what if there is no metar? Ocean etc.

[frankbyte]

Hi

Thanks for this great add-on!

I have a question: since it is supposed to model the clouds as there are at different airports in the vicinity based on the METARs, what happens if we fly for example over the ocean? Will the clouds be like they were over the last airport passed? Or would the NOAA-plugin (if installed of course) take over and override it with its own values it gets from the upper sky (grib2-File)?

Thanks and cheers
Franz

[sundog]

FSGRW creates "fake" METAR stations, and RWC would use those if they are present. NOAA doesn't do that, however.

In the absence of FSGRW, RWC will go with the closest METAR report, wherever it may be. Could be on the nearest island with an airport for example.

[frankbyte]

Are you sure? That's strange because with the NOAA-Plugin i get some changes of the weather over the oceans that match with the conditions i can see on skyvector.com (like thunderstorms etc.) and that doens't seem to be related to any metar-station far away.

[sundog]

What I meant is that NOAA doesn't generate actual fake METAR data that is passed to X-Plane. It communicates using datarefs, which lack the information RWC needs to place individual cloud systems. The way FSGRW does it however does cause the information to flow through to RWC and SMP.

 

[birdy.dma]

Hi frankbyte,

I know, it's more to pay, but the best combo is FSGRW and RWC. Should be even better with 10.50.

 

[frankbyte]

Hi birdy

Ok so i will try with FSGRW again. I purchased it and didn't liked it...i prefer the NOAA plugin. But if the results in combination with RWC is better, i will try it again.

[frankbyte]

5 hours ago, sundog said:

What I meant is that NOAA doesn't generate actual fake METAR data that is passed to X-Plane. It communicates using datarefs, which lack the information RWC needs to place individual cloud systems. The way FSGRW does it however does cause the information to flow through to RWC and SMP.

 

OK, thanks for these informations!