|
Home > Archive > Flight simulator > October 2005 > Can real weather be edited?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Can real weather be edited?
|
|
| Andy L. 2005-10-26, 7:39 pm |
| When I download real world weather (once, not every 15 minutes) can that be
edited or is the user defined weather different?
Andy
| |
| Quilljar 2005-10-26, 7:39 pm |
| Andy L. wrote:
quote:
> When I download real world weather (once, not every 15 minutes) can
> that be edited or is the user defined weather different?
>
> Andy
I doubt if the real weather can be edited -something of a philosophical
question actually :-)
Yes, the user defined weather is editable. It is quite different from the
real weather which is configured from genuine weather station reports via
the internet. You would not need to be able to edit this surely? The user
defined will acheive all you want. Just play around with it until you get
the hang.
Good luck!
--
Sincerely,
Quilljar
| |
| Andy L. 2005-10-26, 7:39 pm |
| Thanks.
"Quilljar" <wykehill-flightsim@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:djotfu$93$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
quote:
> Andy L. wrote:
>
> I doubt if the real weather can be edited -something of a philosophical
> question actually :-)
> Yes, the user defined weather is editable. It is quite different from the
> real weather which is configured from genuine weather station reports via
> the internet. You would not need to be able to edit this surely? The user
> defined will acheive all you want. Just play around with it until you get
> the hang.
> Good luck!
>
>
> --
> Sincerely,
> Quilljar
>
>
>
| |
| James H. Kaye 2005-10-27, 7:33 pm |
| I am using Active Sky, which allows editing and saving downloaded real world
weather as well as creating your own weather. There are also many
pre-defined weather scenarios. I highly recommend it. The link is
www.hifisim.com.
Jim Kaye
"Andy L." <caldex@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:m7Q7f.532$2y.185@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
quote:
> When I download real world weather (once, not every 15 minutes) can that
> be edited or is the user defined weather different?
>
> Andy
>
| |
| Andy L. 2005-10-27, 7:33 pm |
| Great, thank you. That is one the "must haves" that I don't yet. I didn't
know you could save weather scenarios though.
"James H. Kaye" <JKaye_1@charter.net> wrote in message
news:CF78f.2591$7s1.2319@fe04.lga...
quote:
>I am using Active Sky, which allows editing and saving downloaded real
>world weather as well as creating your own weather. There are also many
>pre-defined weather scenarios. I highly recommend it. The link is
>www.hifisim.com.
>
> Jim Kaye
>
> "Andy L." <caldex@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:m7Q7f.532$2y.185@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>
| |
| Andy L. 2005-10-27, 7:33 pm |
| Wow! I just went to the site. $38.00 is a bit steep. Is this that great????
"James H. Kaye" <JKaye_1@charter.net> wrote in message
news:CF78f.2591$7s1.2319@fe04.lga...
quote:
>I am using Active Sky, which allows editing and saving downloaded real
>world weather as well as creating your own weather. There are also many
>pre-defined weather scenarios. I highly recommend it. The link is
>www.hifisim.com.
>
> Jim Kaye
>
> "Andy L." <caldex@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:m7Q7f.532$2y.185@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>
| |
| David Wilson-Okamura 2005-10-27, 7:33 pm |
|
___| reply |__________________________________________________________
Wow! I just went to the site. $38.00 is a bit steep. Is this that
great?
_____________________________________________________________________
Don't buy anything that will get you in trouble with the people you
love and who depend on you. But ActiveSky is great. The best thing
about it, in my view, is the ability to see weather systems that you
are not actually in. What do I mean? With the default weather, you
don't see a new weather system until you enter it. All of the sudden,
you're in a thunderstorm! And, everywhere you can see, it's thundering!
With ActiveSky, it's more subtle: you can see the thunderstorm in the
distance and fly around it. To take a less dramatic example, when there
are clouds collecting on the windward side of a mountain range, THAT'S
where you see the clouds. With the default weather, you wouldn't see
them until you got to them, and when you got to them, it would look as
if the whole sky was filled with clouds in every direction.
