I would seriously question the fact that turbulence is actually affecting your airframe in Opus (since it seems to be a camera only enabled effect). If the option was truly having an impact on how the plane flys then it should be available regardless of camera effects, but apparently it is not.

But you can easily test it. With auto pilot OFF, fly through some moderate-heavy turbulence hands off the stick and see if the planes attitude, altitude, airspeed and general handling is impacted or not. The plane should get tossed around pretty good if it's a light GA and should not be able to maintain straight/level flight on its own without some pilot input on the controls. If it's heading and/or alt doesnt permanently change and returns to normal on its own then its only eye candy and has no ill effect on the plane itself, as it should.

I would test it myself, but IM an EZDOK user and don't want to mess with my current setup.

I have AS2012, tried OPUS and this weekend I tried the FSGRW demo. I must say that initially I really liked the latter.

 

I made two flights with FSGRW and the NGX and on both occassions I had the dreaded S-turns that I do not have with AS2012.

I haven't read anybody else here having this problem.

 

Anybody tried the PMDG planes in combination with FSGRW?

For anyone interested a discussion regarding the turbulence effect in Opus is also discussed over here -> http://forum.avsim.net/topic/412314-no-turbulence/ and in that thread Stephen one of the developers of Opus explains how the turbulence effect is implemented in Opus.

Richard...have you tested as I described a couple of posts above?...If so please let me know the results as I am seriously trying to understand this one way or the other.

Richard...have you tested as I described a couple of posts above?...If so please let me know the results as I am seriously trying to understand this one way or the other.

 

You mean flying in turbulent air using a GA plane with hands-off?

 

Sure, I can try that and see what happens. Not sure though what would be the most easy way finding really turbulent air so if you know of a location where you normally face lots of turbulence let me know and I'll give it a go right away. I'm very interested in this myself !!

 

Also I don't have any payware GA aircraft installed since I do all my flying in the NGX but I guess it would be fine for this simple test to use any of the default FSX a/c?

sure, default c172 is fine...the lighter the plane the better I suppose since it should more easily lose control in heavy turb. Would probably be best to fly down low where the air is thicker, such as on final approach, and a location where it's very warm/humid...mid-late afternoon in the states might be easier to find such conditions where after the earth heating up all day you'll get alot more convection than you would early on.

 

...or maybe you could just download some historic weather from yesterday afternoon?

Its in the camera page but as far as i can tell it does bump the aircraft itself in turbulence and is NOT simply a camera effect. The camera effects are already controlled by the other DHM checkboxes and sliders. Certainly the docs imply this too.

well you would know for sure because if its a light plane it would not hold its assigned course or its altitude without alot of human intervention :-)

 

...also, why then would it only be an option available in the camera effects section, instead of being an available option in the weather settings area? Perhaps they need to move it so we can use it without their camera effects?

 

 

...also, why then would it only be an option available in the camera effects section, instead of being an available option in the weather settings area? Perhaps they need to move it so we can use it without their camera effects?

 

Because they want to tie it to their logic for displaying the effects of this turbulence which they believe is a more real representation based on their recorded data on the numerous flights they have taken to record said data.  If they just send it to FS and let FS display it, then it is not "real".  So they need it tied to their camera views so they can "shake" the cockpit view the way they want, not the way FSX wants.

 

I'm not saying whether or not this should or shouldn't be an allowed option, just trying to explain the reasoning.  Personally, I believe Opus' data over MS though we ultimately have no way of knowing or proving which is more real in the end.

hangar, on 27 Jun 2013 - 2:32 PM, said:

 

I see it'll cost me about $52 just to be able to get turbulence back into my real weather, just not worth it for me.

Just put your monitor on a cushion. It will wobble around so much that you get will the required visual turbulence even if your aircraft doesn't.

 

 

Just put your monitor on a cushion. It will wobble around so much that you get will the required turbulence.

 

yea...the poor man's "full motion" display system :-)

 

 

I'm not saying whether or not this should or shouldn't be an allowed option, just trying to explain the reasoning.  Personally, I believe Opus' data over MS though we ultimately have no way of knowing or proving which is more real in the end.

 

Understood, Kevin...no worries...just wish I could get turb back without disbaling my EZDOK setup...and without spending $52 on a new weather app :-(

Can anyone tell me if FSGRW handles low overcast the same way that Opus does? Where if you are flying through an overcast layer you will have zero visibility until you break out?

 

I have managed to get this with AS2012 (SP2), Opus and FSGRW. The trick is to read the manuals. All programs have different suggested settings for "realistic overcast".

 

I personally have Orbx FSX Go profiles for each weather engine. FSX Go makes the required fsx.cfg changes for me, before launching FSX.

 

I emailed him about getting a refund  3 times.3 times he ignored my emails.-

 

To be honest, if a demo version is available for you, wouldn't this be better, than return policy? IIRC the demo is fully functional up to 5 weather (snapshot) downloads.

 

I wish Opus would include turbulence in the "weather" instead of in their "cameras". I much prefer to use EZDOK for my cameras and this means I have no turbulence in the sim as long as I'm using Opus...rats.

 

I currently have a "hybrid" combo, that works for me. FSGRW for weather, Opus for cameras (weather disabled) and A2A Accu-Feel (v2) for bumping the aircraft around in turbulence.

 

I made two flights with FSGRW and the NGX and on both occassions I had the dreaded S-turns that I do not have with AS2012.

 

Anybody tried the PMDG planes in combination with FSGRW?

 

I fly the JS41 and MD11 and can't say that I would have noticed something like this.

 

Disclaimer: Again I'm using different FSX Go profiles for PMDG aircrafts so that I can set the turbulence scale (and so on), as mentioned in the PMDG manuals. Maybe this is why I do not seem to have the s-turns.

 

 

To be honest, if a demo version is available for you, wouldn't this be better, than return policy? IIRC the demo is fully functional up to 5 weather (snapshot) downloads.

 

Yes, I know.i did not pay close attention to the 8 weather downloads limit and ended up with 0 downloads  in a matter of hours so I bought it.I tested it for 2 days and decided opus was better for me.So I asked for a refund and got no answer.My fault.

I agree...I think a time limited, but fully functioning demo (say 7 days for example) would be MUCH better at letting the end-user see how well or not it works for them over a period of a few days.

 

The way the demo works right now is not very good because #1 it is not fully functioning because you are limited to only using a downloaded file instead of real time updates, and #2 you dont actually get 8 tries either...what you really get is more like 8 mouse clicks...first you have to tell it to download the weather file (thats 1 use apparently), then you have to tell it to load that file (thats a 2nd use)..so thats already 2 uses gone just to actually use it once. Then if you should need to restart the sim, forget it...the demo shuts down and you have to blow another 2 uses to get weather back in the sim.

 

Demo is way too limited in nature IMO. Not utterly useless of course...but still, time limited and FULLY functioning for just a few days would be much more helpful, especially considering there is no return policy in place and it's over-priced (at least for here in the States).

Yes, I know.i did not pay close attention to the 8 weather downloads limit and ended up with 0 downloads in a matter of hours so I bought it.I tested it for 2 days and decided opus was better for me.So I asked for a refund and got no answer.My fault.

I haven't received any refund e-mail - where did you send it to?

 

Time-limited the demo is a good idea, I'll consider this for the next update .

 

Bernd