lwt1971

Vector could well do for Boeings what Fenix did for Airbuses in flight simulation: raise the bar with a standout product, backed by a fresh new dev house. Their initial announcement and release of info tidbits were interesting and got my attention, but this dev update definitely goes a long way in showing the level of depth they claimed initially. Looking forward to their future deep dives and release. What a time for MSFS and the 3rd party aircraft scene so healthy and active!, with great birds being released or in the pipeline.. and the variety of aircraft be they GA or heavies.

Re: the object culling, LOD curve topic (i.e. landing gears not showing on AI aircraft), there was still some investigation I believe @Kaiii3 and team were doing (per below). Anyone heard any updates since?

Oh, wasn't even referring to you or your posts, and didn't realize you were talking about consoles in them 🙂... my response was to other comments on this thread attributing any issues/degradations to intentional scaling back of the whole sim just for console users, which is a silly and tired talking point (i.e. from a previous comment on this thread: "MS/Asobo have further dumbed down MSFS2024 for console players in SU5", etc 🤷‍♂️

But, but, I've been reliably informed by the MSFS development expert and project manager cosplayers on avsim that any time I see a visual problem (or any problem) it must be due to MS/Asobo serving the "cOnSoLe KiDz" ??

Oh ok, I guess "gamification" is why they keep pushing out these AAU updates with high fidelity aircraft and avionics, bother with computation fluid dynamics in flight models and airflow modelling, and bother with improving the accuracy of ground effect for helicopters, bothering with all those other flight dynamics improvements from 2020->2024, etc etc 🙃

The weather engine itself is certainly capable of depicting/rendering varied weather and dense clouds etc, as seen when using manually configured weather. Not sure what limitations there would be to keep increasing this core weather engine in terms of visual capabilities. I don't buy this overused xbox argument since the sim caters to all kinds of hardware including PCs equivalent or lesser than xbox hardware even. The key is that sim visual fidelity settings are fixed and restricted for xbox (to match hardware) while for PC we're free to increase detail settings etc. The issue IMO is live weather and how they blend global and METAR weather data to then render in the weather engine. That's where improvements would be welcome, either in data source and/or the blending of global and METAR data (it's the latter that was introduced in MSFS 2020 SU7 and "regressed" live weather from prior to that). Re: storm turbulence, as some others have noted during the SU5 beta, and as stated by Seb in the last Q&A, I can definitely see improvements for the GA aircraft I usually fly when using manual weather and storms. Need to try in live weather when I next encounter such dangerous weather. Also as some have said, the aircraft turbulence in storms and dangerous weather sometimes doesn't work as well for larger aircraft vs smaller aircraft apparently (so could be a separate bug).

As already said above by Ryan, if you're into business jets the Citation Longitude alone is the worth the price difference for the Premium Deluxe edition. After Working Title gave it their AAU treatment it pretty much is a payware level biz jet IMO. Will say the same about the SR22. Those two combined make the Premium Deluxe more than worth it for me. Not sure how much they are if added individually to the standard edition in 2024, assuming that's possible. In general, if you're into any of the aircraft in the Deluxe or PD editions that have received the higher fidelity AAU enhancements, then maybe worth considering.

Well, the good is rather simple isn't it... weather radar with a tiltable 3D cone is always better than weather radar with a fixed 3D cone, period. Whatever Asobo can do to advance the ball to an eventual more complete solution is what we obviously want. The second aspect as you say is better aircraft reactions to dangerous weather, and actual dangerous consequences. Sounds like SU5 is shaping up to improve on that: The remaining situation to fix/improve is the live weather depiction of proper dense clouds, t-storms, cells and other dangerous weather (and also more varied clouds, etc). This all stems back to MSFS 2020 SU7 when they started doing METAR blending with global Meteoblue weather. That was a poor first implementation but it's also clear they've improved it a lot since then and in 2024 (but not enough to match pre SU7 live weather, albeit based purely on Meteoblue global data). As of now, either a) the Meteoblue data is not enough or not good as it was, or b) the METAR blending process is still not good enough and is causing the resulting live weather to lose out in terms of what it depicts (some times, or most the time). I have a feeling it's more a case of b) than a), since pre SU7 before METAR blending we had varied weather, and dangerous weather with dangerous consequences. There is also the turbulence settings they introduced in response to a large portion of the user base complaining about turbulence, so guess that has a part to play in all this too. Let's see... MSFS 2024's current core weather engine can depict varied weather, dangerous weather, and dangerous consequences to such weather. It's a matter of live weather being able to depict all what manually configured weather can (given the right data). But I'll take progress on whatever front they're able to make it happen. And in that sense, tiltable weather radar is most welcome, as are the turbulence and airflow modelling improvements in SU5.

