Skymaxx pro 4.8.1 & Asxp

[seth]

Hi

Just re-installed updated edition of Skymaxx.

looks like there is not a standard method to inject correct weather from Asxp though Rwc. External injector + Always + Automatic have the same result which sometimes is not correct with Asxp conditions.

finally which is the correct method to use property Rwc+Asxp ?

 

thanks

 

Edited June 3, 2019 by seth

[FlyAgi]

I suggest to use the 'external injector' method, this should work. Make sure you start ASXP before launching X-plane so when the flight is loaded and RWC starts it finds a current metar.rwx (especially important if the 'never change visible weather'option is checked). If you have ever used FSGRW delete the fsgrwsmp.rwx file in the XP root folder, this file could interfere with the ASXP weather information. 

[seth]

thanks , i already made all these suggestions, but sometimes looks like External injector is stuck on previous weather conditions... anyway i will test more

[FlyAgi]

If this is stuck just switch to 'never - read datarefs instead' (or similar), wait until the weather has been redrawn and then switch back to 'External Injector'. This way RWC should reread the weather files and this works well for me. Further I think 'Automatic' possibly leads to the same results as 'External Injector' when using ASXP but I'm not completely sure about that. The setting 'automatic' when using the default real weather lets RWC read the metar.rwx for drawing weather and this is all you need when using ASXP so I expect RWC to do the same in 'automatic' and 'external injector' mode with ASXP as injector. With FSGRW however the 'external injector' mode gets you different results because of the additional information from the fsgrwsmp.rwx file which, if I get this right, will only be taken into account in 'external injector' mode. 

 

 

[shaved_ape]

Prior to purchasing and installing FSGRW (out of shear curiosity but I'm glad I did now), I used ASXP and haven't had any issue with weather depiction, with the only grievance being the winds.  ASXP is still being tweaked by HiFi Simulations, and though it is a good metar injector, I find now that FSGRW does a much better job.  i know this doesn't help the OP in his issue, but as the others have stated, setting RWC to External Injector was what I always ran at, and had no problems, aside from the finer points to ASXP not giving me the whole picture in terms of cloud layers and proper winds.

[dima436393]

Hello! I am using SkyMaxx Pro + RWC + ASXP. There is a problem: the base of clouds does not match the METAR data (2000 - 2500 feet higher) and it saddens me ... How can I solve this problem, what needs to be done? If this is not only my problem, will it be resolved in the near future?

[sundog]

It's not a known issue, assuming you have RWC set to "external injector" mode and "never change visible weather" is not on (which is what you want to ensure the scene matches what ASXP is sending in.)

You might also want to try going into the SkyMaxx Pro configuration, change some setting slightly (like the cloud draw area,) and see if that causes new clouds to appear where you expect them to be. There can be a race condition where where ASXP sends in its weather data after SMP has already constructed the scene, and that's a way to force SMP to recreate everything.

If you're still seeing this problem after trying that, we'd need to see any METAR-related files in your X-Plane directory, your log.txt, and the location your plane was at. I think ASXP deletes its METAR files when it shuts down though, so collecting the data we need is unfortunately tricky.

It's possible you're seeing the effect of "scud", or the irregularities at the top and bottom of a cloud layer. Real clouds are not perfectly flat slabs; there is some distance between the bottoms of the bottom-most puffs that make up the cloud, and the point where you are 100% enveloped by it.  2,000 feet seems a bit much for that, though.

There are also a few cases where we will override where an external injector says clouds should be because the data is not physically plausible. It could be one of those.

Edited November 6, 2019 by sundog

[dima436393]

23 hours ago, sundog said:

It's not a known issue, assuming you have RWC set to "external injector" mode and "never change visible weather" is not on (which is what you want to ensure the scene matches what ASXP is sending in.)

You might also want to try going into the SkyMaxx Pro configuration, change some setting slightly (like the cloud draw area,) and see if that causes new clouds to appear where you expect them to be. There can be a race condition where where ASXP sends in its weather data after SMP has already constructed the scene, and that's a way to force SMP to recreate everything.

If you're still seeing this problem after trying that, we'd need to see any METAR-related files in your X-Plane directory, your log.txt, and the location your plane was at. I think ASXP deletes its METAR files when it shuts down though, so collecting the data we need is unfortunately tricky.

It's possible you're seeing the effect of "scud", or the irregularities at the top and bottom of a cloud layer. Real clouds are not perfectly flat slabs; there is some distance between the bottoms of the bottom-most puffs that make up the cloud, and the point where you are 100% enveloped by it.  2,000 feet seems a bit much for that, though.

There are also a few cases where we will override where an external injector says clouds should be because the data is not physically plausible. It could be one of those.

I sent you files and screenshots to analyze my problem. Please pay attention to METAR (UUDD 070730Z 31003MPS 280V340 3200 -DZ BR OVC002 06/04 Q1007 R88 / 290042 NOSIG RMK QBB060) and the altitude at which I took the screenshots. The first screenshot with SkyMaxx enabled. The second - SkyMaxx is off (default clouds), which corresponds to real weather. I really hope that the problem will be solved and I will see the real weather with SkyMaxx !!!

Log.txt

GizmoLog.txt

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by dima436393

[oldflyguy]

@dima436393 I do like the cloud art that SMP provides along with RWC in XP.  However, you are not imagining things.  Often the cloud base altitudes don't correspond to the Metar readout. But while just using "Real WX" as your setting the cloud base altitudes are right on.  The difference can be just a little all the way up to thousand(s) of feet.  I think this is due to a layering issue - if the layers are too close together SMP / RWC seem to have an issue in resolving those layers.  Having said that I've come to accept this as still a better alternative than XP's cloud art(?).  Sorry, it's easy to be snarky and many posters take that route.  As a former RW pilot I enjoy what XP and SMP bring to my virtual flying "fix".  

