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
They need to add some smooth transissions between METAR and Meteoblue. IF meteoblue says clear sky and METAR says overcast then they need to have a preset of overcast weather in use instead to simulate overcast until the METAR and meteoblue matches. I can’t see anything else work properly. I liked the way meteoblue works. I have never had this problem before METAR. It’s we that wanted METAR in the sim. It’s like going back to old sim weather again. Our real weather is not based of some static METARs it’s alway dynamic and changes all the time. We can’t save the cookie and at the same time eat it up. If they not add an option for it but i think we can’t have both at the same time in a perfect match because they will never match perfect.
I think the absolute best would be if we think the sim weather with meteoblue predictions is the real weather and then maybe the sim itself make METARs based of the weather that has occured in the sim instead. That will make the sim always match the METARs that are generated in the sim. Then use those generated METARS in the ATC or vatsim. I would call this “simulated-weather” based on prediction instead of “live-weather” based on prediction&old weather because that will never be possible to be perfect anyway.
That’s why we complaining so much it not matches. Because we look in the sim that they say is the “live-weather” based of METAR and meteoblue and we look out the window where we see the real live weather that happening right now. If they say the weather is simulated instead it will always matching because it’s simulated not live. And we should use that simulated weather to plan our flights not the real live weather because we are in the simulator when we flying.
4 Likes
Thank you, thats exactly how it happens. Spooky.
The biggest question for me is, what do they expect when they are releasing such, aehm…, features.
Applause?
This is absolutely terrible and not even close to being acceptable … there needs to be an option to switch that garbage off ASAP! It’s bordering on active sabotage.
2 Likes
That’s exactly my point. Use the system they had before (and continue to improve it) and have the sim create it’s own METAR strings based on it’s own weather. Honestly I was actually hoping that’s what was going to be implemented when they were talking about METAR. Well more wishful thinking and fearing that it will be FSX based weather all over again that just looks better.
I won’t be going back as I think there are other features that still are better than FSX/P3D other than weather and visuals.
But this is the first major “bending to the will of the community” that really frustrates me. Because it has nothing to do with realism and simulation. As I have mentioned I don’t really blame Asobo for this one (other than giving in to the community).
People act like if the simulator produces an IFR condition in KSFO, while currently it’s CAVOK that IFR conditions aren’t possible and unrealistic for KSFO and the weather simulation is faulty. Obviously I am painting an extreme picture here, but it does come across that way and most probably a reason for Asobo giving in.
A weather simulation has problems when it’s producing snow in the jungle or a british soup in the desert or 40°C at 35000 ft (these situation are probably all not 100% impossible but very unlikely in our life-time).
Those would be real issues with a weather simulation based on earth.
And btw. that doesn’t mean pre-SU7 weather didn’t have problems. There is loads of tweaking and fine-tuning to be done. But I believe we should help by focusing on what really needs to be worked on and not break what was already working good enough.
2 Likes
Agree, improve it. With this update i can’t see an improvement. I can only see a step back to how it was before this sim. It’s we and how we planning that needs to be changed. We should plan the flight based of the weather occuring in the sim right now instead and of those prediction systems that they use to simulate the weather based on instead. They need to make it match on everybody’s system at the same time. That what they need focus on. Not how much it matches the occuring weather right now everywhere on this planet IRL. It’s impossible. It will always be someone that says it’s not matching what they see ouside. Offline ATC and vatsim needs to know what weather is uccuring for everybody though. And vatsim needs to adapt to this system in use in MSFS and take that weather instead of METAR that not matches the sim weather. I’m not using vatsim though. I only assume they use METAR to give instructions. It feels like that because so many wants to have METAR injected.
It’s the same as the real world flight planning should use MSFS weather to plan the flight in my opinion. It will never match perfect that way. Now they need to adapt the sim to those METARS to be perfect match to METARS not the real live weather. It will be static as the METAR is and outside those weather stations there is no weather at all becuse meteoblue is simulated weather based on calculations and that will never match real live weather either to 100%.
I have to agree with the side criticizing the over-reliance on METAR based weather depiction.
I also have to agree with that “the community” shoveled its own grave here so to speak.
Or better said, the IFR /as real as it can get-Faction managed to get their complaints about the forecast-weather model based on Meteoblue’s data heard and acted upon.
This means we are going back to a depiction regime of weather and the atmosphere in general that was/is used in flight simulators which I left exactly because of this bad depiction.
A patchwork atmosphere and weather depiction of all metar stations layed out across the world, weather redraws based on movement and crossing meta cell borders, no truely dynamic weather, weird weather depiction far out - all these are reasons why I left other flightsims - and here we go.
I don’t care if the wind direction is depicted perfectly like the most current weather reports of some weather reporting station and also not if the cloud layer and types are depicted matching real conditions to a 100% and the weather system definitely had its flaws, however, it was also increasingly better. Flying in Europe the last months in the sim, the weather were almost allways pretty good at depicting the weather in the area I was flying in and that in a livespan of not even 1.5 years. I’m pretty sure, it would have improved a lot!
But apparently, all this was not enough for the peope who wanted down to the single digit knot/degree accurate wind speed and direction. Now we are left, despite numerous warnings by alot of people here in the forum, with a metar based patchwork weather system, so many people left other flight sim plaftforms for.
Hurray!
9 Likes
that’s exactly how it is !
just a few screenshots, it seems like it’s working a bit better now - but nevertheless, I posted these pictures in the other thread - I know it’s “haze off topic” now but they illustrate how METAR works and we’re talking about it right now.
EDDN:
around LOWW:
Everywhere the same patterns only less cumulus clouds or more, we all know from the " previous SIMS" !
Good for screenshots but that’s it, and as I have already noted elsewhere, no more cloud shadows or ? Settings are on ultra !!!
LOXT
aroud LOXT IRL same time, seconds later, went out of the house !
you can see that it’s completely “wrong”, you can see the stratus cloud bands in the distance, it wasn’t 100% in SU7 either, but it looked more like what I see here !
2 Likes