It mainly depends on how you use the sim. Myself and a few friends like to fly IFR and shoot tricky approaches. Using Active Sky, I set a date and use the search function to find low vis, low ceiling airports. Select some with tricky approaches and create a plan. Then we all set our dates and fly. Can't do that efficiently in MSFS. Several of us fly MSFS and others fly FSX/P3D.

There are many reasons why someone might like historical weather. Don't think it has anything to do with realism just specific weather at a specific time and at a specific location that I want to fly.

13 minutes ago, Noel said:

I meant to state what changes is time relative to conditions.

Understood. I hope we will get it someday one way or the other. I used historical weather on almost every flight during my P3D days.

Not long ago we had a short spell of real winter in Germany and it was beautiful in MSFS.

Winter in Europe looks completely different than winter over lets say Alaska or Northern Canada because it is much sunnier and we a have much more varied landscape, not just endless no mans land.

I even took several screenshots of metar etc so I can recreate that period but I'm quite sure I wont find them back now

19 minutes ago, vgbaron said:

It mainly depends on how you use the sim. Myself and a few friends like to fly IFR and shoot tricky approaches. Using Active Sky, I set a date and use the search function to find low vis, low ceiling airports. Select some with tricky approaches and create a plan. Then we all set our dates and fly. Can't do that efficiently in MSFS. Several of us fly MSFS and others fly FSX/P3D.

There are many reasons why someone might like historical weather. Don't think it has anything to do with realism just specific weather at a specific time and at a specific location that I want to fly.

Sorry but as an argument for Historic weather that scenario makes little sense, if you want to fly in specific conditions you can set those conditions with the added benefit above the method you describe of choosing where those conditions are

1 hour ago, Noel said:

Well put.  Obviously some care about historical weather and if it's very inexpensive to create and support I support its implementation though my sense is it will be a small minority who will use it, whereas putting resources into improving weather/cloud depiction and resolution and weather effects on flight will impact all users.  

It used to be (FSX, P3D etc.) that the weather metars were injected into the game at the user level. So historical metars could be stored in a database and delivered to the user on demand.

MS/Asobo doesn't share the specifics of how they implement the weather now, but I don't believe it is as trivial as it used to be and is more cloud/server based. There are a lot of subtle characteristics to the weather now. It is quite possible that storing the information required and being able to deliver it would be an enormous and expensive undertaking and could even require changes to how the system works to make it happen. If the ability to deliver historic weather wasn't part of the design parameters, it may very well have built in a way that doesn't accommodate it without a major code rewrite/redesign.

2 hours ago, Lonesome Cowboy Burt said:

Sorry but as an argument for Historic weather that scenario makes little sense, if you want to fly in specific conditions you can set those conditions with the added benefit above the method you describe of choosing where those conditions are

Well, except that it's still impossible to define a visibility value.  It's the single most glaring omission of software that calls itself a simulator.

If you want to fly an approach to exactly 1800rvr, you need to find somewhere in live weather where those conditions exist, because you cannot define them.

35 minutes ago, rjquick said:

MS/Asobo doesn't share the specifics of how they implement the weather now, but I don't believe it is as trivial as it used to be and is more cloud/server based. There are a lot of subtle characteristics to the weather now. It is quite possible that storing the information required and being able to deliver it would be an enormous and expensive undertaking and could even require changes to how the system works to make it happen. If the ability to deliver historic weather wasn't part of the design parameters, it may very well have built in a way that doesn't accommodate it without a major code rewrite/redesign.

I have said before that I think this is exactly why it is not being done. I really don't think it is simple obstinance on the part of Asobo but rather that the architecture of the whole simulator system, where weather is heavily processed on servers and then delivered to users, makes providing historical weather quite difficult and for this reason it is just not being done. From their comments, they do seem to be aware and thinking about possibilities, but they did not come off as encouraging. I personally don't really see it happening, just as I do not see weather being opened up to third parties, because that would require giving them access to the servers where the weather is being processed. And as people have noted, there does not seem to be a lot of people concerned about this.

5 hours ago, Noel said:

Nonsense, they're hardly two totally separate groups.  All users will find themselves on a continuum from pure arcade to prepping for their PPL in a FAA certified simulator. I have no use for historical weather so in your mind that makes me a "gamer", and yet I've learned a huge amount about aviation, fly 4-10x/week now going on 30 years, now commercial airliners primarily.

You are in a minority the average user of ms2020 doesn't take it as seriously as you (or me for that matter). 

 

2 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

Well, except that it's still impossible to define a visibility value.  It's the single most glaring omission of software that calls itself a simulator.

If you want to fly an approach to exactly 1800rvr, you need to find somewhere in live weather where those conditions exist, because you cannot define them.

Thank you, that was my point. If I just wanted to fly in bad weather, eh, then the current status would be fine.

7 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I flew Active Sky in P3D for years. I think I used historical weather about 1/2 dozen times at most. 

You mean you never fly in the daytime in the sim, at 9:00 pm at night?  C'mon bob...

1 minute ago, Mace said:

You mean you never fly in the daytime in the sim, at 9:00 pm at night?  C'mon bob...

I fly from about 9 am till sometimes 11 PM at night. What is the point of your question regrading weather, or does it have a point? 😏

Just now, Bobsk8 said:

I fly from about 9 am till sometimes 11 PM at night. What is the point of your question regrading weather, or does it have a point? 😏

Of course it has a point!  Think about it.  When you fly at 11 at night, but you're flying in daytime in the sim, you have nighttime weather for your daytime flight.

Or if you are flying at noon, and decide to fly in Australia in daylight flight (to check out the sights, or maybe to test hot-and-high conditions) -- guess what, you'll have nighttime weather...cooler, less visibility...

 

10 minutes ago, Mace said:

Of course it has a point!  Think about it.  When you fly at 11 at night, but you're flying in daytime in the sim, you have nighttime weather for your daytime flight.

Or if you are flying at noon, and decide to fly in Australia in daylight flight (to check out the sights, or maybe to test hot-and-high conditions) -- guess what, you'll have nighttime weather...cooler, less visibility...

 

When I fly in the sim, whatever time it is, that is when I fly. I still don't understand what the heck you are trying to prove...Ridiculous discussion.. 

Edited December 29, 20232 yr by Bobsk8

1 minute ago, Bobsk8 said:

When I fly in the sim, whatever time it is, that is when I fly. I still don't understand what the heck you are trying to prove...Ridiculous discussion.. 

I am not trying to prove anything.  (?)  How odd.  You can have your ridiculousness, I'm out...

3 minutes ago, Mace said:

I am not trying to prove anything.  (?)  How odd.  You can have your ridiculousness, I'm out...

That's great because you make no sense at all. 😁