35 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

I am afraid that those praising the new haze, just take off in a cloud hugging the ground 😋

 

A strawman argument if any. My feeling is that there was, on the contrary, quite a large consensus to praise the new weather engine. Only a minority was  demanding to see in the sim what they saw through their window in real time.  They were flaws of course but the foundations seemed good.

I think one of two things need to happen, perhaps both.  

One, we need community managers that are more familiar with flying or flight sims.  While I respect what Jayne has been doing as community manager, she does not seem to have the knowledge or experience to correctly and accurately relay community feedback to the developers.  This manifests into “everyone wants metar weather depiction” versus “everyone wants a way to read reliable metar data from the Meteoblue forecast model.”  A subtle but big difference.

Second, management change (if not people at least process).  I’m tired of excuses.  Obvious bugs are being introduced every update cycle.  And we’re not talking about obscure 1 in a million type situations.  How do you allow the introduction of metar weather into the sim without a fundamental understanding of MSL vs AGL?  This is a leadership issue.  I “think” Jorg realizes this now with his SU8 bug fixing plan, but the buck still stops with him.

You guys.... 😁

I think a blend of modelled weather and METARs is absolutely the right way to go.  Just give them time to refine it.  Being able to rely on real world METARs really is important for flight planning.

1 minute ago, regis9 said:

I think a blend of modelled weather and METARs is absolutely the right way to go.  Just give them time to refine it.  Being able to rely on real world METARs really is important for flight planning.

A French saying speaks of the wedding between a carp and a rabbit. Generally not very productive. 😄

What is important for flight planning is to know the weather. You don't need METAR for that. The UI weather interface of this sim has been abysmal since day 1. I said it many times on this forum. Why doesn't it collect and organize, in a table, the generally pretty convincing weather en route and at destination as generated by MeteoBlue and their engine ? 

8 hours ago, kurtb said:

Try Rex, update just released.

What is Rex supposed to do that current Live Weather doesn't? Isn't Rex redundant now that Live Weather is METAR based?

I would gladly spend money on a program like Activesky that works like Live Weather in SU6 and prior, AND depicts accurate real life weather. But as I understand Rex doesnt do both...?

15 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

A French saying speaks of the wedding between a carp and a rabbit. Generally not very productive. 😄

What is important for flight planning is to know the weather. You don't need METAR for that. The UI weather interface of this sim has been abysmal since day 1. I said it many times on this forum. Why doesn't it collect and organize, in a table, the generally pretty convincing weather en route and at destination as generated by MeteoBlue and their engine ? 

For the sake of curiosity that's pretty much what was implemented in Aerowinx PSX with the NG FMC update.

Aerowinx PSX uses METAR, and it used until then it's own in-house World Weather Model, which was a tremendous piece of code, but didn't match actual weather model data specially for those using PSX for online flying, and real OFPs, so, Hardy enhanced it with the chance to collect the grid of wind, temp an turb provided by the OFP, in different formats, an users just have to cut&paste it into a window in the sim instructor module. The weather engine then sets a corridor along the route, blending it with METAR data at the origin / destination + Alternate airfields....

OFC Aerowinx PSX benefits from not having a sophisticated weather rendering engine, so everything is a lot "simpler" there...

Edited November 20, 20214 yr by jcomm

METAR is the FIRST thing I look at when I go flying irl.  METAR/TAF/forecasts - the most important thing to aviation!  

It's their first implementation.  Active Sky did this beautifully in P3D - but it took some time.  I can't believe people are so against it.  I want this to be a sim.  What is the point of flying to a destination for fun of shooting an approach because the field is IFR?  In the sim you arrive and it's clear and a million!  How is that acceptable?!?

The 10SM thing was again, solved by 3rd parties in previous sims.  Asobo HAS the data - I illustrated this in my post the other day at PSP.  Cutscene loads with 32 miles or whatever it was...  METAR says 10SM.  It just needs to read the meteoblue forecast data when vis is set to 10SM in the metar.  Problem solved.

Edited November 20, 20214 yr by ryanbatcund

35 minutes ago, regis9 said:

I think a blend of modelled weather and METARs is absolutely the right way to go.  Just give them time to refine it.  Being able to rely on real world METARs really is important for flight planning.

Exactly. I find flight planning with unreliable weather so frustrating in MSFS that I often end up flying with clear skies. Maybe it is tolerable if you fly in areas that tend to have warm weather, but I fly a lot in Northern Canada, knowing the weather before takeoff is critical. If you pick a plane without anti-ice capabilities, you can't even fly through clouds without ice building up on your windshield. With METARs I can predict that and use a different plane our different route. Without METAR and a weather system that is only occasionally accurate in my areas, flying without Asobo weather is often the only way.

Peter

2 hours ago, RALF9636 said:

Didn't they recently say they want to stop bringing unfinished features into the sim and test more thoroughly?

I'm sure they will get there with the weather at some point hopefully next year, but right now this obviously is in Beta state if at all.

Why do they bring that into the sim as a mandatory update? When they had a fantastic weather engine as a flagship feature of MSFS?

I think they need our feedback to get features dialed in. In software development the client tells you what they want, you create it for them, and then they play with it and then tell you what they REALLY want. We are now telling them what we really want. 

7 minutes ago, qqwertzde said:

Exactly. I find flight planning with unreliable weather so frustrating in MSFS that I often end up flying with clear skies. Maybe it is tolerable if you fly in areas that tend to have warm weather, but I fly a lot in Northern Canada, knowing the weather before takeoff is critical. If you pick a plane without anti-ice capabilities, you can't even fly through clouds without ice building up on your windshield. With METARs I can predict that and use a different plane our different route. Without METAR and a weather system that is only occasionally accurate in my areas, flying without Asobo weather is often the only way.

Peter

Exactly!  This thread is dangerous to the sim as a simulation.  

Saying that flight sim doesn't need metar-based weather is like saying that airplanes don't need wings.

Edited November 20, 20214 yr by ryanbatcund

21 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

METAR is the FIRST thing I look at when I go flying irl.  METAR/TAF/forecasts - the most important thing to aviation!  

 

What's wrong with a simulated METAR?  Why does it need to match real world 100%?  A simulated system can produce variables and a better weather simulation than real world limited data sets ever could.  Its not to not have "METARs", its to not rely on the limited real world versions.

Simulation needs a convincing and coherent weather along the route  vis-vis the latitude, longitude, season, time of the day and a good UI to prepare the flight (and historical weather). METAR or not. What I see is that the first try tof Asobo to 'metarize' their engine is, understatement, not a real success.   

key word 'coherent'

20 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

his thread is dangerous to the sim as a simulation

Do not overstate our importance and anyway a good honest discussion is never dangerous .😉

58 minutes ago, regis9 said:

Just give them time to refine it.  Being able to rely on real world METARs really is important for flight planning.

They will refine it, of course.  Just look at the rest of the project.  It's remarkable they released SU7 in the state they did, but I have less than zero doubts they will fix the big breaks hopefully sooner than later.

I don't see RW METARs as having anything to do with 'flight planning'--what does matters is being able to see what in-sim METARs are for flight planning.  That in-sim does not *perfectly* match RW should have zero do with planning your flight in your simulator.   We want the range of conditions possible and after that it's really academic only to simulate what a 3rd party METAR reader offers.   Something like this for MSFS would be fabulous, even if it did not perfectly match RW METARs: