100% would be enough but I will ask it there indeed.  ^_^ But maybe I didn't make it clear enough I was asking what happened if you load that SAVED file in another location because what jcomm posted seems impossible to me: that would mean the saved file would contain ALL the weather for the entire globe which seems a bit much to me. 

... i - again - may be wrong, but as far as i can tell, the specific weather injection - also in the demo mode - begins after(!) FSGRW is asked/commanded to begin the weather transfer into FSX.

So maybe the downloaded file is just some kind of anchor or so until further weather sepcific dteial sare being downloaded.

Again - i may be completely wrong and i stand free to be corrected, but this is how i (vague) remember the demo mode process ...

:smile:

 

 

 

I can be wrong, but I don't think so...

This weather generator / injector uses GFS data, thus World coverage. They rum their model on that and other sources and build what I would call a "weather grid", just like we do here at the metoffice with our forecast models. So... when you go somewhere they just have to match the weather file with the correct time/place ( if it is set for a range of time ), or for the static Global situation stored there, and then just depending on the place.

 

Anyway, I just asked the dev and will post the answer ASAP...

 

Thank You very much for Your effort!

Yes, the save weather is great although I have not tested it enough to answer the questions above. But I had low vis, 22 gusting 36 and just kept loading it and wrestling the Duke onto a short runway. With accufeel setup right, it was a very fun experience indeed!

I asked about the behaviour of saved weather files because when you save the weather with OpusFSX you can load it anywhere else and it will always be the exact same weather: seems FSGRW does this differently.

 

I also read about FSGRW resulting in bumpy flights: afaik FSGRW does not have motion effects but when there is a wind shear somewhere your plane will suddenly move, I suppose. I wonder what exactly the difference is between motion effects due to weather and motion effects like OpusFSX or Accufeel give you... I know OpusFSX effects shakes your VC all the time but it's never really clear when a certain effect is weather related or no. (Anyone knows what I mean here...?)

Anyone knows what I mean here

 

One evident consequence of being shaked due to sudden updrafts / downdrafts or shear is that you can stall, while if it is only a "camera effect", no harm will be caused by the shaking...

 

I don't think "camera" effects are realistic at all, although they can look nice :-)

 

One of the good aspects FSGRW has is the way it maps wind variability and turbulence, including up/down draft, into the sim. Beware that the latest versions require FSUIPC ( you just need the free version... )

Jeroen,

 

On the FSGRW forum Stefan said:

 

 

FSGRW is not just a METAR injector like the other programs around. About 1 GB of Data is collected by our servers from around the world (including METARS) and out of this data a weatherfile is generated.

 

 

When they launched the program, i asked how it worked and this is what he told me:

 

 

Actually the way it works is this: when FSGRW sets the weather, it sets it in a certain radius around the aircraft (you can define this radius in the settings). In Dynamic Download Mode, even when on the ground, FSGRW automatically downloads new weather every 5 minutes (if available). However, the new weather is not set everywhere, but rather outside a certain radius around the aircraft. This is for the same reasons that I mentioned in the previous e-mail; AI and ATC otherwise don't work, which is something that we can't change because FSX is designed that way. Also, you would notice massive cloud formation changes if we would set the new weather everywhere.

As you fly, stations that come into the radius defined, will be set with the new weather, so that you fly smoothly into the new weather conditions.

However, this will slightly change in the new version that's just in development: in the new version, you will be able to set a radius that defines a circle around your position where you want FSGRW to set the weather. Additionally you will be able to define a "lock weather radius" that defines up to which distance from your aircraft position you want to lock the weather (so it's not refreshed with new weather once available). Here are two examples:

If you set the "set weather radius" to 220 nm and the "lock weather radius" to 130 nm, FSGRW will set all weather stations within 220 nautical miles around the aircraft. Every 5 minutes, FSGRW will download the most current weather from our servers and refresh all stations within 220 nm (because that's the radius you want to weather to be set) but outside of 130 nm (because that's the radius you want to the weather to be locked once set). In this case, you won't notice any cloud formation changes and also ATC and AI will work perfectly well.

If you set the "set weather radius" to 220 nm and the "lock weather radius" to 50 nm, FSGRW will also set all weather stations within 220 nautical miles. However, if new weather is available, it will refresh all stations with a distance greater than 50 and less than 220 nm. You then may notice cloud formation changes in the distance (because the weather changes) and ATC and AI may not work as expected, however, this may not be an issue if you don't use these features of FSX (i.e. if you're flying online).

