Asobo advertised that.
5 Likes
It is, Why do they then need to report SPECI or new report every 30mins? Because the weather always changes. Weather is dynamic.
So 12h forecast is more accurate than a metar then? They still use Meteoblue forecast. Nothing in the video says they canât improve on the engine to get WX more accurate.
Speci. So? In my 25yrs of ATCâing Ive seen it maybe twice. The next metar will pick up those changes anyway. So a 15min delay on accurate WX then. At least it is picked up - contrary to a forecast.
Depends on where you live though. At LKMT we have days without any SPECIs at all and some days when we send like 15 or 20 of them - storms, fogs, low vis, lowering bases, you name it.
I donât need the weather to be accurate to the real weather as i have said already. I want the weather to be believable/realistic and match the predictions. To me have a static fog around the airports is not believable or realistic. To have a wind rate on ground level static at METAR value isnât either believable or realistic. The wind varies all the time. I donât care if the weather was 1 year old if it looks/feels believable and was reported in the sim correct.
3 Likes
Exactly, leave this stuff to meteoblue. They have the knowledge and experience to do it well. They are a partner after all.
On the other hand this ânowcastâ would be a premium meteoblue package. Does Asobo see the extra running costs as worth it when only a small minority of us seem to mind? It appears theyâre trying to do their own in-house version, so far with questionable results.
Iâm guessing that by cutting down on the number of meteoblue weather calls where METAR is available theyâre saving a ton already. Maybe that was the primary goal with this new weather system. Speculation but that is all we can do with so little information.
But at least that is picked up by the next metarđ
If they they can fix the blending (and stratus layers) I think this system might be good.
Just getting cloud base and visibility reasonably correct is an immersion booster imho.
Some kind of blend between meteoblue forecast would be amazing.
The issue is at the moment the weather in sim in matching neither of these things, and nor does it look realistic.
There is no way, therefore, to check weather conditions and know what you will get in the sim. This is a huge problem and needs addressing.
Until the METAR system can be blended accurately, it seems the only sensible option is to revert to the Meteoblue forecast model but make sure it really does match what we see in the sim so we can use the Meteoblue data for flight planning.
At the moment it is a total mess that looks bad, isnât accurate to the METARs it is supposed to be using and isnât accurate to the Meteoblue forecast it is supposed to be using. All of this reducing visual fidelity and the ability to plan flights with the weather in mind.
It is therefore absolutely clear that the current weather system does not work and needs reverting to how it used to be to solve some of these issues, until a point comes where they have managed to make good the integration of METARs into the weather depiction.
8 Likes
Who decides if itâs better then? Would like to have option to toggle METAR off.
To me the most important thing is that it needs to match predicted data. I donât need it to match real world weather as long as it matches the source of weather data that makes us be able to plan using forecast data.
so whatever is done - I think it will take a long time until this works to some level - possibly for cost reasons, performance reasons, who knows. For online flying, anyway visibility, wind direction, pressure, temperature would have been enough (for the moment) - what they are trying to do is not clear to me, especially when the result is visible like this.
I would like to agree with some of the previous speakers - they are all a bit right - unfortunately this is the case with MSFS (but I donât want to denigrate the work of the team, I âloveâ MSFS and appreciate the work of the developers very much) - but what I have noticed since Alpha - when people complain about something or there are problems with certain features, they are simply âswitched offâ instead of improving the âapproachâ. itâs the same with the weather at the moment!
What I want to say - visibility layer (not fog) - has worked with the âaerosolâ feature too - an example with REX and aerosol turned on, natural âhazeâ look and by the way the clouds look better too (although I never would have preferred REX WF to the âlive weather engineâ before SU5):
REX WF
REX WF
REX WF
REX WF
sorry for the emergency landing (bingo fuel)
REX WF
look at the waves, it used to be like that even with the default live engine?, can´t remember:
REX WF
REX WF
but the âdisadvantageâ (or the problem at the moment, screenshot below) of the aerosol feature is the blending also against the sun and partly a performance problem when reloading/changing values and with that I mean - just âturn offâ instead of improving a good feature in itself.:
And since the topic is âovercastâ - the engine is still âcapableâ of doing what we want even if you look at the screenshots above.
A big snow storm (in Eastern Europe, unfortunately I canât remember the ICAO, I just searched a strom in the weather section of REX and just wanted to compare) - with REX:
Rich clouds, soup of snow and clouds from about 700 - almost 30000 feet:
At this point, with the âdefault live weather engineâ, this visibility layer was âpresentâ again (which, by the way, suddenly disappeared again at approx. 3000 feet) a rather âthinâ cloud layer with the famous cauliflower clouds - also not 100 % overcast and the layer was approx. 700 feet âthickâ and not continuous - thus completely âwrongâ !
(no screenshots because of âfrustrationâ)
Not that I want to promote REX WF, it was just a comparison - REX WF has the disadvantages of a purely âMETARâ based weather engine - the weather is set exactly the same until the next METAR - then change (often with performance problems, even if aerosol values are switched on, but thatâs not REX WFâs fault) - and no upcoming weather fronts because the next current METAR is only loaded when you are close etc. etc.
4 Likes
The very first photo is beautiful i havenât seen anything like that ever since the cursed update su 7
4 Likes
Exactly my thoughts!!! Ugh SU7âŚ
4 Likes
I really really do miss overcast skies and I hope they can somehow integrate them if theyâve chosen to continue with the METAR-based approach.
After flying a fair bit post SU7, I think the biggest thing they are missing and they DID have this prior to SU7 somewhat are simply thin layers of clouds.
Everything right now is either sparse clouds, or towering CB clouds. We need thin layers of consistent overcast that actually âBlanketsâ an area.
We never had weather that really gave a âseaâ of clouds and a feeling of height like this, but it came close prior to SU7. I remember very often flying between multiple overcast layers and being quite blown away. Breakouts were also much better descending through overcast layers. That doesnât happen anymore.
In terms of thin layers, it would be great to see something like this:
This was taken just prior to the 500 foot callout. Imagine going INTO imc at the 500 callout. That would never happen with the current weather engine.
And then touching down. but having good visibility. This is something that also never happens. If you have IMC at 500, the visbility WILL be bad in the sim on the ground.
Another example of an awesome approach into queenstown. Solid very very thin layer below 1000 feet. But Drop below it, and great visibility underneath.
15 Likes
15 Likes
Asobo thank you for killing the immersion for more than 4 months now, i canât fly while the weather is awful
8 Likes
Exactly. I havenât seen any skies like that since SU7 despite them being a common sight in winter in Europe. I have seen some attempts by the engine to represent overcast with lots of cumuloforms but it just looks awful.
The devs response during the last Q&A regarding weather gave no signal about whatâs happening with this at all, possibly due to the question being too limited to talking about the future.
Iâm sure weâd all really appreciate some reassurance from the devs that clouds will return to or improve on what we had pre-SU7, beyond the constant âweather is a work in progressâ brush offs.
9 Likes
If they could go back to before SU5 it would be even better.
5 Likes
What everyone needs to do is call them out on all their incompetence via zendesk. I mean you have to really let them have it in the section where you can describe the bug. I did it twice and I donât know if itâs a coincidence but both times the very next day there was a response in the forums from a community manager. I did it about their lies about the fix for live weather being down everyday and I did it about the excessive lightning. Believe me, someone is reading those reports
Anything except puffy low level cumulus and the occasional heightened cumulonimbus is heavily underrespresented now.
7 Likes
Moderators. Any reason why this post is not tagged as bug logged? This is a great example of a post on a specific issue with evidence that should be voted up. Thanks!
12 Likes