Weather transition is not smooth after SU7

This is the solution. Vote !!

2 Likes

Please Asobo revert back to the previous weather system!! I can understand the effort but abrubt changes, fog popping up only around the airport, clouds basically in ground contact are s NO GO!!!

8 Likes

Really wish we could get some update on this, at least an acknowledgement that they’re going to address it. Here in the UK the day is nearly over again without any word from the devs, it’s such a shame.

1 Like

Could this issue be server based? I just did a flight out of a METAR area and close to a few others and didn’t notice any sudden transitions. The haze, while maybe a bit overdone, transitioned into thicker haze and thinner haze depending on the area. I noticed sudden changes on my last flight, but not with this one.

EDIT: Or, could the sudden transitions come from new weather being loaded into the sim and not because of your flight path?

Metar is static reports at that weather station that conflicts with meteoblue weather. Now it’s more accurate locally around the weather station with meteoblue predicted more varied weather outside of those weather stations. I wish they included it with an on/off switch for this because not everybody complained about the weather before. That would make everybody happy. They need to implement more options for live-weather. They also removed gusts in live-weather in SU4. Soon we have static weather everywhere. The sim was not advertised like that before the sim was released. I’m not complaining they make the implementation of METAR only that they need to have more options of the things they implement or remove in live-weathet.

1 Like

It looks to be a contribution of a few things I think, with the servers being one of the issues. Also seems clouds are being rendered as an MSL instead of AGL, so for higher elevation airports they are looking foggy, because let’s say the cloud is overcast at 800ft, but the airport elevation is 800ft, then the cloud base is being rendered right at the airport height.

More on that is in this thread here: Are cloud bases in new METAR system in AGL or MSL?

But even so, I find at airports that are at sea level, the cloud depiction and coverage still doesn’t seem to match up with what’s being reported.

2 Likes

Is it me or are the clouds coming out of the ground a lot?

For example did a quick sight seeing tour over Arnhem yesterday and smack bang over the city was a big fluffy cloud rising up out of the ground it just looked ridiculous!

Please guys drop this scheduled update thing and just release stuff when it actually looks good and is ready

It seems clouds are being rendered as an MSL instead of AGL, so for higher elevation airports they are looking foggy, because let’s say the cloud is overcast at 800ft, but the airport elevation is 800ft, then the cloud base is being rendered right at the airport height

1 Like

Absolutely, this is one of the worse things of the new haze, the ■■■■ HARS line between haze and no haze. While it could happen in real life, it would not be common at all, and even less such a sharp transition line. There should be a smooth and thicker transition between haze and no haze

They are testing how clouds are formed that’s why…LOL

1 Like

Don’t give them your money. It’s your choice.

I have only done one flight so far and saw no abrupt transitions. Love the new low visibility… just landed in New Delhi. Its not perfect but pretty good. Need to do more flights

Please can you take screenshots from high altitude during the flight, have already asked for it in the other threads ! I read things like “great update” “finally beautiful clouds” “accurately reproduced weather” etc.?
Maybe just my installation is messed up - so on my 2nd test flight I saw the same things as before - cumulus clouds (or whatever that is supposed to be) gathering only around the (presumably) METAR stations - I’m not talking about the abrupt weather changes, I didn’t see the haze in Europe, but about the “destroyed” unique weather engine !

I’ve thought this as well, but I think it’s just a case of different people having different expectations. I share the same experience as you

1 Like

I did a second test in the 172 last night, flew from St. Pete Florida to tittusville. KSPG to KTIX
I didn’t notice any issues during that flight, as I did earlier, so holding my breath that this issue is more of a rare event than I was expecting it to be.

I too have just landed to LIMF (Turin Italy) and, as for @Topper1988, as soon as I enter the metar cell (I think) the fog pop up from nowhere:

20 Likes

Asobo do love their pop ups.

That’s pretty much what I saw. Great that you managed to capture it. @moderators could you please share @SimoG6 video of the fog popping up.

And @SimoG6 could you please make Zendesk report wit a link to the video?

I think that’s the best we can do to make the devs know about this issue.

I am not saying MSFS shouldn’t use real-world weather as a weather source. I am saying MSFS shouldn’t rely on METAR strips to project it’s weather. Real-world isn’t dictated by METAR strips, so why would anyone consider a simulation that does to be realistic?
As I have mentioned before it’s the other way around
What I am saying is MSFS should be using their system of gathering real-world weather information to produce it’s weather and have the METAR be determined by the in-sim weather and not have the in-sim weather rely on real-world metar, which is a string of very limited parameters (enough for a pilot, but not nearly enough to produce a realistic weather and atmosphere simulation).

Yes I know about online flying. And I still fail to see the problem for online networks to be using MSFS’s METAR strips to produce their weather (VATSIM, Activesky and what not).

2 hours old real weather is still real weather. If MSFS can’t produce a correct simulation with 2 min old weather I rather have the 2 hour old real-weather, which still is real-world weather.
I feel like the weather simulation can be much more accurate when it’s outdated as it can better anticipate what will happen next with the weather. So why not use 24 hour old weather. This way it also produce the correct weather patterns that you usually only see at a given time during the day.
Again VATSIM and ActiveSky could be using this 24-hour old weather. And again it’s still real-world weather, just a little outdated.

Or would you rather online traffic would be dictated by their real-world counterpart, despite the simulator ATC having no control whatsoever, just for the sake of DLH123 touching down at 1353 in sim, just like the real one. Or would you prefer DLH123 to just be there, but being controlled by the in simulator ATC (which is the correct simulation of how it works in real), but happily ignore the fact that different factors in the simulator (as I said it’s impossible to simulate all factors going on in the real world 1:1) will cause it to land earlier or later?

5 Likes

Asobo and MS already knew about the problem - Jörg already did in the interview before the release - and that’s when I had my concerns, which unfortunately turned out to be true, that we see what we see.
I mean, implementing new features is good - but the approach is “wrong” - it never really worked without abrupt transitions.
It’s not just about the “haze” but that the whole weather engine doesn’t work properly anymore (at the moment or whatever) - I “moved” to MSFS, also because of the weather engine (among other things) - I know it lacks features, the winds are not always accurate etc., have discussed this many times anyway - but the forecast method is the best for a SIM. As I said, I would like a statement whether it is now METAR based, with interpolations or forecast which reads the data from the metar and then processes it. If it is metar based again - then I can go back to the fully configured XP11 or P3D, because the rest works there too and I have the “look” there too, MSFS flies off the disk !!

1 Like