Voted as well. Thanks for bringing this up.

50 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I have almost 2,000 hours in MSFS, and have never had that happen, so stop blowing smoke. 

Bob,

 

You actually fly more hours per month than a typical airline pilot during his monthly duty roster. MSFS2020 has been about for about 2 years by now, you fly about over 80 Hrs/month. Keep up the good work.

 

Please, try to agree to disagree with people's opinions in a gentlemanly way without "blowing smoke", pollution is a big thing today. 🙂

 

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

Unfortunately, there are many people believing that the actual SU10 resembles turbulence somehow correctly. 

 

In my assessment as a professional pilot that actually flew 747 and presently qualified in 380, I find actual reaction regarding turbulence to be between 10 to 15% exaggerated. 

More so, is this harsh aircraft's reaction to it.

As an observation, a 747 will not be bumped around to such a magnitude as is now in this MSFS at 10 KTS wind gusts (changes) and with so ample speed variations.

All this exaggeration in MSFS2020 is carried over to all airplanes.

At the same time, each pilot will perceive turbulence differently, another factor will be the number of airplanes flown and what is used to. The more types you fly and the more experience you have you can somehow correctly assess a situation like this.

Looking at the video, I agree with certain statements but find it difficult to agree that is something that "I like it", especially when he's jerking flight controls like that and overcontrolling the inputs (PIO). Typical for a new guy in the airplane.

It's not all about what a C152 or C172 pilot experiences in a traffic pattern, hot or windy day, or on a short flight between airports in a limited environment to be considered a standard and to fight vigorously that is normal. 

If we look at MSFS2020 as a "PC flight simulator" we need this issue addressed (tone down a bit this turbulence factor and more importantly the aircraft reaction to wind conditions), if we want an arcade game and want to be bounced around unrealistically like that, we have it.

 

All this can be accomplished very easily by ASOBO with a turbulence slider. 

 

Funny you mentioned you are professional 747 pilot. I only know one pilot -  John Travolta, who is flying private 747 for fun! The rest 99.99% pilots who are  rated in wide body aircraft  actually flying for a living, commercially or in military. It's kind of automatically assumed to be aviation professionals. LOL

I'm frankly surprise to  to hear world  "arcade" from someone who fly commercially. MSFS got it right. Perhaps tweaking heavy aircraft would be more appropriate.

P.S. I have collection of stories regarding severe turbulence in wide body crossing frontal thunderstorms. My dad was flying Antonov 124 al over the world over 20 years. They was time when he thought they are not going to make it.

2 hours ago, RALF9636 said:

I just don't understand why they don't add a slider for turbulence, so everyone can adjust to his own liking.

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/please-consider-adding-a-turbulence-slider/300063

I cannot sustain the real pilots opinions on home flight simulators, too many variables (at home). There was another infinite discussion on the turbulence "problem", some want a turbulence slider just because the turbulence should be a subjective personal perception, and want to talk about on how real a flight model is.

33 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

 

Funny you mentioned you are professional 747 pilot. I only know one pilot -  John Travolta, who is flying private 747 for fun! The rest 99.99% pilots who are  rated in wide body aircraft  actually flying for a living, commercially or in military. It's kind of automatically assumed to be aviation professionals. LOL

I'm frankly surprise to  to hear world  "arcade" from someone who fly commercially. MSFS got it right. Perhaps tweaking heavy aircraft would be more appropriate.

P.S. I have collection of stories regarding severe turbulence in wide body crossing frontal thunderstorms. My dad was flying Antonov 124 al over the world over 20 years. They was time when he thought they are not going to make it.

It's disappointing to see people taking cheap shuts. Unfortunately, it's not the first time.

John Travolta whom you claim to know flew a 707, not a 747.

You are very welcome to believe that MSFS got it right, others think that there is space for improvement in certain aspects.

I don't understand why is such a surprise to hear "arcade" regardless of being actually type-rated in heavy or super category, or not.

I'm missing completely some unnecessary statements here.

