Wow.....

Left or right : clouds where there should be none is simply wrong.

And even if Asobo is trying other weather data, why do they accept popcorn clouds in place of clear weather for an official release ? And they knew that this fault existed in the weather data as they where pointed to it by multiple beta testers….

43 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Left or right : clouds where there should be none is simply wrong.

And even if Asobo is trying other weather data, why do they accept popcorn clouds in place of clear weather for an official release ? And they knew that this fault existed in the weather data as they where pointed to it by multiple beta testers….

same for snow coverage and iced lakes.

this will not be fixed soon, i am afraid.

Yet,

in other aspects like those pertaining to limited visibility the depiction is doing a nice job...

We've been experiencing this since yesterday, and as I arrived home yesterday late afternoon I loaded MFS and cecked. It was pretty good indeed ! But then I went for an LPPT - LPMA FBW A320 hop, and as the OP remarks, there were the popcorn clouds all along the route, very densely populated because there was a Low affecting the area IRL, but shouldn't have been depicted as **only** Cu allover the place...

 

METAR LPPT 151930Z 33008KT 5000 DU BKN030 17/12 Q1010=

METAR LPPT 151900Z 34007KT 3000 DU SCT028 18/12 Q1010=

METAR LPPT 151830Z 36006KT 3000 DU NSC 18/11 Q1010=

METAR LPPT 151800Z 36007KT 3200 DU NSC 18/11 Q1009=

METAR LPPT 151730Z 04008KT 360V060 3200 DU NSC 18/12 Q1009=

METAR LPPT 151700Z 04010KT 3200 DU NSC 18/12 Q1009=

METAR LPPT 151630Z 05012KT 3500 DU NSC 18/11 Q1009=

METAR LPPT 151600Z 03011KT 4000 DU FEW020 18/11 Q1008=

METAR LPPT 151530Z 03012KT 4200 DU FEW020 18/11 Q1008=

METAR LPPT 151500Z 05011KT 5000 HZ FEW020 BKN030 18/11 Q1008=

Edited March 16, 20224 yr by jcomm

For a discussion of how meteorologists describe cloud cover, please have a look at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okta

The unit of measure for cloud coverage is the Okta, which is described as follows:

Oktas are often referenced in aviation weather forecasts and low level forecasts: SKC = Sky clear (0 oktas); FEW = Few (1 to 2 oktas); SCT = Scattered (3 to 4 oktas); BKN = Broken (5 to 7 oktas); OVC = Overcast (8 oktas); NSC = nil significant cloud; CAVOK = ceiling and visibility okay

where the Okta corresponds to how many eighths of the sky is covered by clouds. Looking at the scale immediately above, it appears that a cloud condition of FEW corresponds to between 1/8th to 2/8th of the sky being cloud covered. Anything under 1/8th would then be considered, for the purpose of weather reporting, to be clear. 

So going back to the original post, does that sky coverage correspond to less than 1/8th coverage? If so, then the description of that sky condition is CLR and the depiction is arguably acceptable. Without getting any further into the weeds here, the problem seems to be balancing the need to be accurate with the desire not to be monotonous. There will certainly be some sky conditions that are accurately described as "clear" where there are some clouds present. 

I did a quick check of a few airports in the US reporting CLR sky conditions. MSFS depicts them all with a mottled sky similar to the one shown by the OP. Hopefully it would be an easy fix to vary that up a bit so that it doesn't always look the same, but it would seem undesirable to have totally cloudless skies every time the weather is reported as clear.

Unless, of course, you're home on the range where the skies are not cloudy all day.

 

While all - or most - what's written in this thread is true, the most troublesome aspect for me is how often Jorg Neumann emphasized how important the weather is for the simulator (and rightfully so, because it is an essential part of real world flying), and yet the best they seem to be able to accomplish is small improvements (although those popcorn puffies don't really count as improvement, do they?) with several sim updates over an unknown period of time with an unknown outcome. "Improve" is their most used word in that context, a pretty unspecific goal for a key feature imho. If Neumanns statements weren't just promo talk this should be the most prioritised task on their development schedule and have a definitive timeline and a clear objective, e.g. matching the promises of their weather feature (promo) video.

