REX WEATHER FORCE For MSFS

[ParaMan 53]

https://rexsimulations.com/weatherforce.html

 

Coming soon...

[carlito777 712]

Microsoft uses much more precise data than METARS. Can‘t see how this would be an improvement once the built-in weather engine is fixed. In the past, REX has basically just sold bitmaps with all their products. Don‘t see what they can bring to the table in MSFS. 

[rstough 523]

13 minutes ago, carlito777 said:

Microsoft uses much more precise data than METARS. Can‘t see how this would be an improvement once the built-in weather engine is fixed. In the past, REX has basically just sold bitmaps with all their products. Don‘t see what they can bring to the table in MSFS. 

Metar's is about as accurate as you can get.  It is reported data directly from a human or an automated station.  The simulator uses model data. This would be data generated from computer models and though you may have some accurate points, there are often misses.  Don't get me wrong the sim is AMAZING.  But we felt the weather engine could be greatly improved.  Plus our plan is to integrate archived weather after the initial release.

Edited September 16, 2020 by rstough

[Bunchy 222]

I've been drawn in too many times with their marketing.

Look forward to the reviews when it's released but I'll definately not be an early adopter.

Stu

[MarcG 2,904]

Once Asobo fix the weather issues and improve upon it in the future then i don't really see the need for a separate App, especially if that app charges X amount a month or one off payment. Each to their own of course and I'll keep an eye on it, but not overly fussed.

Edited September 16, 2020 by MarcG

[G-RFRY 1,705]

22 minutes ago, carlito777 said:

Microsoft uses much more precise data than METARS. Can‘t see how this would be an improvement once the built-in weather engine is fixed. In the past, REX has basically just sold bitmaps with all their products. Don‘t see what they can bring to the table in MSFS. 

A cut of the profits for MS.

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

I am also not that convinced to be honest. There are issues with current weather, yes. But those mostly seems to be either problems with the server or the fact that the rendered weather is 30 minutes-1 hour behind real time.

If you check their comparison screenshots too, well, some are done at different angles, some are in the air and the other on the ground with buildings covering etc etc etc

The dynamic themes is another thing i am not interested in, since i basically only use real weather per se..

Right now i don't think i am interested in weather related addons.

Edited September 16, 2020 by Pastaiolo

[omarsmak30 4,065]

First: I really don't see any advantages. I am wondering, how metar data can be better than meteorblue model that has complex parameters that fed into the model? Sure sometimes can be inconsistent but I think Asobo is aware of this and they have promised to fix some of the shortcomings. 

Second: one thing I sm super happy about MSFS that I don't need to start 4 applications before I have to start the sim, now you are telling me we are back to this? 

[Carts85 1,203]

This sounds all too familiar, remember the people that said they won’t need to buy another add on again. All I would say is let’s wait and see what they bring to the table.

[rstough 523]

21 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

First: I really don't see any advantages. I am wondering, how metar data can be better than meteorblue model that has complex parameters that fed into the model? Sure sometimes can be inconsistent but I think Asobo is aware of this and they have promised to fix some of the shortcomings. 

Second: one thing I sm super happy about MSFS that I don't need to start 4 applications before I have to start the sim, now you are telling me we are back to this? 

We hope they do fix it so it is no skin off our back.  We built WF because we saw that there was definitely some issues.  In addition, we also wanted to provide archive as well as custom dynamic weather scenarios.

I believe that what Asobo has done is amazing, but there is definitely a difference between metar and model data.  Model data is based upon a grid which covers the world.  Most global models cannot get to that level.  There are some local models that can, but again they are at best forecasts.  Metar is real data reported from an observer.  So WF is built from metar data.  If  it says a thunderstorm you will get a thunderstorm.

Edited September 16, 2020 by rstough

[GSalden 4,654]

2 minutes ago, rstough said:

We hope they do fix it so it is no skin off our back.  We built WF because we saw that there was definitely some issues.  In addition, we also wanted to provide archive as well as custom dynamic weather scenarios.

I believe that what Asobo has done is amazing, but there is definitely a difference between metar and model data.  Model data is based upon a grid which covers the world.  Most global models cannot get to that level.  There are some local models that can, but again they are at best forecasts.  Metar is real data reported from an observer.  So WF is built from metar data.  If  it says a thunderstorm you will get a thunderstorm.

Reed is correct on this.

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

Well, if MSF natively won't give us weather that matches metar data, then I certainly will purchase an addon with an engine that will give me that. It is imperative that the rendition of the weather must not be taken away from, though. I dont wan the visual fidelity to take a back seat with WF. 

The uses of such an addon is of course related to flying online and being able to check the factual weather before arriving in to it. 

Edited September 16, 2020 by Andreas Stangenes

[rstough 523]

13 minutes ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

Well, if MSF natively won't give us weather that matches metar data, then I certainly will purchase an addon with an engine that will give me that. It is imperative that the rendition of the weather must not be taken away from, though. I dont wan the visual fidelity to take a back seat with WF. 

The uses of such an addon is of course related to flying online and being able to check the factual weather before arriving in to it. 

 All I can say, once I got the Alpha that was the first thing I checked.  That is when WF was born.

Edited September 16, 2020 by rstough

[RamonB 449]

If Weather Force brings accurate weather, cirrus and other missing cloud types. Plus low visibility & fog conditions for IFR.
It is an instant buy.

Edited September 16, 2020 by RamonB

[Bottle 663]

Perhaps I didn't understand the Meteoblue Partnership Series video. It was clear from that, that Meteoblue uses observation data. Period. It starts with observation data (which is relatively sparse and will be no better or worse than what REX can get their hands on) but then realistically models the weather in locations where there isn't data, including upper atmosphere conditions. They also make forecasts for days ahead (which I expect has nothing to do with MFS).

Unless REX has access to proprietary source weather data, I can't see them having anything more accurate than Meteoblue, and absolutely nothing to rival the granularity and accuracy of the predictions where there isn't actual data (unless REX has a big data supercomputer cluster it's not telling us about).

What's not known is just how frequently the Meteoblue data is updated and how well it smooths from one set of data to another. That's possibly something that REX might have an advantage with. But so far it's been hard to evaluate because the system is obviously partly broken. My suspicion is that it's the data feeding aspect that's broken (hence 255/3), not the actual weather system itself. That might be down to the MS cloud system that the data most likely has to pass through and so nothing to do with Meteoblue. Hopefully we'll see it in full action once the next patch comes out.