4 minutes ago, March Hare said:

 

I couldn't possibly comment on Metars, though, other than I have seen pilots posting that they have been at airports where the Metar doesn't even match what they're seeing -- so are Metars even always accurate? Not according to a couple of pilots posting on the official forum. So how can a developer ever get this "right". It must be minboggling, especially dealing with conflicting feedback during beta from real pilots who can't agree on how accurate the winds/turbulence depiction is over certain mountainous regions.

 

The METAR comes the Airport and is distributed worldwide through a meteorological network and used by all aviation departments. 

The pilots saying that what they say does not match what they are seeing in the sim is true.  It does not and it should.

In this case you are refering to simpilots using the sim to see the weather not pilots seeing the weather in real time in real life when it will match.

 

1 minute ago, harrry said:

The METAR comes the Airport and is distributed worldwide through a meteorological network and used by all aviation departments. 

The pilots saying that what they say does not match what they are seeing in the sim is true.  It does not and it should.

In this case you are refering to simpilots using the sim to see the weather not pilots seeing the weather in real time in real life when it will match.

 

No, what I'm referring to is real pilots saying that they have sat in a real aeroplane at an airport seeing different conditions from the Metar report. I have literally seen at least one or two real pilots saying this in the forums, in response to people complaining that the sim doesn't match the Metars, their point being that real life weather around airports they've been doesn't always match either.

21 minutes ago, harrry said:

 Just to get rid of this Metar versus Meteoblue thing.

We do some reductive and maybe undue polarization here indeed. But the debate is worth it for two reasons 

- Meteo Blue seems to offer more weather details than the limited parameters and the geographical scope of a METAR

- The ASobo engine has been constructed with this in mind and integrating the METAR source at this stage seems an arduous and not so rewarding tasks when we see SU7+.

Addingt that I do not see why they should do it as  said earlier, just to content a tiny minority of simmers nostalgic of their former sims. 

But whatever we say, the awesome and excited marketing crowd at MS knows better, don't they 😇 ?

Well they are mistaken...or not real pilots.

https://met.nps.edu/~bcreasey/mr3222/files/helpful/DecodeMETAR-TAF.html

they are observations.

38 minutes ago, harrry said:

Well they are mistaken...or not real pilots.

https://met.nps.edu/~bcreasey/mr3222/files/helpful/DecodeMETAR-TAF.html

they are observations.

Well, I don't like to cast doubt on their credentials... I think the point they made was even the Metar can be outdated in between reporting periods, because of course weather is dynamic.

And I'm not saying the Metar implementation doesn't need improvement in the sim, either, just saying that, according to what those pilots said, there may still be periods when even Metar may not match

Edited January 8, 20224 yr by March Hare

1 minute ago, March Hare said:

Well, I don't like to cast doubt on their credentials... I think the point they made was even the Metar can be outdated in between reporting periods, because of course weather is dynamic.

METARS are hourly 

https://met.nps.edu/~bcreasey/mr3222/files/helpful/DecodeMETAR-TAF.html

Just now, harrry said:

METARS are hourly 

https://met.nps.edu/~bcreasey/mr3222/files/helpful/DecodeMETAR-TAF.html

Yes, I know.

1 hour ago, ADamiani said:

 

The point I am trying to make is that I am sure that what we are seeing here is not what Asobo wanted.

Do you have any evidence and facts to back this claim up?

This sim is terrible. Asobo, I want my money back.😏

28 minutes ago, harrry said:

METARS are hourly 

Every 30 mins where I live.

2 hours ago, harrry said:

Just to get rid of this Metar versus Meteoblue thing.  If the right points have been included in the sim at the right time and the meteoblue forecast model is correct there will be no difference between the Metar at a place and what is in the sim.  Not an easy task to achieve with models but possible and I would consider essential if MS wants to say this is a sim with realism.

In the blend, in time & space, between model forecast and observation ( METAR ), there's yet another piece of data that can make a whole lot of a difference, and I believe is used, for instance, by ActiveSky software and contributes to it's much better performance in terms of modelling weather in a flightsim - TAF and SIGMET as well as GAMET.

TAF, SIGMET and GAMET are a complement to Forecast Model data, created by weather meteorologists for the aerodrome and other larger specific areas, and can make it easier to find a better merge between observation and Model data.

Edited January 8, 20224 yr by Anatoli-Kagari9

43 minutes ago, Anatoli-Kagari9 said:

In the blend, in time & space, between model forecast and observation ( METAR ), there's yet another piece of data that can make a whole lot of a difference, and I believe is used, for instance, by ActiveSky software and contributes to it's much better performance in terms of modelling weather in a flightsim - TAF and SIGMET as well as GAMET.

