Weather Radar

[JET 1 0]

The Cessna I fly most often has no weather radar in it, but I know some and have flown some that do. Does that make the default Cessna less realistic because it has no weather radar at all? I'm sorry, but I'd argue a radar that doesn't work properly is less realistic than not having one at all.

I would have to disagree with that argument. You can fly a Cessna 172 without a weather radar as much as you like. But you would not legally be able to operate a modern airliner without a working weather radar anywhere within the ICAO world. It is safe to say that ALL NG's have it onboard.WX radar use is IMO an essential part of flying an airliner and I do miss that aspect.Again, not hinting PMDG should do one and I think their stand and reasons against doing so are fair. Edited January 3, 2012 by JET 1

[scandinavian13 5,192]

I see where you're coming from. It's the same Part 121 here with the FAA, but I still don't see the point. If I can't use it like I'd use it in the real world - as a weather decision-making tool - I don't see the point in using it in the sim. It wouldn't help me make any decisions, unless it worked properly (weather radar shows where precip IS not where it is...possibly...), and could actually introduce a human factor of negative transfer of knowledge between the sim and the real world, but that's somewhat of a stretch.

[JSkorna 137]

My offer still stands.

[JET 1 0]

I see where you're coming from. It's the same Part 121 here with the FAA, but I still don't see the point. If I can't use it like I'd use it in the real world - as a weather decision-making tool - I don't see the point in using it in the sim.

We're on the same page, just looking at this from slightly different angles though. Your point is that it makes no sense to add a non-working instrument, which is valid. What I'm saying is I do understand why so many people crave for it, myself included.

It wouldn't help me make any decisions, unless it worked properly (weather radar shows where precip IS not where it is...possibly...), and could actually introduce a human factor of negative transfer of knowledge between the sim and the real world, but that's somewhat of a stretch.

For that, see my longer post on the subject. What do you think?Say, that's a cool first name you got there by the way!

[Spook 96]

My offer still stands.

Someone over spent at christmas i think, lol

[JSkorna 137]

No, we'll see how important this feature really is to folks.

[kevinh 409]

I see where you're coming from. It's the same Part 121 here with the FAA, but I still don't see the point. If I can't use it like I'd use it in the real world - as a weather decision-making tool - I don't see the point in using it in the sim. It wouldn't help me make any decisions, unless it worked properly (weather radar shows where precip IS not where it is...possibly...), and could actually introduce a human factor of negative transfer of knowledge between the sim and the real world, but that's somewhat of a stretch.

The point is it doesn't really matter whether there's actually a heavy storm in the cloud the simulated WXR has painted red or not. After all FSX doesn't know either. The red display on the WXR gives you something to steer around as if it was a real storm. You almost certainly avoided nothing at all, but you had the immersive experience of doing as a real pilot would have done faced with the same presentation.I've said this many times before, but commercial flight sims don't have weather engines any more complex than FSX (generally less complex in fact) but Level D sims must have WXR simulation and it doesn't work of precipitation. PMDG's argument that only a full precipitation model will alow WXR simulation doesn't hold water (pardon the pun).@Jim. Re your offer. Would that put WXR imagery on the ND of the NGX (with nav info superimposed)? If not then that is why PMDG would have to integrate this, even if they don't want to come up with the algorithms nesessary to draw representative WXR imagery.@vololiberista (no real name given, as per the rules) I'm pretty sure the various WXR gauges out there don't just show static bitmaps as you suggest. I've certainly never seen images like the ones you uploaded. They attempt to dynamically draw something approximating to the actual cloud that's in front of the aircraft.Kevin Hall

[Spook 96]

Quality post Kevin, spot on.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Spook

[davierosoft 13]

I would have to disagree with that argument. You can fly a Cessna 172 without a weather radar as much as you like. But you would not legally be able to operate a modern airliner without a working weather radar anywhere within the ICAO world. It is safe to say that ALL NG's have it onboard.WX radar use is IMO an essential part of flying an airliner and I do miss that aspect.Again, not hinting PMDG should do one and I think their stand and reasons against doing so are fair.

The aircraft can fly with WXR inoperative also in real life, the NGX must be considered an aircraft with inoperative WXR as the panel and the buttons are present.14 CFR 121.357, company rules, MEL tells you when the aircraft could fly or not and with what predicted conditions it can or not.However I quote the others about the needing of a real indication, an approximate one is not the best thing.Some of you can point also on the ice simulation that is also a "fake", and the buttons work, the wipers, but also the pressurization is a "fake" system because have no effect to the flight.I only hope that the new simulator (Flight) will re-design the wheater engine to have a more manageable one.Without a decent WX engine, it is useless to have a wxr.With the FSD piaggio avanti I went into some magenta areas with only few visible clouds, no rain, and few winds... it was like a green area...If I can freely fly in the magenta areas of a fake WXR, why I need a WXR?

[Spook 96]

Read post #83.............

[michal 44]

If we are going down the route of saying it isn't modelled because it isn't accurate, why bother with pressurization/air conditioning?One further: why bother modelling a 737 when the flight model is unrealistic to the point it doesn't handle like one? I'm not talking numbers here.

Wrong on both counts. The simulated pressurization/air conditioning or the flight model is a LOT closer to reality than the weather radar would ever hope to be.

[davierosoft 13]

I've always asked for improvements, and continue to ask them, unless who produced the aircraft will say "we don't want".So the point is that PMDG staff don't want to do it untill fsx cannot give them correct WX info.It is their choice, you can accept or not, if not, the problem is your.If there was no official voices from PMDG, yes, I probably ask for a working WXR like on other add ons, also if fictional, just to see it working and giving some colours to the ND in flight.But, they chosen to not do it, it is a decision they made taking in mind fsx limits.So, I will accept their decision and I cannot tell that it is needed on the plane, it is a fake gauge that most add to their products just to add more buyers.If they decide to do it, fictional or not, I will be happy, if not, nothing changes, there is no risk to crash flying in the magenta zones, If I want to "steer" and deviate from route I can "imagine" it and move the aircraft away from route.Simple.It is a 4 pages topic, but the decision is already made, and, as far as I know, there is a similar topic for each PMDG product.

[davierosoft 13]

Wrong on both counts. The simulated pressurization/air conditioning or the flight model is a LOT closer to reality than the weather radar would ever hope to be.

I cannot see death men onboard, and the simulation of pressure, temps, and so on in the cabin is all done by the aircraft gauges, not FSX.The simulation is fully out of the fsx parameters.You can fly at ceiling altitude with the bird fully unpressurized for hours, the cabin could be a freezer or an oven, and nothing changes.Also for antiice, it is useless except for idle change (that at this moment causes only problems with VNAV overspeed)No rain on windsield, so no need for a wiper.

[KriVa 307]

Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it isn't there => Pressurization etc.Just because you cab(well, could, theoretically) see something, doesn't mean it's there, especially in the FSX world.The weather and clouds in FSX are constructed in quite a weird way, which doesn't help developers trying to make a WXR.

[michal 44]

I cannot see death men onboard,...You can fly at ceiling altitude with the bird fully unpressurized for hours, the cabin could be a freezer or an oven, and nothing changes.

Did you think for a minute before typing it, how nonsensical it is?What all this has to do with weather radar or pressurization simulation?We are talking about the gauges ONLY and how they are simulated.There is nothing in FSX environment that can cause your death.Accuracy of simulation is not judged whether it is going to cause your death or make you cold/hot for God's sake. Edited January 4, 2012 by michal