 

 

Note: The new version he was talking about is already available.

Hope this helps you to understand how it works.

 

Cheers.

One evident consequence of being shaked due to sudden updrafts / downdrafts or shear is that you can stall, while if it is only a "camera effect", no harm will be caused by the shaking...

 

I don't think "camera" effects are realistic at all, although they can look nice :-)

 

One of the good aspects FSGRW has is the way it maps wind variability and turbulence, including up/down draft, into the sim. Beware that the latest versions require FSUIPC ( you just need the free version... )

 

wow.....opus 'bump aircraft' turbulence is NOT a camera effect. As it stands, the bump aircraft option is tied into the DHM effects but that is changing soon.

 

I'm not sure how many more times the developer or many users can keep saying the same thing!

Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding... I never used Opus, but keep reading it uses "Camera effects"...

Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding... I never used Opus, but keep reading it uses "Camera effects"...

 

No problem, but this false claim about Opus turbulence being camera effects only is propogating throughout this thread and seems to be turning into the consensus.

 

Whilst its true that the turbulence 'bump aircraft' option can only be enabled if you have the camera effects turned on, this will soon change so that its possible to have turbulence effecting the aircraft itself, even if you wish to use a different camera program such as Ezdok etc.

wow.....opus 'bump aircraft' turbulence is NOT a camera effect. As it stands, the bump aircraft option is tied into the DHM effects but that is changing soon.

 

I'm not sure how many more times the developer or many users can keep saying the same thing!

I've used all weather engines available on the market and I never "felt" the aircraft the way I do with FSGRW camera shakes, bump aircraft etc or not...in FSGRW everything just works and feels extremely realistic out of the box.

I've used all weather engines available on the market and I never "felt" the aircraft the way I do with FSGRW camera shakes, bump aircraft etc or not...in FSGRW everything just works and feels extremely realistic out of the box.

 

Thats fine and Im not debating that. Everyone can make thier own opinions about which program they prefer.

 

What I am pointing out is that its a fundamentally wrong statement to say that Opus turbulence effects are 'cameras' only. This is not true and may put people off...............just look at Jcomm above. He hasnt even tried Opus but was already convinced from wrong statements in this thread that Opus only provided camera effects to simulate turbulence.

 

Choice is great, especially when all the facts are present.

Fair enough and fact is by the time Opus was released it was the best wx I ever used! Looking at how it depicted low visibility and overcast conditions was something I never experienced before in FSX but the one thing I didn't like was even with the bump aircraft option enabled IMHO it never felt as if the aircraft actually was affected by the weather.

 

As an example using Opus I never felt nervous doing an approach even in really bad weather but since I switched to FSGRW I have experienced countless approaches where I actually had to struggle to land the aircraft safely.

 

In the end like you say best thing is for everyone to find out for themselves what they prefer.

Guys, for an even better "shaking effect" come to my other playground - chez X-Plane 10 :-)

 

X-Plane excels when it comes to turbulence, shear and wind variability effects.

 

It is not perfect, but imore realistc in some aspects than the best we have in P3D / FSX ...

And as far as I can tell, the FSGRW folks are also planning on a XP interface or version. :smile:

 

 

And as far as I can tell, the FSGRW folks are also planning on a XP interface or version.

 

Yep!

 

 

What I am pointing out is that its a fundamentally wrong statement to say that Opus turbulence effects are 'cameras' only. This is not true and may put people off...............just look at Jcomm above. He hasnt even tried Opus but was already convinced from wrong statements in this thread that Opus only provided camera effects to simulate turbulence.



Choice is great, especially when all the facts are present.

 

Glenn, I'm confused.  I've been an Opus customer for the better part of a year or so and have enjoyed using it, but as a user my impression is still that up until now, good simulation of turbulence was dependent on having cameras set up - a view that has been re-enforced in my mind by comments from the developers themselves about the role of DHM and Bump aircraft working in concert with wx injection, and until now DHM and Bump have only been available with camera views set.  Would you disagree with this?

 

I'm looking forward to seeing how things work with cameras no longer required, but this is a new thing for Opus.  I don't think anyone is intending to misrepresent what Opus does and doesn't do in this discussion.

 

Thanks,

 

Scott