Just curious about your thoughts on this weather program, FS Global Real Weather.  I usually use Active Sky for P3d, but in the last week or so I've been using the P3d 5.2 version of GRW.  I like it and the weather seems relatively accurate.  Not sure of how heavily it affects the performance of P3d, versus Active Sky, but I have had no problems with it, and absolutely no crashes or memory shortages. I like the way the clouds are depicted and I don't seem to have anything to complain about.

So, I just thought I'd pose the question about this program to the AVSIM members, and create a discussion about it.  I always value your opinions and maybe this is something that could be an alternative to those who don't have a third party weather program for the sim.

Stan

Stan. If you live close to an airport as I do load the weather from each wx program into P3D and decide which is the more accurate.

Temp, pressure and wind direction/speed are pretty easy to check against local weather stations that upload to www.wunderground.com. I do that with my own weather station.

The cloud depiction will be key and should help you decide but in my opinion it would take something special to beat Active Sky.

14 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Stan. If you live close to an airport as I do load the weather from each wx program into P3D and decide which is the more accurate.

Temp, pressure and wind direction/speed are pretty easy to check against local weather stations that upload to www.wunderground.com. I do that with my own weather station.

The cloud depiction will be key and should help you decide but in my opinion it would take something special to beat Active Sky.

Ray, yes, I've always used and will continue to use Active Sky.  However, GRW seemed to be pretty darn good.  I guess I was just wondering how others felt regarding it's impact on performance in the sim along with its accuracy.  Also, I think the clouds look quite acceptable.

BTW, shouldn't you be retiring for the day?  It's already 10:30 + in the UK.  Ha!  Just kidding.  I'm usually in bed watching TV or using my Ipad at that time.

Stan

Stan,

Yes, about to hit the sack over here. But you didn’t fully answer my suggestion. Do both programs provide the same air temp, dew point, wind and pressure for a nearby airport so you can check them for accuracy?

What criteria are you using to determine GRW is pretty good? Accuracy is everything.

Does GRW do historic weather?

27 minutes ago, spilok said:

Ray, yes, I've always used and will continue to use Active Sky.  However, GRW seemed to be pretty darn good. 

I have used both extensively in FSX and FSX SE and find them both to be very very good.  I settled on AS16 about 2 1/2 years ago when FSGRW began getting real slow loading and updating.  I never had an issue with its accuracy.

56 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Stan,

Yes, about to hit the sack over here. But you didn’t fully answer my suggestion. Do both programs provide the same air temp, dew point, wind and pressure for a nearby airport so you can check them for accuracy?

What criteria are you using to determine GRW is pretty good? Accuracy is everything.

Does GRW do historic weather?

Ray, I plan to pit one against the other tomorrow. I do know the GRW does do historic weather.

Stan

I love GRW been using it for years. I find it very accurate where I mostly fly which is Western US. Depicts the low marine layer we get out here in Southern Calif very well. Clouds look very nice using REX Texture 4. 

Martin

I have GRW mainly for FS9, for P3D and XP I moved to AS, manly because WRX for P3D aircrafts then...

16 hours ago, spilok said:

Ray, I plan to pit one against the other tomorrow. I do know the GRW does do historic weather.

Stan

Checked GRW this morning and it indeed does provide wind, pressure, air temp at selected airport. However, dew point was not something I could find when loading the program.  As far as accuracy, I'm within 10 miles of my selected airport, and the weather outside my window looks pretty similar to what the sim is showing (without EA on).  Active Sky is also accurate, perhaps a little more so.  However, GRW is still a viable selection for those interested in an alternative weather system.

Stan,

I’m curious why you would buy another weather program if you’re happy with AS. Unless you’re providing a public service by buying GRW and reporting on its features. 😉

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Stan,

I’m curious why you would buy another weather program if you’re happy with AS. Unless you’re providing a public service by buying GRW and reporting on its features. 😉

That's all, Ray.  Just information SINCE I own both.  I bought GRW over a year ago when I thought Active Sky could be improved. It wasn't that expensive. In my life, I've been "happy" with many things.  However, after I tried another brand (say, an automobile), I found out how much more happy I became. That's probably why I own MSFS along side of P3d.  I'm very happy with P3d, but I wanted to see if I could be happy with another sim as well.  So far, I like both for different reasons.

Stan

Edited August 20, 20214 yr by spilok

I was wondering same thing. However your explanation is completely reasonable. Makes sense. 

I have both FSGRW and AS. I bought FSGRW years ago and have upgraded it as time has gone on. I bought AS afterward (years ago) and have upgraded it, too.

I tend to use AS most of the time I sim, since many of the aircraft I use integrate with it, but every now and then, I like to run FSGRW. I find that FSGRW is a little less hazy on the horizon than AS in the area in which I live, so for me, it seems to be slightly more realistic to what I see out my window.

48 minutes ago, JRMurray said:

I have both FSGRW and AS. I bought FSGRW years ago and have upgraded it as time has gone on. I bought AS afterward (years ago) and have upgraded it, too.

I tend to use AS most of the time I sim, since many of the aircraft I use integrate with it, but every now and then, I like to run FSGRW. I find that FSGRW is a little less hazy on the horizon than AS in the area in which I live, so for me, it seems to be slightly more realistic to what I see out my window.

Vive la difference!

The data of FSGRW is still excellent I would say and historic data is offered as well. And it is pretty authentic.

The only thing that bothers me at FSGRW is the little uncertainty of the development cycle. Sometimes you have to wait a bit longer for patches after new P3D versions. There was a time some years ago then the servers were down or difficult to access and it took a long time until it was fixed.

Before P3Dv5, the combo of FSGRW and REX Texture/SoftClouds and then SkyForce held as one of the best. Today you can see the challenge of P3Dv5 for the REX developers.