What's absurd is claiming the wind simulation doesn't have a significant impact on the aircraft in that you can ignore the winds. If anything, the ground to air transition is off because of tire fricition so you tend to awkardly slip away into the air as soon as you rotate or be subjected to extraordinary sidewards inertia upon touch down with a crab angle. But outside of that transition the wind makes the aircraft behave as expected.

The weather simulation certainly took a step backwards at some point, but it's nowhere near as bad as what's suggested here.

Jetstreams definitely affect my flights and I'm just starting to get into airliners. The slow me down when they're headwinds and speed me up when they're tailwinds. They also make me crab a little in cruise if they're perpendicular to me. Are we all using the same sim? 

8 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

Last Q&A they said they’re working on fixing that 

its baffles me why the flightsim leader in weather (HifI Activesim, and has been been for decades) is itching to work with asabo to create a software package tailored for ms2020 and yet asobo/ms wont let them .  Just baffling. 

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by fluffyflops

50 minutes ago, fluffyflops said:

its baffles me why the flightsim leader in weather (HifI Activesim, and has been been for decades) is itching to work with asabo to create a software package tailored for ms2020 and yet asobo/ms wont let them .  Just baffling. 

I suspect it may be because the software is so intricately interconnected, considering all the disparate technologies being brought together, that introducing an outside element invites all sorts of secondary issues; which we will then not be shy (or slow!) to comment on bitterly and at length.

26 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

I suspect it may be because the software is so intricately interconnected, considering all the disparate technologies being brought together, that introducing an outside element invites all sorts of secondary issues; which we will then not be shy (or slow!) to comment on bitterly and at length.

That, or it's licensing issues with Meteoblue as a data provider.

Curiously, MS has said recently that opening up the weather simulation is at least under investigation. So perhaps something's starting to move here. In any case, I doubt very much the reason for not opening up the weather to third parties is just MS being stubborn.

1 hour ago, fluffyflops said:

its baffles me why the flightsim leader in weather (HifI Activesim, and has been been for decades) is itching to work with asabo to create a software package tailored for ms2020 and yet asobo/ms wont let them .  Just baffling. 

We're not the only developer/genre to be locked out (as of yet).  As I understand it, it's just business.  FS and the community around it used to be much more than business, in fact, most of the developers back in the day including us started doing this as a hobby and passion, and got into the business aspect only as necessary to support accelerated innovation and costs that users demanded.  But somewhere along the line, it seems everything turned to just business, and participating meant jumping into the shark tank and being the biggest, baddest shark you can be just to survive.  It's not fun, unless you love being a shark.  But we still did it, despite not having much fun, because we were good at it, and our users encouraged us.  And the sim developer not only allowed an open extensible playing field, they encouraged it and us directly, leaving nobody out, locking nobody out.  Those days are long gone... we are clearly not wanted by this sim developer (for business reasons of course), and we're not the only one.  The other sim developers still recognize and encourage open extensibility, but those platforms are dying too as the MSFS shark rises further to the top.  Progress?

We still have tons of encouragement though from our supporters (THANK YOU!!!!), that keeps us going, even though we are dying and on life support, for years now, with barely a faint heartbeat to be heard.  What happens next?  Stay tuned.

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by Damian Clark

7 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

That, or it's licensing issues with Meteoblue as a data provider.

I wonder if there's something proprietary to the Meteoblue pipeline that might make it harder to work with others without byzantine non-disclosures. (pure speculation!) And, (shrugs) there might be tech MS doesnt want out in the world yet, either.

Together we could probably all come up with loads of potential reasons with greater and lesser degrees of likelihood.

55 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

I suspect it may be because the software is so intricately interconnected, considering all the disparate technologies being brought together, that introducing an outside element invites all sorts of secondary issues; which we will then not be shy (or slow!) to comment on bitterly and at length.

theres an army of other complex addons that can work with ms2020, not to mention that clear air turbulance addon, real turb or whatever its called.

Id wager the idea they dont like the idea of an external company depicting "better more accurate weather" might show/indicate their flaws with the ms2020 engine engine.

lets us not forget that the asobo 787 is and has been sitting with a knackered flight model, doors 4 inaccurately model, not to mention a jetty that attaches to L1 not L2.   The doors issue could be fixed in a day. Yet asabo they blame WT, ask WT they blame the modeller and 4 years on its not done.

Again Id guess neither asabo , wt or the modeller want to look incompetant and spend money and man hours on fixing it, so 4 years on nothing gets done.  Its a rediculous mentality.

 

 

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by fluffyflops

18 minutes ago, Damian Clark said:

We're not the only developer/genre to be locked out (as of yet).  As I understand it, it's just business.  FS and the community around it used to be much more than business, in fact, most of the developers back in the day including us started doing this as a hobby and passion, and got into the business aspect only as necessary to support accelerated innovation and costs that users demanded.  But somewhere along the line, it seems everything turned to just business, and participating meant jumping into the shark tank and being the biggest, baddest shark you can be just to survive.  It's not fun, unless you love being a shark.  But we still did it, despite not having much fun, because we were good at it, and our users encouraged us.  And the sim developer not only allowed an open extensible playing field, they encouraged it and us directly, leaving nobody out, locking nobody out.  Those days are long gone... we are clearly not wanted by this sim developer, and we're not the only one.  The other sim developers still recognize and encourage open extensibility, but those platforms are dying too as the MSFS shark rises further to the top.  Progress?

We still have tons of encouragement though from our supporters (THANK YOU!!!!), that keeps us going, even though we are dying and on life support, for years now, with barely a faint heartbeat to be heard.  What happens next?  Stay tuned.

ive always said that HIFI are top class in quality of products and customer service, no one else comes close.  Its baffles why microsoft/asobo wouldnt want you onboard.  youd both make money.

