Air Traffic Controller Discussion With a Global Perspective
By Nick Warren 813047
#533547 Just out of curiosity Ross, because I have no idea. Is it that hard to add weather to the clients? Is it hours of code, or something relatively simple to do? If it's not terribly time consuming, then why not? It wouldn't be harmful. If it is, then I can certainly respect the delima.
By Ross Carlson 887155
#533555 Adding weather radar depiction in the ATC clients wouldn't be the hardest piece of functionality I've taken on, but it wouldn't be the easiest either. If it was super simple, it would be done already. :D
By Simon Kelsey 810049
#533560
Ross Carlson 887155 wrote:Ahh, okay, that's not as bad, but still doesn't get us anything that we can't already get from real world weather feeds.


Hi Ross,

I'd argue the advantage of doing it via AS would be that it would provide weather (more) consistent with that depicted in the sim. As all significant weather in the sim is basically interpolated from METARs, it can often be very different to the real-world radar feeds, especially in more sparsely-populated areas...
By Ross Carlson 887155
#533578 Are you sure they don't use real world weather radar to drive their simulation? METARs don't tell you nearly as much about the size and density of the cells as the real world weather radar data.

I'm not even sure it matters ... at the end of the day, if you can't control the location of the cells, it doesn't matter what the source data is. (Not to mention the fact that I am loathe to add functionality to ATC clients that depends on third-party payware.)

What we really need to do is some empirical testing to see how consistent weather depiction is from one sim to another, and how much it varies from the real world data. I know some informal testing was done on this years ago, but it wasn't a large enough sample set to be conclusive.
By Dhruv Kalra 878508
#533604
Ross Carlson 887155 wrote:Are you sure they don't use real world weather radar to drive their simulation? METARs don't tell you nearly as much about the size and density of the cells as the real world weather radar data.

I'm not even sure it matters ... at the end of the day, if you can't control the location of the cells, it doesn't matter what the source data is. (Not to mention the fact that I am loathe to add functionality to ATC clients that depends on third-party payware.)

What we really need to do is some empirical testing to see how consistent weather depiction is from one sim to another, and how much it varies from the real world data. I know some informal testing was done on this years ago, but it wasn't a large enough sample set to be conclusive.


I’m all for this. Nothing like having a couple pilots suddenly unable vectors to final at MCO during FSExpo to start your inner monologue cursing about lack of precipitation depiction in vSTARS :D