1 minute ago, jarmstro said:

You don't say. Who would have known.

Not you, apparently.

"Maybe they just haven't got round to it because they have other priorities?"

37 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Not you, apparently.

"Maybe they just haven't got round to it because they have other priorities?"

That was about opening up the API but nice try.😀 . Not that it matters.  Have you ever considered a career as a comedian? 

 For your information there is already weather in the sim. Lots of it! And it affects taxiing, takeoff, climb.....Did you not know?

Edited March 10, 20233 yr by jarmstro

Okay, cut out the sarcasm please. Be respectful to the opinion of others.

22 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

There's already weather in the sim. Lots of it! And it affects taxiing, takeoff, climb.....Did you not know?

There's weather and there's accurate weather dependent on the time in the simulator. I thought you understood my explanation.

26 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

That was about opening up the API but nice try.

I wasn't even trying.  But the point still stands.  It's obvious the weather need work, so even opening the API should be top priority, and leave it to those people who specialize in weather.  In this case, a dev team with 2 decades of experience.

When you post things like...

26 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Have you ever considered a career as a comedian? 

You lose most, if not all credibility.  What a shame a difference of opinion with you, almost always turns into you throwing around insults.

26 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

For your information there is already weather in the sim. Lots of it! And it affects taxiing, takeoff, climb

You don't say.  But contrary to your opinion, yes, I do know.  Just that it needs work in the accuracy department.

Edited March 10, 20233 yr by GoranM

44 minutes ago, cagarini said:

I see your point, and it was the same with me until the launch of the suposed "soaring weather"...

I was very disappointed with the end result, and see no signs of it getting better in the future. As it is, it's very incinsistent and useless from a soaring simulation pov.

 

 

I am not much into soaring and then correct me if I am wrong but It seems to me that soaring is not as much  about the weather as it is about how the air mass flows over the relief. If MSFS is not perfect in this department, it shows an improvement from what i've experienced before its time. And they say they work on it.

5 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Just that it needs work in the accuracy department.

I agree. And hopefully improvements will be made. And whether it's Asobo who makes them or anyone else I honestly don't care. But if the improvements are free, so much the better.

Edited March 10, 20233 yr by jarmstro

55 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

self-inflicted by some in the community asking loudly for metar at airports when the weather system was constructed onto another paradigm.

Due to this paradigm change Live weather gained (some) accuracy, but at the cost of

* being entirely cumulus centric
* a generic look, at first glance identifiable as a gaming environment
* consisting mostly of one single cloud layer, perhaps added by some high "fluffs"
* missing or not convincing high overcast
* producing clouds with seemingly lower density than presets
* lost variety in cloud depiction
* no plausible storm depiction, including thunder and lightning
* less convincing low overcast
* less convincing convective cloudscapes
* discernable METAR areas

And as Live weather- at least to my understanding - in its current state is synthesized in large parts from "ingested" METAR data and thus isn't much different from what HIFISim or REX and others have done for decades, I think the point MS/ASOBO may have had with protecting  the different and advanced, forecast based weather generation in the release version of MSFS is now obsolete and they should open the weather system.

Honestly, I keep thinking there are 2 people posting under your account.  You're now agreeing with me, whereas here, you held a different view.  Complete with 12 people who agree with you.

But, ok.  For once, you agree with me.  We're making progress.  OBJECTIVE progress!

A very small step towards a brighter goal.  

🌞

5 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

I am not much into soaring and then correct me if I am wrong but It seems to me that soaring is not as much  about the weather as it is about how the air mass flows over the relief. If MSFS is not perfect in this department, it shows an improvement from what i've experienced before its time. And they say they work on it.

That - effects of relief - isn't really the worst part, and MFS while not doing it the best way still provides a plausible form on "mountain soaring"... Problem is with convective weather, and their approach to modeling thermals and so on... That's a complete disaster 😕  and thermaling is one of the most widely used forms of support for climbing in the areas I usually fly IRL.

1 minute ago, GoranM said:

Honestly, I keep thinking there are 2 people posting under your account.  You're now agreeing with me, whereas here, you held a different view.  Complete with 12 people who agree with you.

But, ok.  For once, you agree with me.  We're making progress.  OBJECTIVE progress!

A very small step towards a brighter goal.  

🌞

Where's the contradiction? I still hold to my initial post. AS is not necessary in MSFS whereas it was absolutely necessary in the legacy sims. That doesn't mean the default weather system can't  be improved? Nor does it mean that only Hi-Fi can improve it.

1 minute ago, jarmstro said:

Where's the contradiction? I still hold to my initial post. AS is not necessary in MSFS whereas it was absolutely necessary in the legacy sims. That doesn't mean the default weather system can't  be improved? Nor does it mean that only Hi-Fi can improve it.

Ok.  Every sim, except MSFS, needs activesky, or some other weather injection software.  MSFS...is PERFECT.  And anything added to it, is like icing on the icing on the cake.  If it was any more perfect, it would be legend.

Can we move on?

I feel at least part of this discussion would have been more useful on the MSFS Official Forum to be noted by the developers, or at least the Community Managers to communicate with them.

Perhaps anyone dares to open a corresponding thread there? (Not me not being an expert in this field.)

Kind regards, Michael

1 minute ago, cagarini said:

That - effects of relief - isn't really the worst part, and MFS while not doing it the best way still provides a plausible form on "mountain soaring"... Problem is with convective weather, and their approach to modeling thermals and so on... That's a complete disaster 😕  and thermaling is one of the most widely used forms of support for climbing in the areas I usually fly IRL.

Thanks ! Next question, is it the way the weather is modeled or is it the way the available gliders are. To say it it another way, when you activate these cute blue CFD waves do you see that they are wrong and where ?

5 minutes ago, pmb said:

I feel at least part of this discussion would have been more useful on the MSFS Official Forum to be noted by the developers, or at least the Community Managers to communicate with them.

Perhaps anyone dares to open a corresponding thread there? (Not me not being an expert in this field.)

@guibru started this discussion so perhaps he could.

Again: since there seems to be no indication - unless I missed some announcement - that Microsoft is going to open up the weather api, why are people throwing handbags at each other in the avsim filter bubble?