Also, the pic depicts either a westward-moving tornado, an early-morning tornado, or the precipitation core of the storm is entirely absent. All fairly rare (but not unheard of) in the overall scope of things.
Either way, the aircraft is in and heading toward a place where it should never be.
Maybe these things will spawn any time you’re blocking the runway for more than 5-10 minutes. I wouldn’t mind that. Like when you stand still too long in old video games.
Visibility is rendered in Live weather only around airports having a METAR, what creates bubbles. Between METARs clear visibility is always rendered what is unrealistic. Since Meteoblue forecast exists for visibility, it should be injected in Live Weather engine to create more uniform zones so that flying conditions will be more realistic.
Example: arriving at LFAT, visibility 6000m, we can see the bubble limits:
Looking around, another airport close by with a METAR also reporting limited visibility.
100% behind this.
It’s such a shame there are so many trivial things with a large number of votes that I fear things really needed like this just get totally hidden.
Unfortunately, the meteoblue visibility data is not realistic. Try matching it with METAR at some Indian airports (Eg: VABB,VIDP) and you’ll see what I mean. Instead, they can improve upon the visibility depiction by interpolation between METAR stations. They can also use satellite imagery to get some kind of data to approximate this: EOSDIS Worldview
I disagree with this statement. I think many users are misusing the “realistic” term, wanted to say that the Live weather they are seeing at the time they are using the sim is the same than the one out of their window or the airport they are flying at. If they are not matching then they are saying Live weather is unrealistic. Instead they should use “accurate/inaccurate”. A realistic weather system in the sim is when you are having a set of meteorological data (clouds/visibility/wind/temperature/pressure) resulting in the generation of realistic cloud formations, weather fronts, visibility, airflows (wind/gusts/up-down draft) all over the globe and as close as they could exist in the real world but not necessarily at the time your are flying.
Meteoblue is generating weather forecast 24/24, all over the world. Even if that model cannot obviously be accurate everywhere since it is a forecast, it provides much more data than METARs and consequently Live weather realism should be better. Some improvements are needed but all data are available to make it possible.
I don’t see how to render realistically visibility all over the world by just using METARs interpolation. METARs not always contain visibility, or they contains CAVOK that just mean >10Km, some airports are just generating METAR during the day when they are open, some regions of the world have few METAR stations.
That wish is not asking for the replacement of the visibility that comes in the METAR by the Meteoblue visibility forecast, it is asking to use Meteoblue visibility for the zones not covered by the METAR zones.
I think you and I are saying the same thing pretty much. Right now, meteoblue appears to have some data to at least make visibility depictions at least somewhat believable, instead of having a cartoonish circle of haze around the airport. Using multiple data sources to augment missing info is the way to go, and this includes METAR reports AND measurements from other sources such as you see in meteoblue. Heck, even simple bugs on cloud layer densities have not been fixed. You cant even control each cloud layers’ density parameter independently in the current sim. Meanwhile, hundreds of votes go to minor issues, that detracts from the team focusing on issues that are far more important for a flight simulator.
Yeah but why would you want realistic weather when we can have trains and cable cars and gondolas?
Here’s something I managed with X Plane 12. What a stunning difference it makes when the devs open up the weather situation variables, and actually let people fiddle around with atmospherics.
Unfortunately, the developers seem to have completely forgotten this, contrary to their promise. My only hope is MSFS2024. I hope not in vain…
Except for colors in some specific scenarios, XP is and has always been far ahead of MSFS when it comes to atmospheric visuals. MSFS would look like a hand-painted cartoon without that satellite scenery.
Hey all, any news about this topic?
It’s kinda immersion breaking being able to see far up to horizon most of the times.
The few moments we could see something close to haze is mostly morning when having some “cold fog” giving really so much good impression but well… still fog and local to airport.
Still nothing yet and no comments from the developers on this for the new sim either. Prepare to be disappointed for the 2024 simulator 
The developers still don’t get how haze really works. They need to fly in places like India and compare it against real life aviation footage from the region to see how bad it is. They don’t come in circles, and they don’t have a bright white color all the time. It is rather overdone in many places, and the rest of the area is left with unlimited viz.
X-Plane 12, with a mod called visualXP can create this condition perfectly.
I almost exclusively avoid India in MSFS because of the immersion breaking atmospherics.
We’re now stuck with a sim in MSFS that has amazing satellite imagery and performance, but lacks in one important aspect. And another sim in X Plane that has an amazing flight model + ease of customizability, but really bad anti aliasing + terrain.
Man I wish this had more votes. This is the single most important contributing factor in providing a realistic atmosphere. Right now MSFS atmospheric lacks depth. It’s like flying in an empty space where you can almost every time see till the horizon. Totally unrealistic. Xplane 12 is so far ahead when it comes to depicting visibility due to haze and humidity.
Sadly I have very little hopes that this will get fixed in 2024. All the screenshots that we have seen so far, you can clearly see that you are still getting that insanely unrealistic cavok visibility where can see up untill the earth’s curvature.
I submitted this as a question for the last Dev Q&A, but clearly it was not a popular or interesting enough question to be asked.
Next time the form is open for asking questions, I encourage everyone to submit it.
I’d be happy to have a menu slider to be able to set my own ‘maximum visibility’ which is used in addition to the live weather, but think that solution is unlikely.
FYI, as per the last Development Update, you can post questions here.
This is what bothers me the most. How can this be NOT popular given that visibility is such an intrinsic part of weather IRL? Anyway, thanks for posting a question on this but I’ve lost hopes from Asobo.
Active sky is the best to fix this , you can set more less the highest visibility so now my flight are way more realistic and now the sense of height is there
I am going to buy it!! But I should not have to spend money on an external app for such a basic feature that even default xplane has.
This topic is sadly also a part of MSFS2024. NOTHING was done to fix this in the new sim, absolutely NOTHING.
What’s the use of a flight simulator if the weather can’t be simulated correctly.
Here’s latest screenshots from MSFS2024:
Circle visible in the distance.
I’ve noticed this in the alpha test videos, but I was hoping that it would be fixed at release.
Although, to be honest, I didn’t have high hopes for it, as it wasn’t addressed in MSFS2020.
It’s a HUGE disappointment that such an essential feature is not getting any attention from the developers.
Totally incomprehensible.