[dima436393]

8 hours ago, oldflyguy said:

@dima436393 I do like the cloud art that SMP provides along with RWC in XP.  However, you are not imagining things.  Often the cloud base altitudes don't correspond to the Metar readout. But while just using "Real WX" as your setting the cloud base altitudes are right on.  The difference can be just a little all the way up to thousand(s) of feet.  I think this is due to a layering issue - if the layers are too close together SMP / RWC seem to have an issue in resolving those layers.  Having said that I've come to accept this as still a better alternative than XP's cloud art(?).  Sorry, it's easy to be snarky and many posters take that route.  As a former RW pilot I enjoy what XP and SMP bring to my virtual flying "fix".  

I am also a real pilot. And if I am preparing to land in difficult weather conditions (ovc002), and in fact, good weather is generated, then it saddens me ... I hope that this can be fixed. Otherwise, I really like SkyMaxx and RWC.

[oldflyguy]

There is no weather generation going on with SMP/RWC.  Just cloud art and placement.  If the ceilings are way off try the "debug" selection and refresh the weather.  You can also check the metar log in XP during the flight to see if it's updating as you have selected.  

[sundog]

I'd really need to have your entire METAR.rwx that was in use during this flight to say what's going on. From your log, I can tell that initially RWC received a totally empty Metar.rwx file from ASXP, which would result in no 3D clouds being displayed at all and only certain visibility effects showing up. That might explain what you're seeing. Did you try my suggestion of changing SMP's settings a little bit to force it to reload the weather?

It might also be a discrepancy in how we define the "bottom" of a cloud layer; the first screenshot might be what I'd expect to see as you're just entering a cloud layer but you're not deep enough inside it yet to completely obscure your visibility. Hard to say exactly what's going on without that METAR file though.

[oldflyguy]

@sundog brings up a very good point.  If you don't think you are getting the correct (or any) weather you can force a reload using the "debug" selection then refreshing the weather.  Whenever I've confused ASXP/SMP/RWC to the point where I'm not getting what I supposed to (or I'm just not sure) that's my get out of jail free card...LOL!

[dima436393]

On 11/9/2019 at 1:54 PM, sundog said:

I'd really need to have your entire METAR.rwx that was in use during this flight to say what's going on. From your log, I can tell that initially RWC received a totally empty Metar.rwx file from ASXP, which would result in no 3D clouds being displayed at all and only certain visibility effects showing up. That might explain what you're seeing. Did you try my suggestion of changing SMP's settings a little bit to force it to reload the weather?

It might also be a discrepancy in how we define the "bottom" of a cloud layer; the first screenshot might be what I'd expect to see as you're just entering a cloud layer but you're not deep enough inside it yet to completely obscure your visibility. Hard to say exactly what's going on without that METAR file though.

one more ... ESPA 140750Z VRB02KT 1100 BR VV002 M00 / M00 Q1005

GizmoLog.txt

Log.txt

metar.rwx

[sundog]

Not sure I understand the issue here - the METAR calls for broken clouds at 1100, and you're just below them at 1000 unless I'm missing something. Can you provide more detail on what I'm looking at here, and if you tried any of the troubleshooting steps I suggested earlier?

 

[dima436393]

1 hour ago, sundog said:

Not sure I understand the issue here - the METAR calls for broken clouds at 1100, and you're just below them at 1000 unless I'm missing something. Can you provide more detail on what I'm looking at here, and if you tried any of the troubleshooting steps I suggested earlier?

 

It depicts a landing approach under weather conditions: visibility of 1,100 meters, vertical visibility of 200 feet (according to ASXP, and voice ATIS confirmed this to me), but the ground and the runway are visible when the aircraft is well above 200 feet. I followed your recommendations, I also created weather conditions manually without ASXP, but I did not see a positive result. Nevertheless, I really like your product and I hope that this annoying problem will be resolved. Please experiment with your product at any airport with similar weather.

[oldflyguy]

@dima436393, the way I read the Metar provided is:  Wind is variable at 2Kts, Ceiling is 1100, Mist with Vertical Visibility at 200 Meters with temp and dew point at freezing.  When visibility is less than 1 mile the Metar typically will give that as a fraction of one mile - 1/4M - not in feet unless it's RVR which is not indicated the Metar posted.  Vertical visibility is how far up into the indefinate ceiling you can see - not necessarily from the ground

[dima436393]

1 hour ago, oldflyguy said:

@dima436393, the way I read the Metar provided is:  Wind is variable at 2Kts, Ceiling is 1100, Mist with Vertical Visibility at 200 Meters with temp and dew point at freezing.  When visibility is less than 1 mile the Metar typically will give that as a fraction of one mile - 1/4M - not in feet unless it's RVR which is not indicated the Metar posted.  Vertical visibility is how far up into the indefinate ceiling you can see - not necessarily from the ground

Dear oldflyguy! I am a true pilot, TRI, and I know very well how to read METAR, TAF, etc. For your information: 001 - 100 feet, 002 - 200 feet, ...., 015 - 1500 feet, ..., 034 - 3400 feet, etc. Vertical visibility for METAR, TAF in meters is not used. And 1100 is not a ceiling, it is horizontal visibility in meters. How to read and understand METAR, TAF correctly, I think you can use Google search.

[oldflyguy]

Excuse me @dima436393, I've never flown outside the US where I understand that particular measure of distance (Meters) is used.  Pardon the misinformation...

By the way, did you disable SMP/RWC in this particular instance and see what XP Real World Weather was "saying".  I found in some cases where I wasn't sure I was getting the real deal from SMP/RWC and switched over to XP WX, that mode gave me the same result.  Although it didn't look as good...

Edited November 15, 2019 by oldflyguy