I will start off by saying that I returned OPUS, not because I didn't like the cloud depiction, but for the lacking of everything else. I have been testing in's and out's of both programs, what they depict, how they react and all, and concluded that if I want best of both worlds, AS is the way to go, especially for heavy fliers.

But one thing was there that OPUS did right: get the absolutely correct METAR of the airport as seen in the reports on internet.

 

AS2012 does not report correctly.

 

Example now:

 

2012/11/05 23:20

LOWW 052320Z 29013G23KT 260V320 9999 FEW035 SCT180 09/03 Q1009 NOSIG

 

AS2012 shows half an hour late METAR, at 2250Z, winds slighly different, 280/12, Q1009...

 

Now, not a big difference, half an hour, but the question is why? I'm just interested...

 

At another times, I also had bigger wind differences, I guess the weather can change considerably inside of half an hour.

 

I truly believe in ActiveSky and you Damian, you have been supporter for everyone for a long long time, and I believe this can get even better!

Isn't wind aloft suppose to be implemented in opus soon? The developer is very active with updates. Oh well, to each And their own. I am extremely happy with Opus.

When they implement, I'll maybe rebuy it. The fact is, I learned with Opus that I can't do my NGX flights effectively, and this is for me a pure no-go.

Yeah, I just might buy AS too, testing it parallell to Opus, as a learning experience. As a relative newbie, and a sucker for realism, I am a bit confused about the whole weather thing, I am planning my flights as thorough as I can with fuel, weight, Topcat, routes and all, and suddenly, with the whole CRZ part I feel like am blind.

Word Not Allowed, what website do you use for comparison of the Metars? just wondering because I would like to check myself.

 

I have spent the better part of 4 days tinkering with my ASE and now I am extremely happy with my cloud, low vis and haze depictions, and the winds aloft which gives me my pleasurable airliner flights.

Metars are an observation at that particular time, whether it is a human observation of an electronic one. Winds can reduce over the period of 30mins in my experience but I was curious so I looked in to. I don't know where Opus or HiFi get the metars to generate the weather. But this is what I found;

 

Opus 2320

LOWW 052320Z 29013G23KT 260V320 9999 FEW035 SCT180 09/03 Q1009 NOSIG

 

NOAA database

LOWW 060020Z 28016KT 9999 FEW040 08/03 Q1009 NOSIG

LOWW 052350Z 28017G32KT 9999 FEW035 09/03 Q1009 NOSIG

LOWW 052320Z 29013G23KT 260V320 9999 FEW035 SCT180 09/03 Q1009 NOSIG

LOWW 052250Z 28012KT 9999 FEW035 SCT180 09/03 Q1008 NOSIG

 

So it would be in interesting to know how AS came up with the values they were using. Even the TAF doesn't use that wind value.

 

Craig

LOWW 052250Z 28012KT 9999 FEW035 SCT180 09/03 Q1008 NOSIG

 

You got the answer right there...Active Sky uses NOAA data for their metar, same as just about all weather add-ons. I think the actual question was why did active Sky use an older Metar when a newer one was available. I have my weather updates set at 10 minutes, I find setting 30 minutes means I will almost always find too much change which will not be too gradual.

Word Not Allowed, what is your update interval set for in AS2012? I believe it defaults to 10 minutes. I had mine set for 30 minutes for a time but the results weren't very good and I'm back to 10.

 

METARS do not update on the exact second, as you probably know. If you've got a 30 minute update interval, you'll have a mix of METARS that are current and up to 30 minutes old.

 

Hook

Good pickup on the time of the AS metar time. I read it as 2350z!!! So much for attention to detail on my part lol

 

Craig

Hi there,

 

I'm not familiar with what the other program uses, but we collect data from numerous sources and synthesize/archive/encrypt data including surface data, metars and winds aloft about every 10 minutes on our server network. It then is available to clients on their next update interval. So the total delay, considering transfer time from station to network, network to server, and server to client, is about 20 minutes on average. This means you can expect a 23:20Z METAR to be available to the client at 23:30, and with a 10 minute download interval, anywhere from 0 to 10 minutes after that. So it would be on your end from 23:40 to 23:50Z under most circumstances.

 

We did have an unplanned maintenance period yesterday a couple hours prior to that METAR period, which may have had an effect. We have also noted some continuing miscellaneous network problems on the east coast which affects our connection to some of our sources. We expect that to clear up momentarily.

 

If you'd like to increase the rate of METAR delivery, a 5 minute update interval is recommended. Hope that helps.

@Word Not Allowed

 

In comparison with the own server of Active Sky (which is a very good idea and which permits to have historic weather as well), OpusFSX software gets its METAR from any source (for the time being, NOAA, Vatsim is still not implemented) without any verification and any interpolation.

Winds aloft must be implemented (soon for 2 months !) and nowadays, wind depiction is completely insane from ground level to FL500. Stephen and Cheryl are struggling with various solutions to smooth the winds and reject FSUIPC smoothing (which is perfect for me and for many simmers, I suppose).

