Request Ideas for weather work around

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

24 minutes ago, jrw4 said:

Not sure if I understand this.

I know of no desktop flight simulator matches real world conditions. XP tries, but its weather lags behind real world METARs by varying amounts. There are add-ons that try to do this, including those that interface in some way with FS2020. Similarly, AFAIK, because each of those add-ons bases its weather on discrete locations that  may be separated by significant distances (e.g., the oceans), they have to synthesize conditions between those locations in some way and make them blend smoothly both over space and time.

FS2020 appears to base its weather depiction on global models provided by Meteoblue. These should avoid abrupt transitions and provide  a smooth interface with realistic winds and temperatures aloft. It doesn't appear that this works as well as it should right now, but in principle it's as valid an approach as that based on METARs. The current FS2020 implementation has issues, but given time, it may prove to be brilliant.

For those who want sim weather to match METARs at specific locations, add-ons are currently available. Others would be pleased to have a somewhat idealized representation that also provides a more realistic global atmosphere. We can pay our money and make our choice.

I don't think there's any way to write all this down.  It's simple, but yet not.  You're also getting in to other topics like data time stamps, smoothing ,etc. I may need to make a short video on this. 🙂 

I think the bottom line is, if you're a OFFLINE user, you probably don't care as much.  If you're a ONLINE user or you flight plan, you do.  Which ever user you are, both can have it.  We've had it for years already.  

You can't be on VATSIM or any one of the online networks and have the wrong altimeter or QNH.  There's just no way.  I'm not sure how people are flying on the network currently using MSFS....LOL.  They must be getting lucky or just 'setting' their altimeter based on VATSIMs WX, but that can still cause issues.

[Sky Trail 13]

It would be better if we could access meteoblue's weather representation in MSFS, as means to plan a flight. I understand we can use the default screen to select the arrival and see the weather, but it beats the purpose of real time weather changes. That weather would be changing and cannnot be representative as immersive enough after a 5 hour flight to destination.

What works around so far in Fly by wire A320 mod, is setting AOC menu for pulling decoded metar from MSFS meteoblue itself and then planning the STARS. This wouldn't work around for any other default planes, goes to show the amount of work the A3nX guys are doing ! props to them. Waiting for Asobo to update weather with VIS etc... could be a while, their hands are full with Xbox and VR release.

 

[fppilot 4,371]

5 hours ago, Sky Trail said:

has it improved those transitional effects ? and low FPS which comes with it ?

My system specs are in my footer.  I fly exclusively GA.  Baron, Bonanza, and DA62 mostly, with VFR sightseeing flights in the 172s.  In 90 hours using REX WF I have not experienced either of those.  Nada!  I saw some slight stutters once.  That when flying the freeware Los Angeles Downtown addon scenery.  I would not point the finger at REX WF over that one.

It is not AS16.  But it appears to be getting more than its share of bad here say.

 

Edited December 15, 2020 by fppilot

[Sky Trail 13]

55 minutes ago, jrw4 said:

Not sure if I understand this.

I know of no desktop flight simulator matches real world conditions. XP tries, but its weather lags behind real world METARs by varying amounts. There are add-ons that try to do this, including those that interface in some way with FS2020. Similarly, AFAIK, because each of those add-ons bases its weather on discrete locations that  may be separated by significant distances (e.g., the oceans), they have to synthesize conditions between those locations in some way and make them blend smoothly both over space and time.

FS2020 appears to base its weather depiction on global models provided by Meteoblue. These should avoid abrupt transitions and provide  a smooth interface with realistic winds and temperatures aloft. It doesn't appear that this works as well as it should right now, but in principle it's as valid an approach as that based on METARs. The current FS2020 implementation has issues, but given time, it may prove to be brilliant.

For those who want sim weather to match METARs at specific locations, add-ons are currently available. Others would be pleased to have a somewhat idealized representation that also provides a more realistic global atmosphere. We can pay our money and make our choice.

I agree with you on Meteoblue's implementation in MSFS. So far it looks like the future, avoids taxing our system  in synthesizing data for the route, better MSFS servers do it. My point is how can we use or get access to those synthesized data for a proper flight planning purpose? matching METAR isn't the concern, but Meteoblue's forecast is waaaaay off than anyone else so far !

[Sky Trail 13]

Just now, fppilot said:

My system specs are in my footer.  I fly exclusively GA.  Baron, Bonanza, and DA62 mostly, with VFR sightseeing flights in the 172s.  In 90 hours using REX WF I have not experienced either of those.  Nada!  I saw some slight stutters once.  That when flying the freeware Los Angeles Downtown addon scenery.  I would not point the finger at REX WF over that one.

 

Ha ! That's good to know .. Thanks for the review.

[fppilot 4,371]

1 minute ago, Sky Trail said:

I agree with you on Meteoblue's implementation in MSFS. So far it looks like the future, avoids taxing our system  in synthesizing data for the route, better MSFS servers do it. My point is how can we use or get access to those synthesized data for a proper flight planning purpose? matching METAR isn't the concern, but Meteoblue's forecast is waaaaay off than anyone else so far !

What areas are you flying?  We should be paying attention to that in case region is a factor.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

Again, it's OK for the WX to change or the forecast to bust, that's not a big deal so long as the WX engine reports the same WX which matches the current data or reporting station.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

4 minutes ago, Sky Trail said:

I agree with you on Meteoblue's implementation in MSFS. So far it looks like the future, avoids taxing our system  in synthesizing data for the route, better MSFS servers do it. My point is how can we use or get access to those synthesized data for a proper flight planning purpose? matching METAR isn't the concern, but Meteoblue's forecast is waaaaay off than anyone else so far !

They are the concern...big time.  If they can get those to match what's being reported, we're good.  Now, if they're busting forecasts  'routinely' then that's another issue.  From what I've heard, they've been Ok on that.  Winds aloft, temps, etc.  Honestly, I haven't tried enough flights to figure that out yet, so you guys might have better insight on that.