55 minutes ago, Damian Clark said:

We're not the only developer/genre to be locked out (as of yet).  As I understand it, it's just business.  FS and the community around it used to be much more than business, in fact, most of the developers back in the day including us started doing this as a hobby and passion, and got into the business aspect only as necessary to support accelerated innovation and costs that users demanded.  But somewhere along the line, it seems everything turned to just business, and participating meant jumping into the shark tank and being the biggest, baddest shark you can be just to survive.  It's not fun, unless you love being a shark.  But we still did it, despite not having much fun, because we were good at it, and our users encouraged us.  And the sim developer not only allowed an open extensible playing field, they encouraged it and us directly, leaving nobody out, locking nobody out.  Those days are long gone... we are clearly not wanted by this sim developer (for business reasons of course), and we're not the only one.  The other sim developers still recognize and encourage open extensibility, but those platforms are dying too as the MSFS shark rises further to the top.  Progress?

We still have tons of encouragement though from our supporters (THANK YOU!!!!), that keeps us going, even though we are dying and on life support, for years now, with barely a faint heartbeat to be heard.  What happens next?  Stay tuned.

Ok so far, third party software has been able to tweak offline weather based on snapshots of METAR reports but cannot fully integrate themselves with live weather. In the last Q&A session, Martial indicated that the problem with opening things up for devs to implement proper weather radar is licensing issues. The data does not belong to MS so they can't just offer it up to everyone for free. Are the two related? 

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by Krakin

These folks are doing something with "weather" and clouds.  Is it perhaps restricted to non-live?

 

26 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Ok so far, third party software has been able to tweak offline weather based on snapshots of METAR reports but cannot fully integrate themselves with live weather. In the last Q&A session, Martial indicated that the problem with opening things up for devs to implement proper weather radar is not possible at this time because of licensing issues. The data does not belong to MS so they can't just offer it up to everyone for free. Are the two related? 

In our case, it doesn't seem related to data licensing issues, as we don't really care to READ weather data, we just want to be able to SET it and control it, like we were able to 10 years ago, or even 20 years ago.  Yes, there is some capability in controlling preset weather via memory hacks or UI javascript mods that are not documented nor supported, which various third parties have used, that we have SO FAR not done for many reasons I've discussed ad-nauseum here in the past.  This approach was openly criticized by MS/Asobo in Q&A sessions leading up to and during MSFS2020 release and we've always tried to align with sim developers with their support, and at that time we were led to believe that a weather SDK would soon be coming if we just sat tight a little longer.  Then the big confirmation surprised us all that wx access would never come despite being the #1 requested wishlist item at the time (and it's still a top item).

I can just speculate like the rest of you as to the reasons there is no weather setting SDK like there always has been, but really it doesn't matter.  The facilities for doing such appear to be already available but deactivated/blocked.  So perhaps it's not a data licensing issue, but an exclusive participation issue regarding weather access (read OR write).  Or maybe, they are trying to prioritize and potentially following the vocal minority who DOES NOT WANT weather SDK in any way.  Whatever the reason, it looks like, if we want to keep developing weather, we'll have to move on without support of the sim developer, and hack into weather setting like the others have, with our own creative techniques for improved and augmented weather experiences that our users have been asking for, for a long time now.  

 

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by Damian Clark

4 minutes ago, Damian Clark said:

Or maybe, they are trying to prioritize and potentially following the vocal minority who DOES NOT WANT weather SDK in any way

Mega doubtful, IMO...

3 minutes ago, Damian Clark said:

In our case, it doesn't seem related to data licensing issues, as we don't really care to READ weather data, we just want to be able to SET it and control it, like we were able to 10 years ago, or even 20 years ago.  Yes, there is some capability in controlling preset weather via memory hacks or UI javascript mods that are not documented nor supported, which various third parties have used, that we have SO FAR not done for many reasons I've discussed ad-nauseum here in the past.  This approach was openly criticized by MS/Asobo in Q&A sessions leading up to and during MSFS2020 release and we've always tried to align with sim developers with their support, and at that time we were lead to believe that a weather SDK would soon be coming if we just sat tight a little longer.  Then the big confirmation surprised us all that wx access would never come despite being the #1 requested wishlist item at the time (and it's still a top item).

Thanks for your valuable insight. It is indeed strange but where I differ from your take is the assessment that things are this way because of business. When third party software shines in the sim, doesn't it draw more people to the platform? I think it would be in their best interest business-wise to open up the API to allow you guys to do your thing.

7 minutes ago, Damian Clark said:

Or maybe, they are trying to prioritize and potentially following the vocal minority who DOES NOT WANT weather SDK in any way.

Probably but that wouldn't be sharky behavior either. I suspect there's something they're worried about where weather is concerned and they don't want anyone touching it. Who knows, maybe they don't want a third party dev showing them up and it is a pride thing lol. Do you know why some people don't want the weather SDK?

 

 

 

Hmmmm......

I'm not a weather maven; I tend to fly in what catches my fancy, weather canned or live.

So to be fair, the tiny differences that perturb some are not even really discernable to a mostly casual flyer like myself.

What I do know is that MSFS is offering a fidelity+visual package of the kind that we couldn't even have dreamed of not all that long ago.

That we are still not satisfied seems par for the course, but I wonder if i'm the only one who remembers the FPS hit of the third party clouds for X-plane, for instance. The limited viewing range? The state of the art at the time but decidedly sub-par visuals by today's standards in FSX/P3D? (though both are updating) The rotating billboards? The extra FPS hit when using god-rays or shadows? The absence of cloud self shadowing, and the lack of reflections from the city lights below? The lack of turbulence from buildings?

All potential immersion-breakers that were expected and widely accepted and not very long ago....

I certainly remember.....

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by HiFlyer