Guys I was in contact with the developer, they have found some issues with Skymaxx Pro and they are trying to contact the developer to work together, aiming for a seamless integration.

 

Hopefully the chaps at Skymaxx Pro get in contact soon, as the experience of the last couple of days has been terrific

 

X-Plane is under continuing development, so it just seems odd to me that something as fundamental as improvements in the weather engine is left to 3rd parties. Maybe it's just me, but I would prefer to see that as part of the core sim package, even if it has to be a paid add-on from Laminar. For one thing, it would ease the transition across major release versions, instead of wondering if the 3rd party weather add-ons we buy today will work with X-Plane 11, or if we'll have to buy upgrades, and so on.

Wrong. Especially the weather simulation is something that works more or less independent of the flight simulation. It wouldn't make sense to develop a werather simulator only for one plattform, when yo have FS 2004, FSX, P3D V1,2+3, X-Plane and the Dovetail Simulator that all need more or less the same weather.

X-Planes cloud system is totally unique, so it is Laminars Job to figure out how to display the weather infornmations that they get, and if FSGRW and  and Sky Maxx Pro establish a new interface, Laminar will have to attach itself to the interface, if they aren't asked to add a special interface to X-Plane.

 

While X-Plane 11 probably won't have the same interface (since they will probably move away from their old three cloud layers, they would be crazy to totally block the old API.. Since X-Plane 11 is a new version they will probably just raise the API Versions so that they can detect if the old or new system is needed right now..

You can't really comparte it with the beginning oc X-Plane 10, where they had to burn a lot of the old bridges.

Is it worth a buy? I been using FSrealWX and it's been acceptable.

Given the limitations of the X-Plane weather engine, is there anyone here that can comment on just how close or far away this would be to ASN in the FSX/P3D world?  I just got X-Plane about a month ago now and that's the biggest thing that I miss - ASN weather.  I've been using NOAA plugin and modified it so it only updates every 15 mins and that's ok.  But, it feels like I'm back on the first version of Opus for FSX some 3 or 4 years ago with the sudden weather updates/cloud popping.  Weather and a PMDG level aircraft are the only things holding this sim back, I think.

Wrong. Especially the weather simulation is something that works more or less independent of the flight simulation. It wouldn't make sense to develop a werather simulator only for one plattform, when yo have FS 2004, FSX, P3D V1,2+3, X-Plane and the Dovetail Simulator that all need more or less the same weather.

X-Planes cloud system is totally unique, so it is Laminars Job to figure out how to display the weather infornmations that they get, and if FSGRW and  and Sky Maxx Pro establish a new interface, Laminar will have to attach itself to the interface, if they aren't asked to add a special interface to X-Plane.

 

No, it doesn't work independently of the flight simulation, and I would hate to see Laminar working backwards to satisfy the 3rd party add-on providers of multiple systems like FSX and P3D instead of creating something that works best for X-Plane alone.

 

The data that's independent across all sims is the METAR info, which is interpreted by each different flight simulator in its own way. The way X-Plane handles that information is very primitive, even with add-ons.

 

There are still massive flaws in the core weather engine that need addressing by Laminar, chiefly the fact that weather only exists in horizontal layers, not vertical columns of cloud formation like CB's that we can avoid, fly in-between, or fly in and out of (if we're crazy enough). All of that has to come from Laminar, and probably in v11 if it happens at all.

No, it doesn't work independently of the flight simulation, and I would hate to see Laminar working backwards to satisfy the 3rd party add-on providers of multiple systems like FSX and P3D instead of creating something that works best for X-Plane alone.

 

The data that's independent across all sims is the METAR info, which is interpreted by each different flight simulator in its own way. The way X-Plane handles that information is very primitive, even with add-ons.

 

There are still massive flaws in the core weather engine that need addressing by Laminar, chiefly the fact that weather only exists in horizontal layers, not vertical columns of cloud formation like CB's that we can avoid, fly in-between, or fly in and out of (if we're crazy enough). All of that has to come from Laminar, and probably in v11 if it happens at all.