Thanks jcomm! That's great to hear. Would you say when using similar manual preset weather with similar conditions and CBs in SU4 vs SU5 there is a discernible difference in SU5? Sounds like it 🙂 So as long as live weather is able to depict the right conditions we should be able to see more realistic impacts now. That, with weather radar tilt, and overall airflow and CFD physics improvements make SU5 a solid update.

For those using SU5 beta, how are the cloud turbulence improvements mentioned by Seb below, especially in live weather dangerous/stormy conditions? Video timestamped to when he started talking about overall airflow simulation improvements: https://youtu.be/UPHlS1Iu6ys?t=1228

In addition to Seb's update on the CFD and physics improvements in the core sim this was by far the most exciting part of the Dev Q&A! Looks to be incredible depth of simulation of systems and dynamics down to the core, loved Matt nerding out on all the technical details and equations 🙂 Given their track record so far, totally expecting this one to deliver. "How can we set a new standard not just in MSFS but flight simulation" is the kind of mantra I love to hear from a flight sim development team.

Yes there are differences between live weather and manual/preset obviously, everyone knows that... what some of us are saying is that when using default live weather (and for me with no other weather/atmospheric related add-ons), some aircraft (i.e. lighter/smaller ones) do get impacted when flying thru storm clouds and dangerous weather. Not sure if this is a base sim bug or forced behaviour in that why then not larger aircraft also get impacted?, or if it comes down to aircraft model/FM/sim config, etc. What is your global MSFS turbulence level set to? FWIW I have mine set at "medium" and sometimes use "realistic", I know Fenix recommends "low" for their aircraft (and also iniBuilds I believe for their aircraft as they feel that's best for FMs using CFD), so might need to set to different levels depending on aircraft. @Tuskin38 what about you? Also FWIW, came across this https://flightsimulator.blog/microsoft-flight-simulator-live-weather/ which I haven't seen before explaining more about Meteoblue and METAR in MSFS, not sure if it's an old article updated to mention MSFS 2024 or if it's the latest info from a knowledgeable source.

You misunderstood me in the first point... my point there was that I find it unreasonable/silly that Asobo would intentionally go out of their way to tone down dangerous weather in order to cater to the "casual player" (as some seem to always suggest), regardless of GA or airliners. And secondary to that, some of us *are* seeing storm clouds having impact on smaller/GA aircraft, more so than on larger aircraft (i.e. airliners). So given this, the theory that Asobo is intentionally toning down bad weather does not make sense.

IRL airbus pilots rave about the Fenix too 🙂 I think it's safe to say with the likes of Fenix, FSL, PMDG, Toliss, etc one can't really go wrong with realism and fidelity. Luckily for MSFS users, they can choose from all of them.

If your assertion is that because of "casual players" Asobo is intentionally not making the weather scary then that'd be incorrect... if that was were truly the case then why are smaller/GA aircraft experiencing bad weather realistically? Of course simmers value a lot of different things (as would be common given such a huge user base for MSFS), but it'd be safe to say a majority of us simmers and Asobo obviously value weather and physics as main components of simulation... hence the considerable improvements to physics and flight/ground dynamics in 2024 over 2020, and avionics, and a bunch of other things. You know, the things the "casual player" wouldn't really care about. Just because they haven't improved weather as much as they could *yet*, doesn't therefore mean these silly tropes are true. Especially since they've already said live weather is due for re-work later in 2024.