Re: Weather from ActiveSky

[Enrico Schiratti]

> It was on the 'phone. You said you hadn't realised how
> simple it was ... you
> were pleased because I think you used your new knowledge
> in the
> pmInstructor. At least that was what you said.

It must be one of our classic misunderstandings or my
inablity to express my thoughts. In any case I do remember
an instance where I shared the thought that the only way to
solve this would be to generate all the weather ourselves...

Ciao

Enrico

[Peter Dowson]

On 1/8/2006 7:30:13 AM, Enrico Schiratti wrote:
>It must be one of our classic
>misunderstandings or my
>inablity to express my
>thoughts.

No, your pmInst does read some weather too -- I just checked.

There was certainly no misunderstanding. You were so pleased with yourself. I
think you thought my "New Weather Interface" was complicated, for some
reason, but then you found it wasn't.

>In any case I do
>remember
>an instance where I shared the
>thought that the only way to
>solve this would be to
>generate all the weather
>ourselves...

I think you would be on a sure loser there. Take a look at ASv6 some time.
Such a project is nearly as big as what you do already.

Are you now saying that you have never even so much as read how to read local
weather from FS (in the FSUIPC SDK)? That seems incredible. Sorry.

Regards,

Pete

[Enrico Schiratti]

Hi,

> No, your pmInst does read some weather too -- I just
> checked.

Yes, but it has nothing to do at all with the weather radar,
which I thought was the topic at hand.

> There was certainly no misunderstanding. You were so
> pleased with yourself. I
> think you thought my "New Weather Interface" was
> complicated, for some
> reason, but then you found it wasn't.

I was happy about the weather interface being much easier
than expected. And "pleased with myself" is not something I
encounter too often in my life in general You should see
me when I cook.

> I think you would be on a sure loser there. Take a look at
> ASv6 some time.
> Such a project is nearly as big as what you do already.

Then the point is even more clear and we need an interface
to Active Sky and other programs (no reply received yet.

> Are you now saying that you have never even so much as
> read how to read local
> weather from FS (in the FSUIPC SDK)? That seems
> incredible. Sorry.

Where am I saying that, Peter? I have and do, but not in
connection with the weather radar.

What is our general point in this case? I understand that
rather than specific image generation from the various
programs (which is fairly simple, as the SA_WXR example
shows), you want me to do this via the local weather from
FS. Ok, point made and I will eventually look into that as
well.

Ciao

Enrico

[Peter Dowson]

On 1/8/2006 10:01:18 AM, Enrico Schiratti wrote:
>Yes, but it has nothing to do
>at all with the weather radar,
>which I thought was the topic
>at hand.

Er ... yes. But to make a weather radar you need to read weather data --
clouds at least. You don't want to make it up! That's why it is all about
obtaining the weather at the various stations within radar range, just as SA_WXR
does.

>I was happy about the weather
>interface being much easier
>than expected.

There you are then! A short step now to a weather radar!

>Then the point is even more
>clear and we need an interface
>to Active Sky and other
>programs

Er .. but why not just read the actual weather from FS? It would then even
work with FS's own downloaded weather -- otherwise were you thinking of
coming to some arrangement with Jeppesen for this?

>Where am I saying that, Peter?

Sorry, by implication. Please review the thread.

>I have and do, but not in
>connection with the weather
>radar.

Of course not, but that wasn't the point.

>What is our general point in
>this case?

I am concerned only that instead of spending loads of time dealing the the
half-dozen different weather programs, yet STILL not catering for the main FS
download capability, when you do get around to a weather radar
implementation you do it with the full information of the choices available, and hence
make the best decisions.

>I understand that
>rather than specific image
>generation from the various
>programs (which is fairly
>simple, as the SA_WXR example
>shows)

Duh! NO NO! SA_WXR most certainly does NOT deal with any specific program, it
READS THE LOCAL WEATHER FROM FS, exactly as I am suggesting!!

>you want me to do this
>via the local weather from
>FS.

Yes, like SA_WXR does. Because then it works with ALL weather sources,
automatically.

>Ok, point made and I will
>eventually look into that as
>well.

But why "as well"?

Am I missing a big point here? What is the problem with the way I am
suggesting? This is very very confusing! :-(

Best regards,

Pete

[Enrico Schiratti]

> But why "as well"?
>
> Am I missing a big point here? What is the problem with
> the way I am
> suggesting? This is very very confusing! :-(

"As well", as I am currently juggling quite a number of
pins, and I think there is a limit to how many things I can
do at the same time.