 

 

CBs are not that bad, and we often use them on glider competitions

 

Back to X-Plane's weather, nothing based * only * in METAR data can be useful to properly render weather display continuity, or even the cloud layers above an airfield, where sector altitude, sometimes as low as 5000' for instance here at LPPT, can well hide even massive overcast layers above...

 

NOAA gives us wind and temperatures aloft forecast, which can complement the METAR data, but, are still not enough.

 

That's why Active Sky ( and other products ) go further. I know AS very well, because I beta tested it, and I know how far it goes in getting many additional sources of information, from not only one global weather model, in order to produce the convincing results we now see in FSX, FSX:SE and P3D, but if we look back we can easily remember that MSFS had the exact same problems of display discontinuity that we see in X-Plane 10.

 

I believe the change will probably only become available when XP11 is released. It'll take efforts from both LR and any dev team willing to create a more plausible approach to weather generation ( HiFiTech would be a great addition, I am sure! ).

 

BTW: That's why I feel so fine with Aerowinx's PSX own Global Weather model, with the possibility of still fetching METAR data and blending those observations with the Global model, and even with DCS World where the dynamic weather model creates it's own areas of LOws and Highs and "animates" them...

Why are CB's dangerous ? are they the ones having a lot water or what ?

It only disconnects if you leave the cockpit and go in to the menu for some reason, if your doing a flight, I can't see any reason to go in the menu.... And its just one click and it fixes it anyways  

 

when I fly,  it disconnects when updating the weather too (not only when leaving the cockpit). And it can happen very frequently. I'm using skymaxpro.

 

 

Guillaume

Well,

 

after running a few tests with both FSGlobalRW vs FSRealWxPro, I do prefer the effects of the later.

 

FSRealWxPro also works with FSX and P3D, for those who own those other sims, has better GUI, with interesting on-the-fly aloft weather data, and calculates moisture to even determine icing effects and additional cloud layers above those reported by local METARs.

 

FSGlobalRw keeps failling to connect to XP10.42, and although I'm sure this will get fixed, it is presently very annoying...

 

So, my choice - FSRealWxPro

 

Hmmm, sorry, I guess I was too fast in my evaluation....

 

Under some circumstances Global can actually get better results, namelly when there are multiple cloud layers reported and some are broken or overcast...

 

Both fail miserably - not their fault, but rather X-Plane's cloud rendering fault - to give proper weather rendering under TS / Cb or even Tcu reports, Ns, etc...

 

RwPro can add turbulence and this is good to have.

 

SkyMaxx Pro v2 helps both in the depiction area, but it's still far from what we have in FSX / P3D, IMO 

There are still massive flaws in the core weather engine that need addressing by Laminar, chiefly the fact that weather only exists in horizontal layers, not vertical columns of cloud formation like CB's that we can avoid, fly in-between, or fly in and out of (if we're crazy enough). All of that has to come from Laminar, and probably in v11 if it happens at all.

 

I agree with you.

 

Actually X-Plane creates a weather "intensity pattern" with defined volumes of high precipitation/turbulence that, with regard to this specific aspect, can be much more realistic than FSX and allow/require weather avoidance (and you'd better not ignore those red areas :smile: ):

 

 

However as you said there are some limitations:

 

1) The most intense areas should also be associated with vertical developed clouds. For example a simple direct correspondence between weather intensity and vertical development of the clouds could be a great improvement;

 

2) The weather pattern are static both in shape and position; ideally they should move with the air mass and evolve over time;

 

3) In general, 3rd party access to the weather system via datarefs is too limited.

has anyone used FSGlobalRW with standard x-plane clouds? it hits my FPS by about 5-8 BUT gives far more coverage? 

Yes, I used it with the default clouds too, but with reduced textures, using Murmur's alternative cloud textures - helps with the fps, as well as the modified datarefs through LUA script.

According to FSGRW Facebook page they have found a fix for the disconnect issue. They hope to release a patch this weekend.

According to FSGRW Facebook page they have found a fix for the disconnect issue. They hope to release a patch this weekend.

Brilliant news.

 

Great to see a mainstream developer supporting the X-Plane community.

According to FSGRW Facebook page they have found a fix for the disconnect issue. They hope to release a patch this weekend.

Yay!