Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

MindYerBeak

Fs global real weather and Opus

Recommended Posts

According to one of the Fs global real weather devs  -quote- 

 

The difference between the other tools and FSGRW is that we don't just use METARs and Upper Air Forecasts to provide the weather. We have many other data sources to create realistic weather where other reports don't have any details. As an example: having CAVOK in a METAR does not mean that there are no clouds. FSGRW doesn't "randomly" create clouds there. It creates them by using other real-world weather sources (where available). --end of quote---

 

 

 

How  would  fs global real weather stack up against  say  Opus ?  Any of you  bought  FSGRW ?

 

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked at FS Global Real Weather, there's a demo which let you try it for a limited number of sessions.

 

My personal experience is that Active Sky 2012 and FS Global Real Weather depicts the weather pretty much the same, have no good word for it, but "standardized" in some way to me. I chose OpusFSX hands down. Their depiction method is the most diverse and most realistic looking to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they have access to data better than the one real pilots have? Hmmmm... I'll stick to Opus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have opus and fsgwx (and as2012). I strongly prefer fsgwx at the moment. Simple interface, accurate depiction, complex model. It just does good wx - I like that focused approach.

 

And i've had great response on suggestions and support. It's been a long time since I've had such positive engagement with a dev in support. (Strangely two different devs have engaged really constructively with me this week... Armi was the other one).

 

Bryn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I have opus and fsgwx (and as2012). I strongly prefer fsgwx at the moment. Simple interface, accurate depiction, complex model.

 

 

I'm trying to use opus camera  (+ dhm) with  fsgrwx  weather at the moment..The one thing I do not like much about fsgrwx is that you cannot force a refresh  and metars  seem to be off at times ?.Other than that fs g r wx seems to be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they have access to data better than the one real pilots have? Hmmmm... I'll stick to Opus

We don't have more data than real pilots have. We just don't stick to METARs alone, since they don't tell you the whole truth (or do you really think 9999 is the exact visibility for 90 % of weather stations out there?) :). In addition to that, METARs don't provide cloud types and will (sometimes) only report cloud layers up to MSA or 5.000 feet, whichever is higher. Most of the data sources we consume are the ones actually used by real world airlines or flight planning solution providers.

 

What makes FSGRW unique is the fact that we compose the weather in a cloud-based system, so our weather server collects the data (lower and upper air, METARs, other weather reports, cloud types, icing, turbulence data, SIGMETs etc), feeds an atmospheric model with it and creates a weather file that will be downloaded by the client application. None of the other tools uses that amount of data.

 

With METARs alone you won't get the most realistic experience in the sim, especially over oceans :).

 

Another unique feature are "local weather effects" where we simulate real-world weather effects at certain locations; watch the following video for one of these effects in action at Madeira:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=W08vvkI1caA

 

Bernd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already spent money with ASE, AS2012 and Opusfsx... I have very mixed feelings about all these softwares.

 

ASE, being the oldest obviously should not be compared to the others and I have it still to use with fs9 (almost never nowadays).

 

Comparing AS2012 with Opus I'd say I don't like both and at the same time I like both.

 

Opus, imho, is great if the I choose to fly low with general aviation aircrafts...

But, flying high and jets, for me, is totally disappointing. I get so many overspeed, the aircrafts are always fighting the wind and that kills the experience... I talked about this in their forum, but what I get, is always the same answer- it's not an Opus problem, it's a fsx problem. And I believe it is, but at the same time, if we know that fsx has that bug, why should it be poked? Why not take another path?

 

So, now I'm using AS2012... and for some reason it just doesn't feel real, not very accurate... it's just as feeling that I have, might be wrong!

 

 

What I have to ask about FSGRW is this? How does fsx behaves when he fly high with a jet? Is it smooth like AS 2012 with Opus accuracy or is it more of the same?

 

Why would I spend more money with another weather software?

 

Cheers,

Daniel

 

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they have access to data better than the one real pilots have? Hmmmm... I'll stick to Opus

 

To be fair, real-world pilots don't just use METARs for their weather. We have 4 different types of weather reporting systems in the Tower at LAS that show things that others don't. I'm sure airline operations have different weather info also.

 

I might have to try this program, it sounds interesring. I've tried Opus, REX, AS, currently us AS as I find it's upper wind data (in the US) to be more accurate to what NOAA is reporting.

 

 

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have AS2012, but am being pulled more and more towards FS Global Real Weather. Have seen some interesting scenarios with building storm clouds to one side of the aircraft and clear sky to the other. Its quite impressive and have never experienced to such a degree with AS. Have not encountered problems with winds aloft "spikes". 

 

The beauty with this weather programme is that you can trial it and I am sure that most people are adult enough to draw their own conclusions.

 

Let me also just add and this is relevant to me only. I have read a lot of threads about real winds aloft and from what I have gathered - GRW and AS2012 are pretty similar. But regardless of that, most of my flights are 1 to 2 hours duration and when it comes down to realism, planning and fuel remaining at the end of a flight in a simulator, the difference is minor.

