aktorsyl

This is true.. but also, the current DX12 implementation in SU9 is known for it's extremely bad stuttering when panning. So don't use it 😛

I've plunged on ahead and got it. It's good. Very, very good. It's not $25 good, but it's good. I'd say (my subjective opinion, obviously) that $10 to $15 would be much more reasonable for this. Freeware enhancement mods have done similar (or more) for, well, free.

That I'm not sure of, to be perfectly honest. I know overland they use mathematical interpolation as per their own dev blogs. Over the oceans.. hmm, good question. Maybe the early adopters of sattelite-based depiction?

Sorry I should've been more specific: in terms of clouds and precipitation. HiFi's winds aloft data has always been very good.

Well that's what I'm saying 😛 ActiveSky only interpolates between METAR stations and while this was fine in P3D, I don't think it'd be nearly as good as MSFS live weather in that regard. Even with MSFS's live weather failings.

The thing is, I'm not entirely convinced that would be better. ActiveSky has always used METAR interpolation and (as far as I know) not weather models to depict weather outside of METAR zones.

We should start invoicing Asobo for the kind of weird testing we have to do for them 😅

Very interesting. Almost as if the models refresh around that time and then just use AI to "guess" what they need to do until the next daily refresh the next morning. (Totally just a guess here, though)

Yessir, these tests were from the latest beta build. I think they do have some kind of interpolation, but maybe waaaay too gradual? I haven't had more time to test further up north, but there's a double front hitting us this weekend - so will be a good opportunity for some testing then.

No, but that's my point 🙂 The weather models do reflect the wind (on Meteoblue as well as Windy, etc) but those models aren't reflected correctly in the sim. EDIT: To clarify, pic below. 1 is the FACT airport with its associated METAR which is correct, low winds. 2 and 3 are way outside the METAR zone but have wind accurately reflected on Meteoblue (which is where the pic is from). Sim depiction for 2 and 3 are however the same as for 1, which is the METAR zone. (The closest other METAR area is about 300nm north of this) On a different test, see areas 3 and 4 - further out from the METAR, but still with winds of approx 7kts instead of 25kts (at the time this was tested the wind died down a bit): So it's kinda anecdotal, I suppose. I think it's more a question of how the models are interpreted and at what distance the weather depiction no longer uses the METAR, but rather the world weather models.

Hahah very, very true.

I mean, I fly on VATSIM too and even I would be happy with slightly incorrect METAR data, as long as the world weather data is at least somewhat accurate and represents what's actually going on outside of the airport zones. An example: Last night I had 2 trees go down in my front garden. Winds of around 70-80kts. I live about 40nm north of the FACT METAR, which (being on the other side of the mountain range) had winds at about 13kts. I get in the sim to see what's happening at my local airfield (which, incidentally, was closed due things blowing over onto the runway and parking areas) and... 7 kts. So, yeah.

When you look at the FPS, are you limited by GPU or MainThread? Highly, highly doubt the GPU is the bottleneck there.

When saying "Take the wheel" is not an option.

I've used OnAir and NeoFly. Right off the bat, I can say that I don't really prefer Neofly, though. The system is great but the interface (even the new early-release one) is just clunky. For me, anyway. OnAir is great, but the fact that it mostly requires you to return to your home airport after each leg is a bit meh. Compared to Neofly, which has more freedom in this aspect. Air Hauler 2 - I've bought it when it came out but haven't gotten around to using it yet. Will do and see how that goes.