Sounds good, Kostas!

 

Thank you and keep up the good work. :Peace:

Hi Bryn,

 

As ASN is the one feeding the radar with data, I'll have to respond to this. The WXR-2100 manual states that weather avoidance procedures should not be based on ranges above 80nm . Ranges above 80nm are only used for strategic reasons (to get prepared, to be able to assess the extent of the "wall" if any etc). This is reasonable, because by the time the aircraft reaches at this point, the weather may have changed significantly.

 

At the moment ASN provides data only up to the point of the defined reality bubble. In the case of clouds this is determined by the cloud draw distance (CDD). So if a user has the CDD option value set to e.g. 150nm, then the radar will be able to provide data up to this distance. If on the other hand the user sets the max CDD (in ASN's options), to 60, then the radar will only be able to cover this area. We worked hard to be able to directly control this value inside fsx (mainly to attempt to improve cloud related performance without compromising the depiction while on cruise), but in the end, it's the user option that determines how this works. 

 

We understand that to achieve the maximum realism, signals up to 320nm have to be returned and we're working on this at the moment (for ASN SP1). You have to understand however, that beyond the reality bubble the signals will be much less accurate (in this case the technical difficulties imposed to us by fsx match the technical difficulties real life weather radar manufacturers face with signal attenuation etc). ASN SP1 will be released most probably after the T7 SP, but the good thing is that no code change will be needed on the T7 (or any aircraft) side. Any changes we make to improve the efficiency/accuracy on our side, will be immediately visible on the aircraft ND, once a new update of ASN is installed.

 

So stay tuned

 

I hope you're prepared for a magnitude of threads for any SP1 news for ASN 

 

In all seriousness, this is a really feature I've just picked up on. I wondered how it would work, but this explains it perfectly.

 

Thanks for the wonderful product and the ability for user's to decide on what performance vs eye candy they can get.

Can't wait. Looks way more accurate than other products with WX on the ND. 

-300ER beta pics?  

We understand that to achieve the maximum realism, signals up to 320nm have to be returned and we're working on this at the moment (for ASN SP1). You have to understand however, that beyond the reality bubble the signals will be much less accurate.

 

Well then, this will be just like real world.

 

By the way, I absolutely love your software and can't fly without it.  Undoubtedly my best purchase ever.  Any chance of knowing what's to come in ASN SP1?

Any chance of knowing what's to come in SP1?

 

 

Robert posted this yesterday:

 

"I'm going to paste a (huge) change list for items that are already cleared for inclusion into SP1- as I think it is mostly complete"

 

Shouldn't be much longer Max

Shouldn't be much longer Max

 

I guess I didn't proof-read myself.  I meant in ASN!

I just cant wait for this. I have been enjoying just flying the LR with active sky next and using the MAP on my networked PC in track up mode but the new WX radar will be awesome. Once thing i wonder though in the future is how will it affect things on Vatstim for example, would controllers have access to the same data and would they be expecting aircraft to deviate or even divert based on the weather conditions? This would really add to the immersion.

Once thing i wonder though in the future is how will it affect things on Vatstim for example, would controllers have access to the same data and would they be expecting aircraft to deviate or even divert based on the weather conditions? This would really add to the immersion.

 

If ASN runs in live mode, anyone looking at real world data sees the same thing. ASN is incredibly close to real world.

I currently own both PMDG 777 and Active Sky Evolution.  Can you confirm the radar feature won't work with Evo?

 

 

Can you confirm the radar feature won't work with Evo?

 

It will not work, no.

 

This has been stated multiple times, though in your defense, the stickied post has been un-stickied.  The original text is here:

 

 

Now- a few details you absolutely MUST know about this implementation.  Currently it only works in conjunction with HiFi’s ASN- and it is designed specifically to work with their weather export data only.  The implementation is dependent upon data that only ASN can provide to the PMDG 777 and this is the basis for the requirement.
 
I fully anticipate that other developers will want to create implementations that allow us to accomplish the same task with their weather engines- and I don’t doubt that over time we will do so…  But like all things it will take time- and of course those platforms must be able to provide the same level of technical implementation that was accomplished by HiFi.
 
(And since I’m going to get a ton of angry email from folks who didn’t read the two paragraphs above closely:  No- we aren’t saying that only HiFi is capable of doing this, nor have we evaluated the other implementations for technical feasibility.  HiFi approached us based on a long-standing partnership and they demonstrated a very cordial, informal, relaxed working style that just happened to fit perfectly in our own workflow for the SP1…and thus the SP1 will include this capability only in relation to ASN.)

[My standard rant goes here, but I'm feeling generous...]

 

It is planned to be included as part of SP2 of the NGX, yes.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/index.php?app=core&module=search&search_in=forums

Try terms: "weather radar SP2." Author: rsrandazzo

 

Whilst I agree we should search things first, bear in mind forum search engines are notoriously dodgy and sometimes miss out results without you knowing if you don't get the terms precise. I'd also say since things change so often it's easier to simply as someone then and there.

 

Unfortunately that clogs threads with repetitive questions. There isn't a right or wrong way imo.

 

Regarding your videos I quite like your long narratives. When you have something to say, it's usually interesting or informative.

 

 

Whilst I agree we should search things first, bear in mind forum search engines are notoriously dodgy and sometimes miss out results without you knowing if you don't get the terms precise. I'd also say since things change so often it's easier to simply as someone then and there.
 
Unfortunately that clogs threads with repetitive questions. There isn't a right or wrong way imo.

 

I always find that statement odd.  Just because forum searches don't have the power of Google (where they build in a certain amount of human-proofing and logical jumps; e.g.: the "did you mean [abcd]?" feature) doesn't mean that it's dodgy.  You just have to use your brain a little to get what you want.  Heck, even a Google search is made more effective by using the right terms.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+an+apu (search terms "what is an APU")

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+an+apu+aircraft (search terms "what is an APU aircraft")

 

Note the increased relevance of the latter search because I simply included a reference to aviation.

 

Perhaps it's the fact that I've been using SQL for ages, but I've never had a problem digging up info to post a link where someone was too lazy to look for himself.  Usually, the terms I use are some of the same terms the user ended up typing in their post anyway:

 

Not trying to start a forum war about it, though.  I just don't understand why there's this mysterious distrust of the feature.  Seems to me that it's less of an issue with the function and more of an issue of motivation and proper use of query fields.

 

Example:

Generic search terms "weather radar SP2 rsrandazzo" are less reliable than generic search terms "weather radar SP2," with author "rsrandazzo."

 

 

 

Regarding your videos I quite like your long narratives. When you have something to say, it's usually interesting or informative.

 

Thanks!  I enjoy making the videos, but I usually end up hoarse by the end of it because I never shut up to give it a rest - haha.

I guess I didn't proof-read myself.  I meant in ASN!

 

You DID Max!  The guy who was quoting you removed the ASN.  Either that or you re-edited your post.   :lol:   Either way it got me!

Does the weather RADAR project a cone out the front, and does it simulate ground clutter as well at longer ranges? What about shadowing? I didn't see that in the video.

 

Best regards,

Robin.