[Flightgear-devel] Re: Possible config (file type) problem?
* William Earnest -- Sunday 23 January 2005 18:53: After last evening's snow and today's wind, the METAR from KABE is a bit messed up, and the parser that extracts the conditions went wild and clobbered who-knows-what in the properties. Sorry, but no. This is neither messed up, nor does it confuse the parser. A completely normal METAR string. If anyone wants to trace this and add some sanity checks, the METAR used seems to be this: KABE 231651Z AUTO 33014G22KT 10SM M10/M17 A2986 RMK A02 SLPN0 T11001167 TSNO $ I pulled the above for KABE from ADDS while the mess was happening. You can check this with the metar program that comes with fgfs. Either run it with the station id: $ metar KABE or feed the whole string to it. I did this to falsify your problem: $ metar KABE 231651Z AUTO 33014G22KT 10SM M10/M17 A2986 RMK A02 SLPN0 T11001167 TSNO $ METAR Report(automatically generated) Airport-Id: KABE Report time:2005/1/23 16:51 UTC Visibility: 16.1 km 10 US-miles Wind: from the NNW (330°) at 25.9 km/h14 kt = 16.1 mph = 7.2 m/s with gusts at 40.7 km/h 22 kt = 25.3 mph = 11.3 m/s Temperature:-10°C 14°F Dewpoint: -17°C 1.4°F Rel. Humidity: 56% Pressure: 1011 hPa29.86 in. Hg ... and this is correct as far as I can see. The remark (RMK and everything after it) is mostly ignored now, only runway reports are scanned therein. This string doesn't contain a runway group. The weather applet in Fedora 3 also complained about invalid and missing fields. I don't miss anything. And I don't see anything invalid. Maybe RH/F3 is broken? m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Possible config (file type) problem?
Melchior FRANZ wrote: * William Earnest -- Sunday 23 January 2005 18:53: After last evening's snow and today's wind, the METAR from KABE is a bit messed up, and the parser that extracts the conditions went wild and clobbered who-knows-what in the properties. Sorry, but no. This is neither messed up, nor does it confuse the parser. A completely normal METAR string. If anyone wants to trace this and add some sanity checks, the METAR used seems to be this: KABE 231651Z AUTO 33014G22KT 10SM M10/M17 A2986 RMK A02 SLPN0 T11001167 TSNO $ I pulled the above for KABE from ADDS while the mess was happening. You can check this with the metar program that comes with fgfs. Either run it with the station id: $ metar KABE or feed the whole string to it. I did this to falsify your problem: $ metar KABE 231651Z AUTO 33014G22KT 10SM M10/M17 A2986 RMK A02 SLPN0 T11001167 TSNO $ METAR Report(automatically generated) Airport-Id: KABE Report time:2005/1/23 16:51 UTC Visibility: 16.1 km 10 US-miles Wind: from the NNW (330°) at 25.9 km/h14 kt = 16.1 mph = 7.2 m/s with gusts at 40.7 km/h 22 kt = 25.3 mph = 11.3 m/s Temperature:-10°C 14°F Dewpoint: -17°C 1.4°F Rel. Humidity: 56% Pressure: 1011 hPa29.86 in. Hg ... and this is correct as far as I can see. The remark (RMK and everything after it) is mostly ignored now, only runway reports are scanned therein. This string doesn't contain a runway group. The weather applet in Fedora 3 also complained about invalid and missing fields. I don't miss anything. And I don't see anything invalid. Maybe RH/F3 is broken? m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d Melchior, I agree with you, having dragged out my Instrument training manual and decoded it manually. The missing item was the sky condition field, but the weather applet in RH reported it as invalid. Just a few minutes ago an update came out with sky conditions reported clear, and the startup of FG was normal. With no sky report, FG showed the default scattered condition. Still wonder why the missing field seemed to confuse the initial conditions, I tried it back and forth at least 5 times and the startup error followed the .fgfsrc edits. -- Bill Earnest [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Powered Allentown, PA, USA Computers, like air conditioners, work poorly with Windows open. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Re: Possible config (file type) problem?
* William Earnest -- Sunday 23 January 2005 20:10: The missing item was the sky condition field, but the weather applet in RH reported it as invalid. Ok. SimGear is a bit more liberal. After all, many/most reports are generated by humans, and I didn't want to throw the whole message away because of a minor defect. What sg requires is: station id and date, and a minimum of 4 valid groups altogether. Garbage ends a string, but doesn't invalidate it. The unparsed parts can be read out (red text in $ metar -v kabe). I'm relative strict in the group order and will probably ease these restrictions a bit. With no sky report, FG showed the default scattered condition. Really? It shouldn't display scattered by default if METAR is on. Only CAVOK should creat a scattered layer. Still wonder why the missing field seemed to confuse the initial conditions, Couldn't it be that the 40km/h gusting wind made problems? m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Possible config (file type) problem?
Melchior FRANZ wrote: With no sky report, FG showed the default scattered condition. Really? It shouldn't display scattered by default if METAR is on. Only CAVOK should creat a scattered layer. This is probably the network detection code kicking in. After three failed attempts, three seconds apart (if I recall it correctly) the code will not do any further attempts to get the data and will run like the option was not specified in the first place. This is to make sure that users without an Internet connection still can run FlightGear with the option enabled. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Re: Possible config (file type) problem?
* Erik Hofman -- Sunday 23 January 2005 21:14: Melchior FRANZ wrote: * * William Earnest -- Sunday 23 January 2005 20:10: With no sky report, FG showed the default scattered condition. Really? It shouldn't display scattered by default if METAR is on. Only CAVOK should creat a scattered layer. This is probably the network detection code kicking in. After three failed attempts, three seconds apart (if I recall it correctly) the code will not do any further attempts to get the data I know, but I thought William is talking about successfully fetched METAR where the sky condition was omitted (CLR, SKC, NSC, CAVOK, cloud groups, etc), like it was in his KABE example. In this case, if no clouds are in the message, then there shouldn't be any clouds. (Only CAVOK generates a fantasy layer. Having none is most likely wrong, because one would have used CLR then. Same with NSC, that I'll let create a high FEW layer or something.) m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Possible config (file type) problem?
Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Erik Hofman -- Sunday 23 January 2005 21:14: This is probably the network detection code kicking in. After three failed attempts, three seconds apart (if I recall it correctly) the code will not do any further attempts to get the data I know, but I thought William is talking about successfully fetched METAR where the sky condition was omitted (CLR, SKC, NSC, CAVOK, cloud groups, etc), like it was in his KABE example. In this case, if no clouds are in the message, then there shouldn't be any clouds. (Only CAVOK generates a fantasy layer. Having none is most likely wrong, because one would have used CLR then. Same with NSC, that I'll let create a high FEW layer or something.) Ok, I didn't understand that part correctly then. But it's still good to know how this code works after all. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
