, cloud type, thunderstorm simulation and much more, that X-plane 12 wins hands down when compared to MSFS 24 in terms of its accuracy to real life conditions.

Whilst MSFS 24 clearly shines in other areas such as scenery, when it comes to flying in a dynamic, realistic weather environment, it’s a huge fail. This is by no means an attack on MSFS, it has the potential to be fantastic, but a flight simulator without proper and accurate environment simulation lacks so much immersion and flying experience.

[Foxhound6050]

it’s been 3 years that we have this issue, they didn’t focus on fixing live weather and make it more realistic

[utd4life12]

@Foxhound6050

it’s been 3 years that we have this issue, they didn’t focus about fixing live weather and make it more realistic

Yeah sadly MSFS 2024 is plagued by the same deficiencies and bugs 2020 had when it comes to live weather depiction and I don’t think there is any intention by the developers to fix or improve things, I’d gladly be proved wrong.

[arniex78]

dear @utd4life12 - we have known each other for a very long time in this forum - I would like to thank you for your detailed reports and messages.
We (and many others for sure) have the same weather affinity and view on the importance of weather in a flight simulator. unfortunately (although several times indicated otherwise, but after such a long time with the same flaws) I don’t think that developers or the people responsible for the weather think the same as many others here.
It’s enough if there are a few clouds that look like clouds, apparently. Unfortunately I couldn’t see any real improvement in the weather visualisation in MSFS 2024 (except for these cirrus clouds and possibly more cloud density) (yes ok the clouds might vary a bit more, and the look is better - but this is probably due to the increased cloud density). There were enough detailed reports here, already at various MSFS 2020 discussions and reports from many and hints on ‘flaws’ and even how to do it better. Unfortunately, this has not been implemented in msfs 2024. I am a bit sad about this, because I basically like the MSFS very much, as you know (since MSFS2020 Alpha here) and a lot of potential is gambled away here.
But the strange thing is - if you set the values manually, it is very well possible to visualise certain things, so the engine is capable of doing so. METEOBLUE also has (would have) enough data for the whole thing - now the question arises to me why this is not being implemented ?
Is it a performance problem or do they not know how to implement it, or is it just not important ? The next question is - why do you allow the tools e.g. Active Sky to set the weather per station and not always worldwide - Damian from AS would have so much knowledge to implement this better for sure. We don’t have RWR visibility in a ‘simulator’ so far ?? Like I said, maybe it’s an imagination (we’ve already discussed it elsewhere) but it seems to me that some of the ‘density’ of the weather has been taken away with the, well I would say 2nd patch, maybe it’s too much detailed weather for the servers to have. I don’t know, as I already said, I don’t want to do Asobo wrong,and on the other hand if I can’t do it already then I’ll pass it on to third parties or on to developers outside !
Of course it’s complaining on a high level when you see what we already have (including Xplane) - but it could easily be done better, probably without much effort. We have also mentioned the option - maybe if the data from METEOBLUE with more detail costs so much - I would be ready for a subscription for a ‘profi weather’ !
Anyway, thank you for the reports !
BR, Arnie

[utd4life12]

I think like anything in life, before you can go on and improve something or make it better, you must first acknowledge it is wrong. Although there are many many bug reports that are marked ‘bug logged’, we’ve never had any proper acknowledgment from Asobo that they will work on these live weather issues and make it better.

Every time there is a patch, or a sim update, I cautiously read the release notes to now be disappointed every single time because there are never any reference to live weather fixes or improvements.

We’ve both been in it since 2020 alpha, so we know how amazing it can be as it was at release of 2020. I agree also, at release of 2024, it looked much better than it does now. I suspect the detail has been dumbed down to release load on the servers.

[arniex78]

@utd4life12

We’ve both been in it since 2020 alpha, so we know how amazing it can be as it was at release of 2020. I agree also, at release of 2024, it looked much better than it does now. I suspect the detail has been dumbed down to release load on the servers.

So to be honest, after the release I really thought - ‘oh this looks like MSFS2020 but before the SU5/6 patch’ - and also mentioned it positively in several forums - but now I’m not sure anymore - I see again these ‘METAR’ accumulations and the rest that has already been reported several times…so probably no delusion !

[utd4life12]

Yes, I agree I was pleasantly surprised at release of 2024.

I suspect something happened like:

1. the metar wasn’t working properly at release so we were seeing pure meteoblue data only and it looks much better.

2. the detail has been lowered to lower stress on the server (I suspect more this one)

[CharlieFox00]

@utd4life12

Test 1 - High level cloud.

