I would say just let us have what ActiveSky was able to provide for FS)/FSX and I would be willing to bet almost everyone would be happy.
I know I was very happy with the results I was able to get between ActiveSky and FSUIPC.
Quite a few times I would literally sit on the virtual ramp at KONT while working on a cfg file etc during the gestation of the different Connie versions and when it started to rain on my real window it usually would do so in FS as well a few minutes later 
The same goes for the winds etcâŠbut here FSUIPC did modify the directional changes because occasionally there would be 180° swings that did not happen in the real METARs.
Doubtful. I sure wasnât, but it was the best we had at the time.
Had some really frustrating times flying around Florida and other places in the afternoons using ActiveSky, every 15 minutes (or whatever I set it to) the thunderstorms would all shuffle around, the existing ones would magically dissipate, new ones would magically morph into place as fully mature thunderstorms where there was clear air a minute before. Things like NEXRAD and weather radar was useless since by the time you had started out on your path along a clear stretch the storms all moved around at random and your clear path is suddenly inside a storm. Raining starting from clear skies a minute before the cloud faded into view. A completely unrealistic mess, focusing on âfeaturesâ and weather snapshot comparisons rather than how weather actually works and how a pilot adapts to it. That is what happens if you use weather snapshots and donât bother simulating weather dynamics.
âbet almost everyone would be happyâ
I said almostâŠso you were not.
Maybe the Wx in CA was more stable than FL. Frankly it makes no difference since at least at the moment it is not available and what is in the sim is â â â â .
Yeah agree, there are weather types where Active Sky works great. Fast moving thunderstorms is the main exception but yeah in many places I was also happy with it.
In CA we have the particular issue of smoke obscuring visibility in large areas part of the year, weather modeling will not predict that, something for Meteoblue to think about how to address.
Gâday there All ~S~
Currently sitting on the fence has been a very wise decision, as with ALL the other MSFSims when they came out new, were quite tatty and not very good , just like our NEW MSFS , fulla bugs and p[roblems I am seeing, So, I will wait .MS is a very cheesey outfit. the worst thing they did was to get rid of the Zone !
Now to task, aftert jeppsen jumped ship and we have a new metar data program for this sim, has ANYONE thought of, or have even tried to âslip it inâ to FSX as a replacement work around ?
is the coding THAT difficult to fudge through ?
I have tried FSXWX and it was pretty ok but a pain in the 6. WHY can it not âtagâ onto the already present jeppsen integrated FSX weather program ? as i thought it would be just a matter of misleading the sim into thinking it was going to jeppsens live weatjher. CAN the new MSFS weather program work within FSX ? .
I shall keep looking here to see how the new sim is cracking on, and wait till a heap of updates and fixes arrive.
thanks
Sharkzz
NSW south coast
flying from Moruya, Albion Park & Cresswell. as well as Narooma lakes and South coast lakes in general.
hoo roo.
Just my usual chiming in again. Reporting another experience of inaccurate weather, both in terms of the MB forcast that the game uses, what my local news station weather forecast is, and what is being depicted in sim.
Winds, temps, pressures, close enough. Visibility? Cloud cover? Precipitiation? Why bother. Slight chance of rain this morning here (central Indiana) according to MB. Clearing skies for the morning forcast according to my local weather station. Game depicts zero visibility thunderstorms.
This is the norm in my experience. At least after SU5. SU4, while not 100% accurate, was at least accurate enough to the MB forcast that I could correctly plan a flight and know what to expect on my route. Post SU5 and into SU6 and that has gone well out the window.
From David in the developer Q&A when discussing âreworkedâ weather system:
David â We knew that we needed to rework the weather, especially for Vatsim simmers because the METAR implementation wasnât perfect. We took advantage of the rework of the weather to improve the whole system. The intent is to get fresher data than the current half a day forecast data.
The METAR will be merged/blended with this new forecast data system.
Seems like we have heard this before.
Live Weather been using r/w METAR data for airport wind, temperature and pressure for many months, and in general those three parameters have been very accurate. Up to now, Live Weather has never used the METAR data for clouds precipitation and clouds. That is what is coming in SU7. It remains to be seen how well they will be able to merge those three parameters with the surrounding weather from the MeteoBlue model.
