Weather radar and On board taxi camera

[RiceySpicey 586]

I really don't want to re-open the debate yet again, but I felt this comment had to be answered. I fully agree that a realistic WXR is not possible in FSX, but that doesn't mean a "fake" WXR is not worth having.  A "fake" WXR is not completely useless, as long as it's reasonably representative.  Here's why:

 

1. Fake WXR paints realistic looking storm cells in CuNim clouds displayed by FSX.

2. Sim pilot sees storm cells on WXR and diverts around them in a realistic manner.

 

Note it does not matter at all that the weather diverted around is not really there in FSX.  The sim pilot reacted to what the WXR displays were telling him and got a rewarding immersive experience as a result.

 

Of course if you want to save frames switch the WXR off and never experience an en-route weather divert like this in the sim.

 

I disagree entirely.

 

A sim pilot can already divert from CuNim as he can visually see this outside the flight deck and divert around it if he so wishes. The issue is CuNim is not really a reason to divert - most of the time it is harmless. Until its possible to get a realistic working weather radar that actually gives you the correct information to divert the fake one is simply just a cloud map. We dont need a cloud map - just look outside. If you want to do a weather divert - when you see those towering clouds coming up - visually divert around them. Your eyes are more accurate than a weather radar that does not work.

 

Honestly - I would love to see a WXR in the sim - I think it would be very cool and increase the realism - but only if it actually works like the real thing.

[ajpongress 467]

 

 

.................

[machine2035 176]

LOL, definately saving those .gifs for future use. Cheers AJ!

[pride545 30]

Not really. I am more concerned about the way they say things. Like mentioned above, PMDG obviously felt that there was a market for a visual extension of the 747-8 for flight sim. There was none for a "visual extension" of an equally non accurate weather radar? As others mentioned, this has been discussed to death on these forums so there is a mighty bit of interest in this also. Maybe it is hard to integrate the weather radar into the ND that is why PMDG is not keen in doing it and how much can they charge for it? Not profit making?

 

Regards,

Darren 

Darren,

 

I see you are new here. As per PMDG forum rules, you are required to sign your posts with your FULL name.

[CaptCraig 226]

 

 

you are required to sign your posts with your FULL name

 

hehe BUSTED!!!!

 

Welcome to AVSIM.  

[FSMP 95]

Post deleted by author  -- Not worth going there !!

[kevinh 409]

I disagree entirely.

 

A sim pilot can already divert from CuNim as he can visually see this outside the flight deck and divert around it if he so wishes. The issue is CuNim is not really a reason to divert - most of the time it is harmless. Until its possible to get a realistic working weather radar that actually gives you the correct information to divert the fake one is simply just a cloud map. We dont need a cloud map - just look outside. If you want to do a weather divert - when you see those towering clouds coming up - visually divert around them. Your eyes are more accurate than a weather radar that does not work.

 

Honestly - I would love to see a WXR in the sim - I think it would be very cool and increase the realism - but only if it actually works like the real thing.

Is there something wrong with your comprehension skills? Please read my post again more carefully. It's not about avoiding all visible clouds. Assuming they are visible that is. Could be night time, could be poor visibility.

 

If you're happy diverting around visible clouds that's fine, but I prefer a more realistic scenario involving a WXR display showing storm cells in one or more of those clouds. I never suggested a cloud radar showing all clouds as storms would be satisfactory or worthwhile.

 

Sim flying is basically an enhanced role play. A realistic looking WXR would only add to that experience. It can't detract from it. Obviously any storms it shows aren't really there in FSX, but the storm clouds FSX shows don't have storms in them either. It is illogical to be happy to avoid such non storms visually and not be happy to avoid them if displayed on a WXR.

Please god, make it stop....

Why, don't you like discussing things in a reasonable way? Are you so wedded to the orthodox view that you can't bear to hear alternative ideas?

[CaptCraig 226]

[machine2035 176]

Mr Burgandy's famous quote can be applied to many threads in this forum.

 

... we also seem to just go in circles (and now to cue AJ's gif);

 

[kevinh 409]

I would assume (assume emphasised) that because the JS41 had a seperate display unit for the Weather Radar, it was alot easier to incorporate it in. With a ND, there is of course information to be placed ontop of the weather radar image, and therefore I assume it would be harder to merge the two together. The unit in the JS41 also seemed to replicate that of the WXR500 which is modelled by RealityXP. The WXR1200, that most T7's are fitted out with obviously has alot more features than that of the 500, and I assume PMDG wan't to keep the aircraft as realistic as possible.

 

But anyway I still agree with my original opinion that if you want to divert around weather, just look out your big wide windows infront of you and move to your heading bug to deviate as required. No need for a WXR at all. Zilch. Zero.

Why would overlaying ND information on the WXR be any harder than overlaying it on the EGPWS terrain data as they already do?

 

Being able to look out of the window at clouds is not an argument against providing a WXR in FSX. Especially as the main argument against WXR in FSX is that it just shows clouds. Can you not see the irony?

[machine2035 176]

Why would overlaying ND informationd on the WXR be any harder than overlaying it on the EGPWS terrain data as they already do?

 

Being able to look out of the window at clouds is not an argument against providing a WXR in FSX. Especially as the main argument against WXR in FSX is that it just shows clouds. Can you not see the irony?

Because they didn't write the code nor anything related to the RealityXP WXR500. I am sure its not as simple as just slapping the guage file on the same cockpit coordinates and it simply is the 'behind' layer on the ND.

[kevinh 409]

Some anti WXR posters are being very immature. Imagine how rude it would be to shout down alternative opinions like this face to face? Please grow up or simply leave the thread if you don't like the discussion.

Because they didn't write the code nor anything related to the RealityXP WXR500. I am sure its not as simple as just slapping the guage file on the same cockpit coordinates and it simply is

the 'behind' layer on the ND.

Fair point, but it's certainly not impossible. Other developers have managed to integrate the RealityXP radar successfully.

[machine2035 176]

Some anti WXR posters are being very immature. Imagine how rude it would be to shout down alternative opinions like this face to face? Please grow up or simply leave the thread if you don't like the discussion.

Fair point, but it's certainly not impossible. Other developers have managed to integrate the RealityXP radar successfully.

Kevin,

 

With all due respect, considering the number of threads in this forum composing of the topic of a weather radar being incorporated into a PMDG product, I think one sentence describing their frustration on the topic is more than warranted, and not immature.

[JoshuaC 61]

Imagine how rude it would be to shout down alternative opinions like this face to face? 

Having an opinion is fine. Enforcing onto others your opinion is not.

[RiceySpicey 586]

Is there something wrong with your comprehension skills?

 

Why, don't you like discussing things in a reasonable way?

 

People dont tend to have a problem discussing something in a reasonable way. However, when the person is going to be insulting and rude then I do not see the point in these threads. I was happy to discuss this with you, but if you just going to insult me then I will not bother.