> Duh! NO NO! SA_WXR most certainly does NOT deal with any
> specific program, it
> READS THE LOCAL WEATHER FROM FS, exactly as I am
> suggesting!!

Excellent, so we do not need another program.

Peter, I got the message, right now I have other things that
have to come before the weather radar.

Ciao

Enrico



"Peter Dowson" wrote in message
news:379944.53373@wb.onvix.com...
> On 1/8/2006 10:01:18 AM, Enrico Schiratti wrote:
>>Yes, but it has nothing to do
>>at all with the weather radar,
>>which I thought was the topic
>>at hand.
>
> Er ... yes. But to make a weather radar you need to read
> weather data --
> clouds at least. You don't want to make it up! That's why
> it is all about
> obtaining the weather at the various stations within radar
> range, just as SA_WXR
> does.
>
>>I was happy about the weather
>>interface being much easier
>>than expected.
>
> There you are then! A short step now to a weather radar!
>
>>Then the point is even more
>>clear and we need an interface
>>to Active Sky and other
>>programs
>
> Er .. but why not just read the actual weather from FS? It
> would then even
> work with FS's own downloaded weather -- otherwise were
> you thinking of
> coming to some arrangement with Jeppesen for this?
>
>>Where am I saying that, Peter?
>
> Sorry, by implication. Please review the thread.
>
>>I have and do, but not in
>>connection with the weather
>>radar.
>
> Of course not, but that wasn't the point.
>
>>What is our general point in
>>this case?
>
> I am concerned only that instead of spending loads of time
> dealing the the
> half-dozen different weather programs, yet STILL not
> catering for the main FS
> download capability, when you do get around to a weather
> radar
> implementation you do it with the full information of the
> choices available, and hence
> make the best decisions.
>
>>I understand that
>>rather than specific image
>>generation from the various
>>programs (which is fairly
>>simple, as the SA_WXR example
>>shows)
>
> Duh! NO NO! SA_WXR most certainly does NOT deal with any
> specific program, it
> READS THE LOCAL WEATHER FROM FS, exactly as I am
> suggesting!!
>
>>you want me to do this
>>via the local weather from
>>FS.
>
> Yes, like SA_WXR does. Because then it works with ALL
> weather sources,
> automatically.
>
>>Ok, point made and I will
>>eventually look into that as
>>well.
>
> But why "as well"?
>
> Am I missing a big point here? What is the problem with
> the way I am
> suggesting? This is very very confusing! :-(
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pete
>

[Peter Dowson]

On 1/9/2006 5:58:05 AM, Enrico Schiratti wrote:
>"As well", as I am currently
>juggling quite a number of
>pins, and I think there is a
>limit to how many things I can
>do at the same time.

Yes, that is EXACTLY why I suggested only implementing a weather radar one
way (for all sources) and not follow up ActiveSky, FSMeteo, FSMetar,
WeatherMaker, and others separately and THEN do the FS read of weather "as well".

And in any case none of this is urgent -- as I pointed out right at the
beginning, folks can use SA_WXR at present. Where's the rush?

>Excellent, so we do not need
>another program.

Yes, as I said in one of my first replies here! All I then said was that it
would be neat to have it as part of PM, making your total package cover the
things it needs, but I pointed out that there was no rush because SA_WXR
does work!

>Peter, I got the message,
>right now I have other things
>that have to come before the
>weather radar.

Of course, as I've been saying all along. That was why I questioned the
reason for you sending emails to the ActiveSky folks about all this ...

How is it we always discuss at cross-purposes? I always get the feeling that
you never actually read my WORDS only skim the subject and miss the actual
statements.

:-(

Best regards nonetheless ;-)

Pete

[Enrico Schiratti]

> And in any case none of this is urgent -- as I pointed out
> right at the
> beginning, folks can use SA_WXR at present. Where's the
> rush?

No rush at all anymore... I didn't get a reply anyway.

> How is it we always discuss at cross-purposes? I always
> get the feeling that
> you never actually read my WORDS only skim the subject and
> miss the actual
> statements.

I am not sure why you generalize it that way?

In any case, defining a way of handing bitmap files between
programs is one thing, it is another thing to have to
re-write something done elsewhere from scratch... and that
would include polling the weather stations and generating a
weather radar image. In any case, I will revisit this.

Ciao

Enrico