Edited March 16, 20224 yr by Tom_L

1 minute ago, Tom_L said:

While all - or most - what's written in this thread is true, the most troublesome aspect for me is how often Jorg Neumann emphasized how important the weather is for the simulator (and rightfully so, because it is an essential part of real wolrd flying), and yet the best they seem to be able to accomplish is small improvements (although those popcorn puffies don't really count as improvement, do they?) with several sim updates over an unknown period of time with an unknown outcome. "Improve" is their most used word in that context, a pretty unspecific goal for a key feature imho. If Neumanns statements weren't just promo talk this should be the most prioritised task on their development schedule and have a definitive timeline and a clear objective, e.g. matching the promises of their weather feature (promo) video.

Your only mistake is to assume prioritization necessarily makes something happen quickly...

With something this complex, especially since it involves work from a third party vendor (who has their own priorities beyond MSFS) I would expect to see things change in incremental steps no matter how much priority they give it.

8 hours ago, VFXSimmer said:

Your only mistake is to assume prioritization necessarily makes something happen quickly...

With something this complex, especially since it involves work from a third party vendor (who has their own priorities beyond MSFS) I would expect to see things change in incremental steps no matter how much priority they give it.

The question is why they released weather with SU8 that has this CLR Live weather in the first place.

Better test it thoroughly and when it is working as it should  then implement it in a release version.

The issue has been reported by beta testers and they decided to do nothing about it and release it as it was. Like they think that everybody is a Preset weather flyer ….

 

ASOBO: It's not about how ACCURATE the weather is compared to outside our windows (that is actually working very nice now except popcorn in clear skies), it's how UNCONVINCING the weather is in the sim.

SAME ugly cumulus clouds EVERYWHERE. Sometimes they are smaller "popcorn clouds" (where it should be clear skies), and then there are the uglier large dark/light contrast TRANSPARENT cumulus clouds EVERYWHERE else. No true overcast, no VARIATION, same ugly cumulus clouds anywhere we go. It seems to rain where it should be, but does not LOOK convincing - all of this totally breaks immersion and it really needs to be fixed.

11 hours ago, GSalden said:

The question is why they released weather with SU8 that has this CLR Live weather in the first place.

Better test it thoroughly and when it is working as it should  then implement it in a release version.

The issue has been reported by beta testers and they decided to do nothing about it and release it as it was. Like they think that everybody is a Preset weather flyer ….

 

The fact that it was caught and noted by Beta testers is actually a sign that they are testing things.  Just because its caught and spotted tho doesnt mean it is going to be fixed before releasing the beta, however.  That will only occur if the fix is a simple one.

Not trying to be apologetic, just offering alternatives that might have to do with side effects on a change in how they interpret Meteoblue data, a step necessary on the critical path to their ultimate redesign of live weather.  They've suggested as much in Q&A's, not so much specifically about the popcorn clouds, but about the fact that they are reworking that very interface.  Seems reasonable to think this might have been a result and a something they need to push forward with and repair with as their new systems mature.

Asobo could certainly explain the situation and clear this up, might be good to hear their position for many of us on the forum.  In the meantime, I do give them the benefit of the doubt if only because of the fact that they do continue to talk about it and list it and a top item on the development agenda.  I see no reason to be skeptical with a team willing to devote so much time to this crazy hobby of ours 🙂.  It can be a thankless task, and there's an inherent irony when I consider that the simulator itself is the least expensive piece of the puzzle in my setup. 

 

Edited March 17, 20224 yr by VFXSimmer

Hopefully you are right.

Large software packages mostly are made of a development tree where each branch consists of a part of the whole package.

Why swapping the former weather part or a smaller part of the weather part with another part that isn’t working correctly…?

Edited March 17, 20224 yr by GSalden

Today KMSO - KORS the popcorns clouds did finally evolve into an awesome cloud bank.

Also the difference between Ultra and High was 10 FPS while the High clouds were great.

ns

Edited March 18, 20224 yr by bean_sprout