Then we can’t never have a simulated weather in a flight sim because of no adapt policy.
Sure but that isn’t a big deal. The main point being you have good visibility for doing your approach, the right winds and pressure. We already know that it’s impossible to have everything simulated exactly like real life. Active Sky will render in 99% of the cases the correct conditions, at least the important and critical ones.
1 Like
I’m not saying that the weather in MSFS should just continue to be made worse to suit the likes of Vatsim, absolutely not. What we had before sim update 7, was beautiful. There were times when the real life metar reported CAVOK, and in MSFS some rain had moved in over the airport, then the new real life metar for the airport came out and it reported rain. Wow, how amazing it was, MSFS had already moved in that rain front, right before the real world metar reported it. That really was incredible.
On the flip side, I had many times were an airport was shrouded in TS, with heavy rain and low visibility. Let’s say you’re flying the FBW A320, you plan to use CAT1 minimums for landing because metar is reporting a nice Overcast layer around 1,000ft, TS are in the TAF but not yet hit the airport, still 30 miles out to sea. Then you get to the airport in MSFS and huge TS, heavy rain, low cloud. Suddenly all the planning you did has gone to waste. Now I’m not saying this doesn’t happen in real life too, it can and does. But it’s these circumstances were meteoblue just needed refining, and METAR is not necessarily the answer to that.
That is why I recommend to adjust the weather reports to reflect the simulator weather for this type of model. Have virtual meteorologists work out the weather reports.
And again give options for both “real world weather” models.
Yeah you’re correct, it’s not. I think the problem is though, so many of us have come accustom to this new level of weather depiction we’ve seen in MSFS and we all know the limitations of metar-based weather. A lot of us don’t want to go back to that, it feels like a step in the wrong direction.
On the flip-side though, I do totally understand those like yourself that don’t care if there’s an overcast cloud layer at 25,000ft, and simply want accurate and reliable weather at the airport.
I see the argument for both sides, there’s advantages and disadvantages of both. I don’t envy Asobo, that’s for sure. I think no matter what they do, they can’t please everyone. Unless as Aviara says, they give people the choice to have different options of weather simulation.
1 Like
I absolutely agree with you.
1 Like
But that will never work cohesively with networks such as Vatsim, or for those who plan their flying with all the tools available to them in which the data they get is based upon real world. Otherwise yes, I think this is such an interesting idea.
“give options for both models”. Don’t throw away one of the(!) advances made compared to previous simulators.
Again, don’t take me the wrong way, I think it’s a great idea. Having options is always great, I just don’t think it’s the direction Asobo will go in.
That is why I am fighting for it and even opened a thread in wishlist. This is a big deal for me. I was able to look passed any imperfections until now (night lighting, twitchy controls, terrain and ai buildings glitches, AI traffic, ATC and what not). But this is seriously the first time I consider something game breaking.
And the most frustrating part is, it’s been there and so I am heavily spoiled. It’s not like some wishful thing that would be great for the future. The base already is there, that just needs fine-tuning. So yeah I am very emotional about it. And won’t let it go without fighting to at least get this model back as one of two options. And use them accordingly.
4 Likes
Oh yeah absolutely, same here. I’ve not done a single flight since SU7, I’m very passionate about this area of the sim, just as you are. The sad thing is, I spend my spare time now, sat scrolling these forums, hoping for some announcement, some fix, some comment from the devs. So far we have nothing, I hope so much today’s dev update will give us some hope. I know how you feel, because I feel exactly the same. It’s ruined MSFS for me.
2 Likes
Yeah, if i am right a metar is only valid til 5000 feet over the field? But when i think again, isn’t Active Sky doing exactly that: using the metar for the weather below 5000ft and the GFS-datas for the high-altitude weather above 5000ft? Because I don’t see any better way of doing it.
1 Like
It really depends. Some METARs take into account and report cloud levels to much higher levels. In the USA for example, they report cloud levels much higher. But a lot of airports in Europe and the UK, indeed only report clouds up to 5,000ft. So In such cases it can be overcast at 5,500ft, but the METAR would report CAVOK, or NCD (No cloud Detected). Here my experience with Active sky when this happens, is it indeed draws clear skies.
No that was the case for example on X-Plane 10 years ago. And that was horrible because even the upper winds got calculated based on these metars. That gave completely fantasy-upper winds. This has been fixed since years.
1 Like
Yes but for example with X-plane, if you use an addon such as Enhanced cloud/sky scapes, this is still an issue. It injects the metar, across the whole of the simulator.
Not with winds I mean, but the clouds.
Hmmm…let’s take an example:
METAR at 08:00z Q1013 VRB CAVOK
METAR at 08:30z Q1016 120/13KT BKN20
The sim could calcualte the dynamic by rendering clouds slowly appearing and slowly covering the sky at an altitude of 2000ft over the field til it is broken, at the same time the pressure increasing smoothly from 1013 to 1016 within 30 minutes of time.
That is the only way to have smooth transition during live-weather (+/- 30 minutes) and not a weather that has nothing to do with the actual weather we see outside.
Trying to do an interpolation through many more metars is in my opiniion a waste of time and a degree of perfection that is not needed, if we loos ethe ability to have “Live weather” similar to the one we see when looking outside (or at least close to it)
The only sort of reply we’ve had, was over in another thread (which is now marked as resolved):
It’s as vague though as everything always is with MSFS, not sure exactly what ‘these issues will soon be addressed’ actually means.
1 Like
You best use Active Sky and default clouds or XVision. Anyway XP11 has its own limitations of depicting the weather, that is far from perfect and should be fixed in XP12. The worse being the rebuilt of the entire sky at every refresh.
1 Like
Yes, I’ve actually been waiting for xAmbience pro, that looks very promising and is meant to release before the end of the month, but we shall see.
1 Like