Having said that, if $38 is too steep (and it is real money), I've had
a lot of fun with the freeware program FS Metar
http://personal.telefonica.terra.es/web/fsmetar. It's easy to use and
produces more interesting weather than the default. Since it processes
METARs, it can also be used to play back "old" weather from a METAR
archive such as http://vortex.plymouth.edu/sa_parse-u.html
_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
| |
| Gregory 2005-10-27, 11:32 pm |
| On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:08:15 -0500, David Wilson-Okamura <David
Wilson-Okamura@forums.simradar.com> brought the following:
quote:
>
>___| reply |____________________________________________
quote:
>Wow! I just went to the site. $38.00 is a bit steep. Is this that great?
>_____________________________________________________
>
>Don't buy anything that will get you in trouble with the people you
>love and who depend on you. But ActiveSky is great. The best thing
>about it, in my view, is the ability to see weather systems that you
>are not actually in. What do I mean? With the default weather, you
>don't see a new weather system until you enter it. All of the sudden,
>you're in a thunderstorm! And, everywhere you can see, it's thundering!
>With ActiveSky, it's more subtle: you can see the thunderstorm in the
>distance and fly around it. To take a less dramatic example, when there
>are clouds collecting on the windward side of a mountain range, THAT'S
>where you see the clouds. With the default weather, you wouldn't see
>them until you got to them, and when you got to them, it would look as
>if the whole sky was filled with clouds in every direction.
>
>Having said that, if $38 is too steep (and it is real money), I've had
>a lot of fun with the freeware program FS Metar
>http://personal.telefonica.terra.es/web/fsmetar
David.. thanks for the great idea. Have FSMetar 1.5.4 installed and
did a RWW flight from ONT to OAK. It's interesting all right. There
was a problem with FSUIPC 3.50 and the Reg code.. so went back to
FSUIPC 2.975 temporarily. Now will have to learn better [how to read]
METAR codes. 2.975 works well except in Europe and Asia where
there are BAD visibility corruption problems at the horizon.
-Gregory
quote:
>It's easy to use and
>produces more interesting weather than the default. Since it processes
>METARs, it can also be used to play back "old" weather from a METAR
>archive such as http://vortex.plymouth.edu/sa_parse-u.html
>
| |
| David Wilson-Okamura 2005-10-27, 11:32 pm |
|
___| reply |__________________________________________________________
David.. thanks for the great idea. Have FSMetar 1.5.4 installed and
did a RWW flight from ONT to OAK. It's interesting all right. There
was a problem with FSUIPC 3.50 and the Reg code.. so went back to
FSUIPC 2.975 temporarily. Now will have to learn better
METAR codes. 2.975 works well except in Europe and Asia where
there are BAD visibility corruption problems at the horizon.
_____________________________________________________________________
Send the author an email; his address is on the FS Metar website
http://personal.telefonica.terra.es/web/fsmetar/
_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
| |
| Gregory 2005-10-27, 11:32 pm |
| On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 21:09:11 -0500, David Wilson-Okamura <David
Wilson-Okamura@forums.simradar.com> brought the following to our
attention:
quote:
>
>___| reply |__________________________________________________________
>David.. thanks for the great idea. Have FSMetar 1.5.4 installed and
>did a RWW flight from ONT to OAK. It's interesting all right. There
>was a problem with FSUIPC 3.50 and the Reg code.. so went back to
>FSUIPC 2.975 temporarily. Now will have to learn better THE
>METAR codes. 2.975 works well except in Europe and Asia where
>there are BAD visibility corruption problems at the horizon.
>
>_________________________________________________________
>
>Send the author an email; his address is on the FS Metar website
> http://personal.telefonica.terra.es/web/fsmetar/
>
>_________________________________________________________
David.. found this entry in the FAQ..
Q. Problems with FSUIPC 3.44 or greater version. FSMetar
canīt connect to FSUIPC (Not Connected all time.)
A. Your FSUIPC key is invalid. Review your FSUIPC log file
(modules folder) and report to Pete Downson.
| |
| David Wilson-Okamura 2005-10-27, 11:32 pm |
|
___| reply |__________________________________________________________
David.. found this entry in the FAQ...
_____________________________________________________________________
I saw that too. Does it help, though?
_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
| |
| Crash Lander 2005-10-27, 11:32 pm |
| What effect does Active sky have on frame rates? I use FSMetar a bit , but
found sometimes it was a bit heavy on frame rates. Is active sky any better
in that respect?
Crash Lander
--
I'm not always right,
But I'm never wrong!
