Mike777

Once source of RW METARS is Flightaware. It seems to cover the world -- earlier today I tried Kabul/OAKB and a slightly old METAR showed up. Type in the ICAO (just the name may work too) in the search box and then scroll down to near the bottom of the page.

Frank, have you posted your findings as perhaps a bug report in the MSFS forum? Someone with your experience and expertise might just get their attention!

No, Frank, I just said my experience has been different. One example doesn't prove anything. I am well aware that MSFS is far from perfect and quirky ATIS is hardly a surprise. I wold be interested to know which method of extracting weather data from MSFS do you think is more accurate? In this thread it is unclear to me which programs pull data from MSFS, which from RW, and which from addons like Active Sky (which I believe doesn't work with MSFS).

The ATIS is based on sim weather, unlike several of the suggestions earlier in this thread. That has not been my experience. When I listen to the ATIS once I am in range to receive it, the conditions are pretty much what ATIS reports, notably the landing runways and wind speed and direction.

Hi Luka, If you can find the real-world ATIS frequency, you can tune it in your aircraft radio. MSFS appears to be quite accurate in reproducing real-world frequencies. The ATIS usually comes in much sooner than it is selectable by using MSFS ATC>Nearest Airports. If the real-world charts show more than one frequency, you may have to experiment.

Thank you very much for checking!

Hi Waldo, Does this app allow download of the "development" versions of the 78XH and A320NX? The "Stable" versions of these are often not up-to-date, especially after an MSFS update that can mess up the older versions.

Thanks, pmplayer! I didn't know where to find the developer file on that page.

That's only if you start on a runway, where the aircraft is supposed to be ready to go. If you load at a gate or ramp, IRS alignment works (you can still force instant alignment, or choose Real, Instant, Fast, or Normal as the default alignment on the Heavy tab of the FMC). AFAIK the latest developer version is here, put out on July 28th: https://discord.com/channels/808476259016769546/852748629877850143 Choose the DEV version.

I would have thought anything in "Community" would override anything in "Official," even if "Official" contains a "handcrafted" airport or other scenery. Is that not correct? I am sure there would be a problem if two versions of the same airport were included in "Community" -- duplicate, conflicting gates, runways, taxiways, aircraft parked on top of each other, not to mention CTDs as Dillon said.

The FBW folks update the Development version very frequently. I have not tested it since the SU5 update + hot fixes, but it is likely they have fixed the issue(s) or will very soon. Follow this link: https://github.com/flybywiresim/a32nx Scroll down to "Unstable Master Branch Build", then click on the link “Download development build here.” Download the zipped folder, copy the file contained in the zip folder into your community folder (with MSFS not running) and it should show up. On the same page, a little higher up, you will also find the “A32NX Installer,” which can be downloaded and installed on your machine. It will update the Developer and other versions directly into the Community folder as often as you want. This page also explains the different versions..

Just a reminder that you can shut off Live Weather - when I did, the problem went away. Currently in midflight; when I descend I will turn Live Weather back on for the approach and see how it works. Update: Live weather worked fine for the approach and landing at ATL.

But there is an important exception: I would say a 747 that would have to veer off the runway to avoid a collision, is comparable to a container ship in a narrow channel to which a sailboat must give way. Many years ago I did a lot of sailing in San Francisco Bay; in more than one race I remember crossing the path of an oncoming container ship that was blowing its horn as a warning. Its skipper clearly had no intention of turning his ship out of the narrow shipping channel to avoid hitting sailboats crossing the ship's path. The boat I was on was always far enough away that we were in no danger, but it was often difficult to tell how much separation there was for other boats much closer to the oncoming ship. At any rate, here we have power vs. power: a powered yacht vs. a 747. I would guess that the law would give the much larger vessel, limited to the narrow "channel"/runway, the right of way over the much smaller and more maneuverable yacht.

Nothing about which one gives way between a sailboat and a 747.

I'm really regretting that I got into such a silly discussion.