More importantly what weather did as2012 show?

 

Hi Sam, AS2012 showed rain and good cloud coverage, while OPUS did not. But then again, the reverse happened last nite in one occasion, where OPUS depicted the local METAR correctly while AS2012 did not. I honestly do not see that as an issue, after all, the big issue per se is FSX and the way it was coded. These weather engines do their best considering all the FSX limits.

 

Enrico

Hi Sam, AS2012 showed rain and good cloud coverage, while OPUS did not. But then again, the reverse happened last nite in one occasion, where OPUS depicted the local METAR correctly while AS2012 did not. I honestly do not see that as an issue, after all, the big issue per se is FSX and the way it was coded. These weather engines do their best considering all the FSX limits.

 

Enrico

 

Enrico

I have to say that my experience is that since I changed to Opus I haven't been flying low visibillity approaches that were ruined by weather being cleared or cloud coverage being wrong. I like to fly according to the metar, if it says BKN 004 I expect to break out of the clouds at 400' and thats what my own tests over and over shows. What makes the difference for me is that Opus quoted that Metar is gospel to them. My experience is that other developers have forgotten what it really is about.

I cannot talk for upgrades made to the software after I made the change to Opus but I think that the weather is showed better in Opus when I made the change. We will never get what we see when we look out the window, but I think that Opus is pretty damm close to doing that.

If you wanna test it you should load the same metar, in all 3 different programs and see what they show.. There is some youtube video somewhere of it. While REX & AS is pretty much the same, opus shows the weather very differently.

When I can import my FP into Opus and get my winds aloft as I can now with AS2012, I will most certainly try again

 

We have already implemented winds aloft and we are looking to integrate with a 3rd party flight planner.

... Instead of turbulence they have a camera that just shakes the pilots head which is not for me but the weather they produce is so good that it out weighs this. ...

 

-Travis

 

P.S Marry Xmas

The latest version now bumps the aircraft around when the weather engine deems it appropriate. You want turbulence, you got turbulence :-)

Enrico

I have to say that my experience is that since I changed to Opus I haven't been flying low visibillity approaches that were ruined by weather being cleared or cloud coverage being wrong. I like to fly according to the metar, if it says BKN 004 I expect to break out of the clouds at 400' and thats what my own tests over and over shows. What makes the difference for me is that Opus quoted that Metar is gospel to them. My experience is that other developers have forgotten what it really is about.

I cannot talk for upgrades made to the software after I made the change to Opus but I think that the weather is showed better in Opus when I made the change. We will never get what we see when we look out the window, but I think that Opus is pretty damm close to doing that.

If you wanna test it you should load the same metar, in all 3 different programs and see what they show.. There is some youtube video somewhere of it. While REX & AS is pretty much the same, opus shows the weather very differently.

 

Hello Sam, that is a very smart thing to do. Tonite I'll load the same METAR with OPUS and AS, over different locations, and test some more. Let's see what I come up with...this is very interesting...

 

Enrico

Enrico

Dont forget to take a lot of screens

Enrico

Dont forget to take a lot of screens

 

You bet!!

 

Enrico :lol:

 

We have already implemented winds aloft and we are looking to integrate with a 3rd party flight planner.

 

Ok, thanks, I guessed you had the winds aloft sorted by now, with your remarkable dev speed I can't fathom how you do it...

 

Anyway, I did not use Opus since about ~ 2.50.3 where I took a pause and went AS2012 SP2 for a while.

 

Ok, so, do I understand it correctly in the following points;

 

1. In the latest Opus beta, when I have my company FP loaded in f.ex EFB, that I can save it from EFB f.ex to .pln format, then import that plan into Opus, and Opus will add the wind & winddirection per WP's in the imported plan?

 

2. If so, is the wind & winddirection data not only for internal use inside Opus for interpolation and wx depiction, but also visible to me as data in a WP table so I can use this in my LEGS - RTE DATA wind planning?

 

2B. [EDIT] Related to pkt. 2 above: Does Opus provide the data for DES FORECAST page, normally in NGX I enter wind and winddirection for 3 FL's over my arr apt, in addition to ISA DEV / QNH to have my MCP calc the correct T/D and VNAV path for a smooth CDA.

 

3. Any news about what synergies PFPX and Opus will bring?

 

Thanks Cheryl and Stephen, keep up the stellar work!

 

Happy New Year to both of you!

 

Regards

Morten Steen

Hi Morten

 

We haven't implemented the flight planning yet, not sure how close PFPX is to release yet but there are other flight planners you can use, I haven't had time to look at them all but there is some discussion here,

http://www.simforums.com/forums/best-vfr-and-ifr-flight-planning-packages_topic43061.html

 

We have improved our in-flight weather reports from version 2.50.3 onards which you should find useful for upper, local, alternates and destination long range ATIS reports.

 

You can catch up on the features you have missed here

http://www.simforums.com/forums/announcements_topic42608_page3.html

 

Regards and Happy New Year,

 

Cheryl

Thanks, no problem. I did explain a bit crooked Actually I do not need a flightplanning software at all. I am all good in that department

 

But, when I have a flightplan ready, for simplicitys sake, in FSX .pln format.

 

Is it necessary to I import that into Opus, or is Opus just tracking my flight in RT, fetching data from your server, interpolatong these data and then injecting this correct weather into FSX on the fly (pun intended as my flight progresses?

OK, see what you mean, some people still use the flight planners to determine average winds for the flight. It is not necessary to import your flight plan since OpusFSX does not look at it, it does take account of your destination and alternates which are configured via the OpusFSX Weather dialog and then injects the correct weather into FSX as you fly.

 

Cheers

Cheryl

Ok, what do Opus do regarding winds and winddirection at CRZ, and how do I know windspeed and direction at a certain wp?

 

Do I still have to use AS2012 for this when I need to plan my fuel etc., and then use Opus wx and fly the route with the same wx as AS2012 gives but Opus will depict that weather better than AS2012 wx engine. Is that the idea?

 

Morten

Within OpusFSX you can currently see the winds/temps at your destination and up to four alternates but they must be within 300 miles to view the report in flight. If you need more waypoints then you can use AS or some other package to plan your fuel etc before turning off AS and using OpusFSX.

The latest version now bumps the aircraft around when the weather engine deems it appropriate. You want turbulence, you got turbulence :-)

 

+1 and it's works very well.

If you wanna test it you should load the same metar, in all 3 different programs and see what they show.. There is some youtube video somewhere of it. While REX & AS is pretty much the same, opus shows the weather very differently.

 

Actually I would argue this, at least in terms of REX-E+ and I expect most likely AS as well in the correct wx mode. I did extensive testing between the REX-E+ and Opus engines at a variety of airports in a variety of conditions, and in every case, each gave a credable interpretation of the METAR. The only cases where I thought I saw major differences happened when the METAR changed dramatically between test loads. Re-loading the other app then gave similar results. I posted a number of comparison images when I did this and about the best (or worst) I could say was that I sometimes modestly preferred one or the other.

 

That's not to say that there aren't many other differences between the engines, especially once you get underway. It's just that to really get a feel for the differences, you'll have to do a lot more than simply going to an airport, looking at the METAR and then loading each product to see if they did a good job.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Scott