 

They need to - - they are way overdone now. Landing at an airport reporting calm winds should not result in my plane being bounced all over hell with the wind indicator bouncing between 3-20 knots.

30 minutes ago, LRBS said:

It's disappointing to see people taking cheap shuts. Unfortunately, it's not the first time.

John Travolta whom you claim to know flew a 707, not a 747.

You are very welcome to believe that MSFS got it right, others think that there is space for improvement in certain aspects.

I don't understand why is such a surprise to hear "arcade" regardless of being actually type-rated in heavy or super category, or not.

I'm missing completely some unnecessary statements here.

 

I apologize  if it came a wrong way. Travolta own 707 but type rated in both 707 and 747. Yes I'm surprised to hear word "arcade" is world commonly used by simmers.  

My opinion is not based on "believes" but in comparison with airframes I fly. Yes there is a lot of room for improvement. I don't think stock  aircraft are tuned really well and heavier are even worst . Nevertheless, I don't think make MSFS arcade. I would wait until serious third party developer made  high fidelity 747 to pass your judgement .

 

 

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

I don't understand why is such a surprise to hear "arcade" regardless of being actually type-rated in heavy or super category, or not.

It’s not a surprise, but it is disappointing when even those who claim special understanding because of their piloting skills quickly bring out the word for any behaviour they believe to not match their perceptions 100%. I’m sure you’ve been in training simulators that don’t get some things 100% right. Do you come out of them complaining to the trainers that ‘it feels arcadey’?

 

Bob that video is in the first post of the thread, why did you post it again?

16 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

It’s not a surprise, but it is disappointing when even those who claim special understanding because of their piloting skills quickly bring out the word for any behaviour they believe to not match their perceptions 100%. I’m sure you’ve been in training simulators that don’t get some things 100% right. Do you come out of them complaining to the trainers that ‘it feels arcadey’?

Not even level D sims are 100%, but I would like to let you know that after a sim session we have an evaluation form, on top of that there is a maintenance book where we actually, like in the real airplane, we make entries of the discrepancies noted during the session. Some of them can be fixed at a later date (under MEL or DDG) and others can ground the sim until they get fixed.

It's not that we complain if it "feels arcadey", we just ground them.

Yee of little faith.

sp

27 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

It’s not a surprise, but it is disappointing when even those who claim special understanding because of their piloting skills quickly bring out the word for any behaviour they believe to not match their perceptions 100%. I’m sure you’ve been in training simulators that don’t get some things 100% right. Do you come out of them complaining to the trainers that ‘it feels arcadey’?

Level D simulators don't work like that. Since they are certified by the relevant aviation authority, a 737-800 simulator sitting in the American Airlines training center in DFW acts EXACTLY the same as it does in the United Airlines training center at IAH. IF it doesn't then it gets fixed or it gets decertified. So yes, MSFS is just a game used for entertainment purposes it is apt to be "arcadey" in many instances.  Level D simulators? Yeah...not so much.

That said, for me the wind gusts are not the issue, rather it's the horrific yaw model in-flight and on the ground that's the problem. My quads are now the size of Conan the Barbarian from trying to keep the PMDG 737 on the centerline with a 10 kt gust on a quartering headwind during x-wind ops at SFO! If they're not going to fix the flight model, then I vote to put a slider so I can turn it off. My friends are beginning to ask if I've started doing CrossFit! 

Edited September 24, 20223 yr by Mike T

6 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

 

But this is more a question of each aircraft's flight model and not necessarily the core flight sim's simulation of gusts/turbulence etc right.  Asobo might not have modelled the default aircrafts' FMs enough to depict intertia properly, but that is a separate topic from what's being discussed here. Are you guys noticing this extreme effect on yaw in any high fidelity 3rd party aircraft? Aircrafts with properly implemented FMs combined with SU10's core live weather gusts/turbulence model I think is at a good place currently, and hopefully gets even better with the atmospheric airflow advancements coming in SU11.

Watch the video that the OP posted. The yawing on final with the crosswind is very exaggerated. Almost like an engine failed. 
 

I see your line of thinking and understand where you’re coming from though.