 

Try it is the best advice I can give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't own all 3 of them. Have been using AS2012 for a while and I'm quite happy with it. Anyway, found this short video on YouTube depicting the sky with different engines. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll give the demo a try.

 

Very cool stuff of this per airport weather effects! It's going to be hard to implement those around the world thought, as only a pilot with lots of experience on an airport will know what happens and where. But a cool feature!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't own all 3 of them. Have been using AS2012 for a while and I'm quite happy with it. Anyway, found this short video on YouTube depicting the sky with different engines.

 

So this is a good video and all...some excellent scenery and weather depiction. But, how is anyone supposed to really know which one is doing the best job of displaying the real weather without the data(metar, tafs, etc) that is being used to create the weather?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so I took the plunge and was excited to try this program out.  My opinion, it still has a ways to go and I shall explain why I feel this way.

 

First, my GOOD points about the product. The GUI is easy to use, and I like the flight planning system.  It provides a nice table that can be printed out.  It also provides wind and temperature data for your entire flight.  The upper level winds and temperatures are very accurate and I have no issues with temperature or wind shifts in cruise, it's very smooth.

 

Now onto my points that I think need work.  The GUI does not provide a way to Refresh the weather, so most likely, your weather will be older data and if newer data is available, the program wont download it for 5 minutes.  This is enough time for you to fly an approach and have your weather change to the correct weather once you land.  Also, even though you are loading a flight plan, it doesn't set your destination weather until you're destination is closest to you.  This causes changes in the weather when you're on final.  I think these are two things that need to be worked on to compete with the other programs.

 

And now, my NOT GOOD point, and I only have one, but it's a big one.  I was excited while reading the posts above that "seemed" to describe an ability to depict the weather at a more accurate level.  And while I'm not expecting it to look exactly the same as it does in the real world, I was expecting a better representation.  Here's what I mean, this morning I took a flight out of KMCI which had a large storm overhead, here is a shot of the real-world weather radar, tmci is the airport's terminal radar and the airport's location:

 

radar.png

 

Pretty nasty right?  Now, while departing KMCI, I was in the middle of a thunderstorm, but not for long.  Here's a screenshot of what FS Global Real Weather depicted:

 

FSGW.jpg

 

This doesn't look very good, kinda looks like there's just a small group of cumulous clouds creating one small isolated thunderstorm....not really what the radar looks like.  To do a comparison, I closed FSGRW and loaded up AS2012 and this was how AS2012 depicted the storm:

 

AS2012.jpg

 

Now that's a storm, clouds all around and I haven't even hit the tops yet.

 

Overall, I'm pleased at some of the features, but when it comes to depiction, I'm a bit disappointed.  Try it out and judge for yourself, this is just my findings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


But, how is anyone supposed to really know which one is doing the best job of displaying the real weather without the data(metar, tafs, etc) that is being used to create the weather?

 

I doubt the video is asking to be accepted in that regard. It simply visualizes a certain weather condition and projects the outcome of the 3 engines working in their own way. Thought it's interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt the video is asking to be accepted in that regard. It simply visualizes a certain weather condition and projects the outcome of the 3 engines working in their own way. Thought it's interesting.

I'm not saying it's not interesting. It's just that any weather program can make any one of those depicted weather situations. I think I could even make it do all that myself with the default weather in FSX. So, I'm just saying I think it would be even more interesting to see what the weather data was for each scenario and who depicted them the best.

 

Posts like the one by Jeremy(JBZ) are a much better way to get a comparison. There you can tell that AS2012 does a much better job of depicting that scenario in KMCI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried all of the real world weather programs. I ended up (finally) settling on FS Global Real Weather because it has a smooth, simple interface, easy flight planning, super easy to see what the nearest reported conditions are, and I also really like the static option so that you don't see sudden immersion destroying changes in weather when the weather is refreshed.

 

Also it seems to do pretty well at avoiding all the stupid wind shift bugs inherent in FSX, at least I haven't seen them in the 5 or 6 flights I've done so far, and the winds matched perfectly what was predicted in the flight plan forecasts.

 

This program is still very new so I'm hopeful it will see continual improvements just like the other ones out there. As for the screenshots above, you can find weather depictions from ANY weather engine that don't match the real world very well. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. I have never seen one weather program get every single report "right" every single time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it's not interesting. It's just that any weather program can make any one of those depicted weather situations. I think I could even make it do all that myself with the default weather in FSX. So, I'm just saying I think it would be even more interesting to see what the weather data was for each scenario and who depicted them the best.

 

Posts like the one by Jeremy(JBZ) are a much better way to get a comparison. There you can tell that AS2012 does a much better job of depicting that scenario in KMCI.

Agreed

 

Very cool stuff of this per airport weather effects!

