Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement variable wind at KSFO #169

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

tedrek
Copy link
Collaborator

@tedrek tedrek commented Sep 7, 2015

Here's an approach for fixing #68. The basic principal is to build a wind rose for the given airport, I used data from http://www.enviroware.com/METAR/METAR_WindRoses_2014_maps.html for KSFO.

A wind direction and speed are selected with with weightings, then over a 3 hour period the wind shifts to a new direction and speed, repeat.

I increased the crosswind limit from 10 to 15 for normal and 20 to 25 for major. (Of course this can't generate cross winds over 24 knots so I'll need to fix that, I had planned to make the top tier 20-40 knots but forgot.)

Any feedback appreciated.

@zlsa
Copy link
Owner

zlsa commented Sep 8, 2015

What do you think about making the delay more like 30 minutes or so? I honestly don't see anybody playing the game for three hours and watching the wind direction move.

@tedrek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tedrek commented Sep 8, 2015

I initially had a 60 minute delay, that seemed too fast to be realistic. It also made the wind switch fast enough that by the time an aircraft had made it's way from the center boundary to a runway that runway could be already unusable.

Looking at it now, I think there should be two different variation methods, one which slowly varies the speed and direction and one which causes quick and drastic changes. This is something which would probably benefit from some sort of configuration where the player can choose whether a drastic wind change is common (50% of games or better) or rare (5% of games or less) for example.

@glangford
Copy link
Contributor

My two cents - I think this is a terrific idea in general, but I worry a bit about timing and introducing a feature like this before the baseline is more stable. With #156, #134 and #128 (and #147 should we decide to do it) does it make sense to try and reach a stable place in terms of playable arrival/departure rates first?

@tedrek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tedrek commented Sep 9, 2015

@glangford, that's a very good point about timing. I'll leave this for now and come back to it later.

@glangford
Copy link
Contributor

I am trying the enviroware link above, and getting very slow response. Here is another data candidate:

http://windhistory.com/station.html?KSFO

@erikquinn
Copy link
Collaborator

The ATC repository is being migrated to it's new home at https://github.com/openscope/openscope, and thus, all pull requests are being closed. If you would still like to see this merged into the simulator, please reopen the pull request at the new repo. Thank you!

Closing this PR.

@erikquinn erikquinn closed this Jan 31, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants