Hello,

today while i was flying from Kakira to EGKK, i faced a huge building storms, which totally surprised me, it's started to be super bumpy, didn't know from which direction i should pass that so followed the plan. i would rather pay another extra 10$ in my case GBP on WXR which not 100% accurate but shows some, for time like today when i was totally helpless.

wonder what you think about that.

 

cheers!

OpusFSX is working on their own radar.

Don't worry, go through the middle. Your plane won't come down anyway. :lol:

in that case, i don't need to worry about the landing to, i wont crash anyways(;

I wouldn't mind having one - it'd definitely help with the realism; however I do love the Terrain radar.

I use the active sky radar map to help plot my course through storms, one night it became real handy. I think CS sells a standalone radar set and while a FS WXR is not 100% accurate its better than nothing since it gives you an idea on whats ahead.

I use the active sky radar map to help plot my course through storms, one night it became real handy. I think CS sells a standalone radar set and while a FS WXR is not 100% accurate its better than nothing since it gives you an idea on whats ahead.

 

Wait - Active Sky has one? I have AS2012 ha. I need to find it then..

Wait - Active Sky has one? I have AS2012 ha. I need to find it then..

 

XGaugeWizard

Yea its under the map button on the main program.

Plus in bad weather the four wheel drive and 265 HP turbo 2.5 L boxer engine are great! Sure you spend a lot at the pump having to use premium gas and only getting 21 MPG...

 

... wait did you say WRX or WXR...

 

 

-Bryant Martin

I wish I understood what PMDG says about why they don't waste their time modelling a WXR for their aircraft - I really do want to understand it better.

 

The group I fly with uses ActiveSky (we're still looking at OPUS), and when we fly the Maddog in shared cockpit the pilot and copilot see ALMOST (90% or better) the same clouds and thunderstorms. We use the WXR in the Maddog, and most of us also have the CS WXR for other aircraft, and we really enjoy having it ESPECIALLY in shared cockpit. It does seem to add to the realism for us, though I understand some say that it's just the opposite.

 

Of course ATC on VATSIM doesn't see the same weather as we do UNLESS ATC is also looking at ActiveSky - then it's really close (back to that 90%) providing they have similar settings of course.

 

Anyway, I just don't understand the reason for their decision, but would like to know more about the technical end of this. I understand radar use and theory pretty well my military days, but just have to confess ignorance in this arena.

 

 

Dave

Its my understanding that PMDG wont , because it cant be done in a realistic way, with FSX and PMDG are all about realisam.Im totally fine with that.

Jeff

What about custom weather engines?

Would they able to make a realistic WXR or in any way still limited by the simulator?

Majestic is including weather radar on the ND of the upcoming Q400. Will be interesting to see how they do it.

 

Sure a radar may not be perfect in terms of realism due to computer limitations, but what is.

 

Flying through a storm instead of around it certainly isn't more realistic than having a not-perfect radar. At least with radar we can simulate diverting for weather instead of flying the planned route 100% of the time.

 

I hope PMDG consider it for future products, but I understand it's hard to give up standards when the developers have such attention to detail.

Nah, PMDG is down for harcore realism, if they cant find a way to depict it accurately, they wont do it at all