TAF, SIGMET and GAMET are a complement to Forecast Model data, created by weather meteorologists for the aerodrome and other larger specific areas, and can make it easier to find a better merge between observation and Model data.

TAF is a forecast based on what is likely to happen at various time intervals after the metar.  

SIGMETS are special Metars issued outside of the normal issue time to show signifigent weather changes such as the development of thunderstorms or the passing of a front causing a windshift. It is an OBSERVATION.

AGAMET applies only to the UK.  Is is a low level forecast meant for GA users. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/services/transport/aviation/regulated/gamet-faqs

 

I would disagree that these are complements to Forescast Model data as Observation is always superior to forecast.

Edited January 8, 20224 yr by harrry

39 minutes ago, harrry said:

I would disagree that these are complements to Forescast Model data as Observation is always superior to forecast.

Well, for sure they're not observation, and as I believe you should know, they're not purely a decode of model GRIB(2) data, but rather, have a "hand" from the aeronautical meteorologists.

I'm familiar with it since I've been working at the MetOffice since more than 25 years, but thanks for your comment 🙂

Edited January 8, 20224 yr by Anatoli-Kagari9

15 hours ago, ADamiani said:

Also: too bad they already took our money.

LOL!  I am not arguing with that.  But is that not the least of it all?  Chuckle. 

As a former aircraft owner (split ownership) I try to stay realistic in this activity I call a hobby and thus maintain a detailed logbook in Microsoft Excel.  Included in the records are my estimated operating costs.  I use Fltplan.com as my source and check my departure and destination airports for landing and tiedown fees, fuel costs, and the like. I record what I burn in fuel. I use a 80 hour oil change interval @ $120 (large filter and 12 quarts @ $8 each).  I have a handle on depreciation, insurance, and annual maintenance. But here from ACC (AircraftCostCalculator.com)  is a more simple way to see it:

Pricing
Depending on numerous factors, the average price for a pre-owned BEECHCRAFT Bonanza G36 is $575,000.00. A $287,500.00 loan over 120 months including $1197.92 per month in interest equates to a $14,416.32 per-period payment. Based on 450 annual owner-operated hours and $5.00-per-gallon fuel cost, the BEECHCRAFT Bonanza G36 has total variable costs of $92,250.00, total fixed costs of $27,640.00, and an annual budget of $119,890.00. This breaks down to $266.42 per hour.

I logged just at 350 hours in 2020 and again in 2021 so my estimated cost per hour is closer to $300.  (some costs are incrementally lower due to lower annual hours)

So.  I purchased the Premium Deluxe Edition of MSFS for what? $129.99?

 

Edited January 8, 20224 yr by fppilot

6 hours ago, ADamiani said:

Too early after 16 months and at least two crippling updates? After seeing that they nerfed the game to make it fit in the limits of a console?

They stated publicly that they would not abandon "hardcore simmers". Right. Then in the first 16 months they went the other way.

Developing the console version side by side is ok. What's happening here is something else. 

A.

The first crippling update was the Xbox port.  Do you think maybe their agenda might involve more than just taking care to keep PC users from coming unglued?  The console port was clearly a major focus to keep the platform growing and sustainable.  Then SU6 came along and fixed nearly all of that to the point we hardly heard a whimper out of the Chicken Little crowd until many in that same crowd wanted METAR integration.  They took a crude stab at that right before the holidays, botched it of course, made some fixes and now we're not too far from where SU6 left us, right?  Yep.  Why do you believe 'side-by-side' implies absolutely balanced development in both pathways?  Is it possible for reasons you are not privy to they need to stagger development, perhaps because they don't have unlimited resources? 

Right now flying out of LEMD I'm seeing 12.3Gb of RAM in use, and 7.4Gb of VRAM in use at FL410.  Well before 16 months after release they had developed the SDK enough for the PMDG DC-6 and a few others to function very well.  P3D inherited largely a fully functional SDK 11y ago, XP's been around for over 20 years.  I don't think it's a big stretch in something as complex as a reality emulator to take time to mature.

Here's some clear evidence how botched and nerfed the game is, all taken post SU7.  Somehow me and most everyone else here flew right on thru the crippling updates to perfect ILS/RNAV/Visual landings.  Absolutely cloud rendering took a hit, but I don't see anything else that has been 'nerfed'.   I still see copious VRAM and SRAM in use so this nonsense I read that they have restricted the sim to 6Gb to cope w/ Xbox S is just another hyperbolic example of Chicken Little Syndrome.  In fact coming into KORD last night 11.3Gb of VRAM alone in use.

Oh well screenshots not uploading so we'll skip this part as you're all seeing it yourselves anyway.

 

Edited January 8, 20224 yr by Noel