January 18, 20233 yr It's not specific to XP12 because unfortunately if you play with the weather configuration menu in MFS, which is more sophisticated regarding turbulence, you get pretty much the same effects if you make it stronger, although overall I find it more convincing in the way it affects the aircraft in MFS, even if overdone... In XP you do not have the same modulation parameters though, and it's all associated to a number whose value translates into turbulence intensity. Problem is, in XP (and in MFS) the programmers haven't been able to capture what turbulence is and how it affects an aircraft aerodynamically. In XP it makes it look like if it wasn't 6DOF, and you get bouncing, sometimes madly, all around the aircraft CoG and that's all. In XP it's even more surprising because I would expect the way the various lift/drag producing surfaces are modelled separately and the flows around the aircraft being able to actually get hit asymmetrically, to give an outcome of turbulence appearing more like if it was on 6DOF instead of 3DOF? Comparison? Yes, turbulence for instance in IL-2 Great Battles, I believe in AEFS2 it was more convincing too, in Aerowinx PSX, in Condorsoaring. All of those sims model turbulence in a much more realistic way, IMO and comparing it to my RL experience. In FSX/P3D I did prefer the default turbulence to the ActiveSky enhanced turbulence which felt weird to say the least... I believe LR is at it now regarding fine tuning some aspects of XP's weather, but I wonder if Austin really understands what turbulence is and how it can affect an aircraft, I mean, aerodynamically? He should probably make a video.... BTW: XP Trubulence levels: X-plane 11 - TURBULENCE LEVELS - YouTube Edited January 18, 20233 yr by cagarini Flying gliders since 1980 Flightsimming since 1992 AMD Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, GPU Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB, 1 TB and 500 GB nvme2 SSD drives, HP 27" 60Hz LED monitor @ 1920x1080, T16000, Hotas from old X52 Pro, Saitek Combat Rudder Pro (2010 model)
January 18, 20233 yr Alas the turbulence response is not just a matter of aerodynamics of airfoils or basic aerodynamics. There is the issue of stability and aircraft have two types static and dynamic how that translates into how the aircraft behaves is actually given in the data of the aircraft flight manual in what is known as the performance envelope if you know how to interpret one you can actually measure the deviation in terms of displacement from the flight path which then effects the G loading etc. These diagrams actually consist of complex curves. For every aeroplane you would have to find a way to incorporate that data into the simulation dynamics. To get the function of those curves mathematically would require the designers to give it to you very hard to re-engineer! The way a light aircraft responds to an updraft or downdraft or a sudden sideways force varies considerably on its basic design and its weight , it is well known that heavier aircraft ride turbulence better simply because of their high mass or weight. The downside of a heavy and big aeroplane is the more severe the displacement the faster it can overwhelm the designed in stability of the basic design especially if you start to try to control it or overcontrol it. Boeing have a very good paper on this dealing with sudden upset responses in Boeings and a number of accidents. The other area I think they do not get a grip on is INERTIA and MASS in terms of thrust and drag. I have yet to see any model in the sim deaccelerate correctly or normally by a reduction in thrust leading to drag being higher and hence the way MASS (WEIGHT) causes the aircraft to slow or accelerate either on the ground or in the air! I will settle for a reasonable turbulence response but I am not expecting perfection!
January 18, 20233 yr Author OFC when I refer to aerodynamics I am referring to the whole - including your stability considerations. Btw, since you mention inertia, yes indeed and we have Jan who is type rated on the 747s and can probably confirm that the real thing is a lot more sensible to thrust changes, specially when fully configured for landing, and the pitch-thrust coupling way more intense than 744 models represent in the sim (one of the aspects that according to other rw 744 pilots is superbly portrayed on the aerowinx psx sim) Edited January 18, 20233 yr by cagarini Flying gliders since 1980 Flightsimming since 1992 AMD Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, GPU Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB, 1 TB and 500 GB nvme2 SSD drives, HP 27" 60Hz LED monitor @ 1920x1080, T16000, Hotas from old X52 Pro, Saitek Combat Rudder Pro (2010 model)
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.