For this test, I used an area of the USA where there is widespread high cloud

I don’t know what time you used for your first test, but for some supporting evidence, here’s the FAA’s webcam from KHVR, looking southwest at about 18z today:

If I can find a webcam to differentiate what’s going on in the sim and the real world, it’s usually pretty solid evidence of accuracy or the lack thereof.

Nice work, by the way

[Squibby6134]

Honestly, play the better sim for you and stop worrying yourself. Msfs has a its weather system that despite small improvements (which IMO do improve the look of the skies) is basically the same as the previous iteration with all it’s shortcomings. I can guarantee it will never change significantly despite constant feedback from the playerbase, either due to technical complexity or just requiring far too much effort to overhaul.

If anything we may see a backside on future as they scramble to deal with bandwidth and performance bottlenecks.

Enjoy what we have while it lasts

[utd4life12]

@Squibby6134

Honestly, play the better sim for you and stop worrying yourself.

I’m quite happy to feedback, I do so for XP as well when I get test builds. Their developers are far far more responsive to feedback and listening to their user base and really want to improve core features such as weather. Sadly the same can’t be said for MSFS. There is no ‘better sim’ they’re both different and both have their strengths and weaknesses in different areas depending on what you as the end user want to get from it.

Having said that, Asobo over promised and under delivered yet again. When you watch the Q&As leading up to release, they mention for example thunderstorms in live weather having being worked on in 2024, yet still we don’t have them. I think it’s good to keep pushing for accountability and improvements, at the end of the day I paid for premium deluxe to support the developers, it’s my wish to see this area of MSFS be focused on so I will keep pushing for it.

[utd4life12]

@CharlieFox00

If I can find a webcam to differentiate what’s going on in the sim and the real world, it’s usually pretty solid evidence of accuracy or the lack thereof.

Nice work, by the way

Thanks for this. Yes I usually try and find some webcam footage as well to confirm what I’m seeing, or at least what I expect to see. Whilst I know ‘what you see out the window’ can often be a poor benchmark to try and compare with, the reality is actually Xplane about 80% of the time actually does look very close, whereas MSFS I’d say now looks as you would expect less than 30% of the time.

[JakTrax78]

I’ve been quite disappointed with the supposed cloud improvement in FS2024. I’ve yet to see the new cirrus. Atmospheric lighting is better, though (especially with the new Rayleigh scattering).

[Silvera1657]

In terms of reality MSFS cannot beat X-Plane and it is still the case. If Xplane had the same visuals, no one would be using MSFS for accurate flying.

Thank you for this detailed comparison, i’m not surprised. Developers keep telling stories about how accurate live weather is becoming but that was never the case, neither in 2020 nor in 2024. Sad but true.

[Flusingo]

Thanks for the comparison! I think that the clouds in FS 2024 look much worse than in FS 2020. Clouds and weather haven’t been improved. Another promise that hasn’t been kept.

[TomL7753]

I think this is an opportunity to quote Jorg Neumann once again. This is what he said in September 2021:
“Weather for us is a Big Deal. It is something we are heavily, heavily investing in. I think with Meteoblue we have a great partner. Late this year you will get this first Update [remark: SU7], we’re planning on another which will be really awesome when it happens. It will probably be in 2022, it could be as late as 2023. Weather is one of those things. It’s where planes live, it’s got to be awesome. We will get it as good as you can get it. That is really the goal”.

I have already said it elsewhere: that goal has obviously changed, away from a simulation environment that is as realistic as possible (“where planes live”) to a more entertainment oriented environment.
The two do not have to be mutually exclusive, but yet they clearly are, at least when it comes to development priorities.
In my opinion, it is dishonest not to address this obvious fact for years and instead to keep avoiding it (“we need to talk to Meteoblue”).

I support everything that has been said in this thread and thank @utd4life12 for his tireless work on weather topics, which unfortunately I think will be in vain. If only Jorg Neumann would finally be honest, at least this lost time could be put to better use.

[utd4life12]

I’m afraid I too will eventually reach the end of what little patience I have left for any improvements to the weather. It already frustrates me that it falls on deaf ears.

Xplane has its issues too, it’s not perfect by any means. But the difference is that 1) their dev team recognise and acknowledge how important it is to get weather right and accurate in a flight simulator and 2) they are receptive and open to feedback and implement change based on it to improve this core feature.

What I really think MSFS needs is firstly, open and honest communication from the development team. There are several major live weather bugs that have been tagged ‘bug logged’ for years now, with no update on when or if they will be fixed. This would be a good starting point, tell us what the plan is, or if there is no intention to fix them, then tell us that too, we’d rather know.

I then think there needs to be a weather dedicate update, not just a sim update but an update that focuses purely on improving the live weather, with a proper beta run or flighting run you can opt into and provide real meaningful feedback.