1 Like
Wind data aloft are wrong again - Iâm showing steady southwesterly winds at 40 knots at FL300.
Meteoblue and all other models show I should get northeasterly winds.
1 Like
How they even manage to blend those it still need to transission between them at some point. I think itâs hard to implement 2 different sources and make that perfect. Real weather that occuring right now is not based on reports and does not need to transission between those.
I see thanks. Really wonder how there are going to blend all these things
1 Like
Just tried taking off from Tashkent, and was denied:
Another case of the depiction not matching the data:
As I was posting this, this cloud drifted over:
Yeah, it clearly takes into account the METAR youâve posted which has only 4 km visibility due to fumes. And since MSFS canât simulate that, it looks like summer weather :).
1 Like
Horrible âŠ. Vissability is one of the most important thing in aviation weather ⊠and after all this time not even remotely âsimulatedâ in this âsimulatorâ
Partially I am happy about this though ⊠when i see how my GPU explodes with high level clouds âŠ. I wonder what will happen with fog on the ground
Those clouds you could see where right at ground level. They were all drifting towards the airport I was at. When I took off my takeoff roll took me right through that cloud in the final image. I think this is the sims best effort at portraying that METAR.
At the present time, (SU6), the sim only uses wind, temperature and pressure from a r/w METAR It does not use any reported clouds, precipitation or visibility from the METAR. Those three parameters still come from the MeteoBlue forecast model.
If the model âpredictsâ that there will be clouds, precip or low visibility, it will create them - but whether those items exist or not has nothing to do with what might be contained in the current METAR.
Apparently, the big change in weather that is coming with SU7 is that Live Weather will, (for the first time), use the METAR parameters for clouds/precip/visibility in lieu of the forecast model prediction - at least for airport surface weather.
Hopefully this will mean that SU7 will have improvements to the simâs visibility function. At present, even when using the custom weather menu, visibility can only be set in terms of âparticle densityâ, and that does not permit setting visibility in standard aviation units of miles/kilometers (or yards/meters for low vis situations). This precise visibility functionality has been missing in the MSFS weather system since the sim first released.
Live Weather can and does simulate very low visibility (if the forecast model predicts it), but it does so by putting a cloud right on the ground.
What has always been lacking is low, (but not extremely low), visibility - (say 1 to 3 miles). The particle density setting by itself cannot achieve that even when set to maximum density.
6 Likes
Well, now I really wonder where does MSFS takes the weather data (clouds, âvisibility,â present weather etc.) from.
So far I thought they used the NEMS model from Meteoblue, but that doesnât seem to be the case.
I have also added real time satellite imagery (curtesy of Czechâs meteorological institute - CHMI) and Meteoblueâs maps.
The sky in the game doesnât match Meteoblueâs NEMS model, the ingame info before starting a flight doesnât match ATIS, nor current IRL METAR report. Itâs really confusing. Just see for yourselves:
This is the current METAR for LKMT:
METAR LKMT 120600Z 00000KT 4000 BR OVC012 04/04 Q1024 NOSIG RMK REG QNH 1019=
This is how the current weather is represented in the sim:
ATIS is saying calm winds (that is correct with the current METAR), visibility of 2 km (thatâs off) and SCT006 (also off).
The intro information is reporting calm winds (true to current METAR) but visibility of 15 km. That doesnât correlate neither with METAR nor with ATIS.
This is how it looks IRL from a webcam:
Same thing with LKTB, I wonât add it here, you get the gist.
Here is the satellite imagery to compare it with current model predictions. First is NEMS (clouds and visibility), the second is ICON (much more precise):
3 Likes
yeah i have totally clear sky at eprz. metar says ovc 600 and rain.
With your example, you can see significant variations in the predicted cloud cover via Meteoblue. We donât know which models are being used, how old they are, etc at any one place. From my understanding they are likely 12 hours old.
1 Like
Whenever I want to perform a landing to EDDM during a foggy weather, Iâm always welcomed by a partly cloudy or nice sunny day 
I really hope some improvements for the SU7 but I keep my expectations low.
2 Likes