 

So I agree with you, I'm staying with AS2012, Wideview and Ezdok.

OpusFSX is only good to visual candy for the time being.

 

Pierre

Yeah, I just might buy AS too, testing it parallell to Opus, as a learning experience. As a relative newbie, and a sucker for realism, I am a bit confused about the whole weather thing, I am planning my flights as thorough as I can with fuel, weight, Topcat, routes and all, and suddenly, with the whole CRZ part I feel like am blind.

 

If you are after best realism for longer flights, you must have correct aloft data and correct winds. Otherwise are all flight calculations for poop.

Besides, topcat can import from activesky directly, with a push of a button.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

Word Not Allowed, what website do you use for comparison of the Metars? just wondering because I would like to check myself.

 

I have spent the better part of 4 days tinkering with my ASE and now I am extremely happy with my cloud, low vis and haze depictions, and the winds aloft which gives me my pleasurable airliner flights.

 

Using simple google search, then using local websites. Always check the metar time. See that is most actual and compare that.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

Word Not Allowed, what is your update interval set for in AS2012? I believe it defaults to 10 minutes. I had mine set for 30 minutes for a time but the results weren't very good and I'm back to 10.

 

METARS do not update on the exact second, as you probably know. If you've got a 30 minute update interval, you'll have a mix of METARS that are current and up to 30 minutes old.

 

Hook

 

Mine is set to 5min updates. Yes I know metar is updated in 30min interval, which you give activesky enough time to obtain newest data with only couple of minutes delay.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

Hi there,

 

I'm not familiar with what the other program uses, but we collect data from numerous sources and synthesize/archive/encrypt data including surface data, metars and winds aloft about every 10 minutes on our server network. It then is available to clients on their next update interval. So the total delay, considering transfer time from station to network, network to server, and server to client, is about 20 minutes on average. This means you can expect a 23:20Z METAR to be available to the client at 23:30, and with a 10 minute download interval, anywhere from 0 to 10 minutes after that. So it would be on your end from 23:40 to 23:50Z under most circumstances.

 

We did have an unplanned maintenance period yesterday a couple hours prior to that METAR period, which may have had an effect. We have also noted some continuing miscellaneous network problems on the east coast which affects our connection to some of our sources. We expect that to clear up momentarily.

 

If you'd like to increase the rate of METAR delivery, a 5 minute update interval is recommended. Hope that helps.

 

Thanks Damian, that is a great info.

I guess now it is because of compiling with other data is why you need to have own server? I thought metar could be forwarded directly from noaa to the user, why delay it?

Maybe there is a way inbetween, making as report stations much like opus does, but still handle winds and aloft data as it does now. I don't know if these two could be separated, or even if they should be separated...

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

@Word Not Allowed

 

In comparison with the own server of Active Sky (which is a very good idea and which permits to have historic weather as well), OpusFSX software gets its METAR from any source (for the time being, NOAA, Vatsim is still not implemented) without any verification and any interpolation.

Winds aloft must be implemented (soon for 2 months !) and nowadays, wind depiction is completely insane from ground level to FL500. Stephen and Cheryl are struggling with various solutions to smooth the winds and reject FSUIPC smoothing (which is perfect for me and for many simmers, I suppose).

 

So I agree with you, I'm staying with AS2012, Wideview and Ezdok.

OpusFSX is only good to visual candy for the time being.

 

Pierre

 

Well, I wish them good luck in their endeavours, and lets hope they reach what they are aiming for! I guessed already that opus gets its data directly, which explains no or little delay.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I thought metar could be forwarded directly from noaa to the user, why delay it?

 

One reason is to perform a synthesis on the data to handle incomplete, incorrect, or out-of-date METARs.

 

A good example of the problem showed up when I was still using the built-in Jeppeson weather long ago, shortly after I got FSX. Departing south from the Faroes I had a sudden pressure change of exactly one inch. A few minutes later the pressure changed back to normal.

 

Hook

As said, Opus links directly to the NOAA site. They have stated that they want to get their own servers so I see this as a non issue down the road. As to winds aloft - they will find, as we did, that in order to get ACCURATE winds aloft, there must be tradeoffs - DWC is a prime example.

 

As is often said - "Been There, Done That - got the Tee Shirt!" and TANSTAAFL!

 

They will find that their "coming soon" promises will wear thin after a bit. So basically they are currently using the equivalent of our Standard Depiction Mode with Winds Aloft disabled. Pretty for sightseeing.

 

But competition is always a good thing.

 

Vic

Good points by all. I purchased and fiddled with OPUS today for the first time. But I still enjoy the wind stability and pre-planning through the AS interface. And I'm back to FS9 after another FSX trial run. But one thing I DO wonder and ask here is: "why can't AS nail the ceiling like OPUS does?" I mean I look up and I CANNOT see through the clouds when below the ceiling. Same on the other side, when I look down from above the ceiling I CANNOT see the ground. AS always has holes.