"Gregory" <flightsim.maps@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3mv2m1d9fg7nskf6b1rnq16jdcbcc3gke1@4ax.com...
quote:
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:08:15 -0500, David Wilson-Okamura <David
> Wilson-Okamura@forums.simradar.com> brought the following:
>
>
>
> David.. thanks for the great idea. Have FSMetar 1.5.4 installed and
> did a RWW flight from ONT to OAK. It's interesting all right. There
> was a problem with FSUIPC 3.50 and the Reg code.. so went back to
> FSUIPC 2.975 temporarily. Now will have to learn better [how to read]
> METAR codes. 2.975 works well except in Europe and Asia where
> there are BAD visibility corruption problems at the horizon.
>
> -Gregory
>
>
>
>
| |
| Gregory 2005-10-27, 11:32 pm |
|
Someone will need to reply that's used AS. Are you saying FSMetar
cuts into the framerate? how so? Just ran one of the California
Cargo routes on 500MHz hardware with some tough weather and
substantial AI traffic.. and there wasn't any framerate hit?
(was there?) :]
-Gregory
p.s. only problem was reading the METAR codes..
--------------
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:10:09 +1000, "Crash Lander" <here@there.com.za>
brought the following to our attention:
quote:
>What effect does Active sky have on frame rates? I use FSMetar a bit , but
>found sometimes it was a bit heavy on frame rates. Is active sky any better
>in that respect?
>Crash Lander
>
>--
>I'm not always right,
>But I'm never wrong!
>"Gregory" <flightsim.maps@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
>
>
| |
| Crash Lander 2005-10-28, 2:32 am |
| I'm not saying it was the FSMetar program itself that was causing the frame
rate hit, rather the clouds it drew. Maybe I was imagining it. I may have my
settings up marginally too high for when the weather starts to get thick.
I find FSMetar far better than default real world weather simply because of
the fact that in the default it's clear one minute, then fogged in the next
with no transition. It's also better than the Squawkbox weather too. I
don't think I've ever seen rain depicted with the squawkbox weather.
I'm sure I read somewhere here that there was a weather program that drew
weather with less effect on frame rates than the default clouds did. Can't
locate the post right now, but I'm sure I read it here.
Crash Lander
--
I'm not always right,
But I'm never wrong!
"Crash Lander" <here@there.com.za> wrote in message
news:4361969c_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
quote:
> What effect does Active sky have on frame rates? I use FSMetar a bit , but
> found sometimes it was a bit heavy on frame rates. Is active sky any
> better in that respect?
> Crash Lander
>
> --
> I'm not always right,
> But I'm never wrong!
> "Gregory" <flightsim.maps@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:3mv2m1d9fg7nskf6b1rnq16jdcbcc3gke1@4ax.com...
>
>
| |
| Dallas 2005-10-28, 2:32 am |
|
"Crash Lander"
quote:
> What effect does Active sky have on frame rates?
I performed some ActiveSky frame rate tests using my "standard frame rate
benchmark". With the out of the box settings, a moderately complex
"weatherscape" cost 5 FPS.
Subjectively, a frame rate hog aircraft and a complex weather system
produced frame rates in the 8-10 range.
In other words, yes, ActiveSky can have a severe effect on frame rates.
Dallas
| |
| David Wilson-Okamura 2005-10-28, 7:35 pm |
| - I used FS Metar for about five months before getting ActiveSky -- did
not notice any consistent impact on framerates relative to default
weather, though weather did seem more complex/interesting.
- I'm not contradicting what Dallas said about ActiveSky and
framerates. But he's describing "out-of-the-box" impact. If you have
WideFS and can run ActiveSky on a second computer, some of that impact
is reduced. More important is to limit max cloud layers (that's an
ActiveSky setting). I limit mine to 3, and have noticed no impact on
framerates relative to the default weather. This was my main concern
before getting the program, and in practice my worries were all for
naught. I am very, very pleased.
* My system specs, in case you're wondering: P4 2.2 MHz, 1 gig RAM,
Radeon 9100 video card with 128Mb onboard RAM; that's a PCI card, by
the way, not PCI Express or AGP. Yes, I know that's a big drag on
everything else, but the alternative is getting a motherboard and who
knows what else.
_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
|
| |
|
|