Wouldn't all weather engines do this inherently? I haven't tried to set up a flight into an airport where such local phenomena has been experienced but I'd think if the weather engine is gathering its data correctly, wouldn't it then depict the sudden wind changes as any other engine would? Unless, FSGRW has sort of magnified that local phenomena into a more 'in-your-face' sort of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certain areas are known for certain weather characteristics, such as thermal turbulence above a lake, a mountain nearby making the wind shift on a certain point, etc. The Metar wouldn't capture all these little things as it's only getting it's info from a single point at an airport, and these effects happen during the approach or after the takeoff. I like the idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certain areas are known for certain weather characteristics, such as thermal turbulence above a lake, a mountain nearby making the wind shift on a certain point, etc. The Metar wouldn't capture all these little things as it's only getting it's info from a single point at an airport, and these effects happen during the approach or after the takeoff. I like the idea

I doubt the report an engine uses to depict weather locally is coming from a single point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now onto my points that I think need work.  The GUI does not provide a way to Refresh the weather, so most likely, your weather will be older data and if newer data is available, the program wont download it for 5 minutes.  This is enough time for you to fly an approach and have your weather change to the correct weather once you land.  Also, even though you are loading a flight plan, it doesn't set your destination weather until you're destination is closest to you.  This causes changes in the weather when you're on final.  I think these are two things that need to be worked on to compete with the other programs.

 

That's not true; the weather of the destination airport will not change when you're on final. Also, there is an option in the FSX Add-On-Menu (Add-Ons > FS Global Real Weather > Refresh Weather) to refresh the weather completely (may take a few seconds until it's initiated).

 

Regarding the depiction: difficult for me to support this one, because you can't tell the real world conditions by just looking at a weather radar. The question is: how did the weather really look like in that area. FSGRW depicts a stratus layer; if you telll me exactly WHERE this is and what time I can explain how this weather as created and what real data sources reported.

 

Bernd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt the report an engine uses to depict weather locally is coming from a single point.

 

Exactly. That's the unique feature of FSGRW, it goes beyond standard weather reporting and adds in those highly localized phenomena that happen at certain airports/locales. This is specifically programmed in by hand so it's not going to cover every airport obviously (they have like 7 or 8 so far) but it is a neat feature that no other weather program has yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt the report an engine uses to depict weather locally is coming from a single point.

 

Other weather engines definitely do not have that feature. Just try it out in Madeira: approach runway 05 and compare FS Global Real Weather with the other ones. However, these local weather effects will only be active when the weather conditions at the airport would also lead to these effects in reality.

 

Bernd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's not true; the weather of the destination airport will not change when you're on final. Also, there is an option in the FSX Add-On-Menu (Add-Ons > FS Global Real Weather > Refresh Weather) to refresh the weather completely (may take a few seconds until it's initiated).

 

 

Hello Bernd, technically it is true, there is no Refresh button on the GUI. I have a sim pit so my plan would be to network FSGRW as I don't really use the mouse and keyboard once my flight is started on my FSX PC. That being said, there would be no way for me to refresh the weather on my networked PC.

 

Also, the changing of the weather happened to me as it wasn't accurate to my destination until I was turning final. Next time I shall make a video.

 

 

Regarding the depiction: difficult for me to support this one, because you can't tell the real world conditions by just looking at a weather radar. The question is: how did the weather really look like in that area. FSGRW depicts a stratus layer; if you telll me exactly WHERE this is and what time I can explain how this weather as created and what real data sources reported.

 

Bernd

The time was around 1400 Zulu, here are the two latest METARs from that time:

 

KMCI 271353Z 03013G17KT 4SM +TSRA BR BKN008 BKN070CB OVC100 17/16 A2990 RMK AO2 SLP118 CONS LTGICCG VC E-W TS VC E-W MOV SE P0049 T01720161

 

KMCI 271339Z 05011G21KT 4SM -TSRA BR FEW050 SCT080 OVC100 17/16 A2987 RMK AO2 FRQ LTGCGIC DSNT SE-S TS DSNT SE-S P0040

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Bernd, technically it is true, there is no Refresh button on the GUI. I have a sim pit so my plan would be to network FSGRW as I don't really use the mouse and keyboard once my flight is started on my FSX PC. That being said, there would be no way for me to refresh the weather on my networked PC.

 

Also, the changing of the weather happened to me as it wasn't accurate to my destination until I was turning final. Next time I shall make a video.

 

You're absolutely right, I mixed two things up here; FSGRW's GUI doesn't allow a refresh (yet).

 

However, the weather change when turning final is something that really shouldn't be the case; are you sure that the weather at the airport changed and that it was not just the change of direction that caused this effect (because in FSGRW you will see the weather in the distance just the way it is at the location you're looking at, so when you change direction you'll see different weather in the distance). What kind of weather change happened (visibility? wind? clouds?).

 

Bernd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was clouds, the airport in close proximity to KMCI was reporting a higher ceiling tgan KMCI. might have been due to the ASOS being shut down for the night causing the last METAR to be read. Once I started turning final into KMCI, the ceiling lowered and the clouds changed. Woyld be nice if the program forced the weather to be what the destination is reporting when you're so many miles out.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...