It’s sad when we have such beautiful add on aircraft and such an amazing visual living world scenery wise, for the actual environment we fly in to be so poorly simulated.

[Coleo91]

Yesterday TBM930 flight from EGPF to LFRC.
Preparing flight with Ventusky about clouds, wind etc… I was expecting for 3 clouds layer: Bottom, medium and higher. Departing EGPF and climbing to FL300 there was really 3 clouds layers. First 1500 to 5000’, second 9500 to 16000’ and third higher cirrus 27000 to 29000.
When approaching LFRC 3000’ according to Ventusky I was expecting for towered Cumulus with rain showers and that’s what I get.
So selecting parameters on LIVE give a correct weather

[arniex78]

@Squibby6134

I can guarantee it will never change significantly despite constant feedback from the playerbase, either due to technical complexity or just requiring far too much effort to overhaul.

You’re basically right, but then I shouldn’t PROMISE something that I can’t keep - just by remembering and looking at the ‘episode weather’ - some of it isn’t true at all. (or most ) !
And I can’t stand in front of the community and tell them how ‘amazing’ it will be and that ‘everything’ is possible. Even Seb said in the preview of 2024 that the interaction between the clouds is much better. That may be true in part, but it’s not really better. I can’t advertise something and then make myself look a bit ‘stupid’ and above all make the community look a bit “stupid”, or at least those who are constantly reporting here. That’s not one of us, I know very well what I see or don’t see.
Imagine a Bugatti salesman telling everyone ‘yes, this thing does 400 km/h’, but then I get in and the thing only does a hundred at most - am I allowed to do that?
Like I said, you’re partly right, it’s complaining at a high level - but for some people it’s important and we’re paying for it - what I’m asking is that someone stands up and at least makes a clear statement about the state of the ‘bug-logged’ things or says: ‘ok, that’s the best we can do, sorry’ - it’s very simple - and it’s a small thing compared to what’s happening in this world, but don’t hold out unnecessarily!

[utd4life12]

@arniex78

Imagine a Bugatti salesman telling everyone ‘yes, this thing does 400 km/h’, but then I get in and the thing only does a hundred at most - am I allowed to do that?
Like I said, you’re partly right, it’s complaining at a high level

If all comes down to accountability, which there seems to be a lack of at Asobo. Like your example you give, whilst to some it probably seems far fetched and dramatic compared to a desktop game, I know that in my career I am accountable for my decisions, if I promise certain things then don’t meet those promises, I have to explain why. That accountability is missing with MSFS. Which is again just a huge shame when you have a good amount for the community making detailed reports and really willing to work with the developers to test, provide feedback and make it better.

Sadly as others have said I think the goal posts have significantly changed and the end goal is no longer for it to simulate as close to real life and be the best weather simulation, but for it to look dramatic and entertaining, which of course pleases a large degree of the user base, but at the same time it leaves behind also a large group of people who were told we would not be left behind.

[arniex78]

@Coleo91

Yesterday TBM930 flight from EGPF to LFRC.
Preparing flight with Ventusky about clouds, wind etc… I was expecting for 3 clouds layer: Bottom, medium and higher. Departing EGPF and climbing to FL300 there was really 3 clouds layers. First 1500 to 5000’, second 9500 to 16000’ and third higher cirrus 27000 to 29000.
When approaching LFRC 3000’ according to Ventusky I was expecting for towered Cumulus with rain showers and that’s what I get.
So selecting parameters on LIVE give a correct weather

I have always flown the last few flights with live weather - I have never seen continuous cloud layers, or very less - especially not between the METAR stations - and that is what is sometimes criticised here - I refer to my topic:

Short Feedback LIVE Weather!

Just wanted to give some short feedback here - maybe add a forwarding to the developers by community manager ! Since I initially had very positive impressions compared to the MSFS 2020 weather, I also wrote this in various forums and I didn’t really want to report negative things about the LIVE Weather But now I’m not sure if this had anything to do with the last update, hopefully they didn’t reduce the weather accuracy here to gain bandwidth, maybe just an imagination but on the first flights…

This is the same thing that happened in MSFS 2020.
But as you also say - often it hits the spot - and that’s the question and what we may be trying to clarify.
like right now, looks pretty similar to what I see out the window, it’s gusty and unpleasant, very well presented - it’s a station without METAR data - and then again, I have no clouds at all ! (probably METAR data active again)! who knows !

Is it possibly the case that at certain times data is used that is current or closer to the report and that in turn is turned into a kind of generic data?
That’s why it’s good that there are people reporting - it can’t be bad for anyone!
BR