MSFS Turbulence Airliners

[Stoopy 1,571]

Jeez folks.

I was one of the members teasing the OP early on but he took it all with aplomb.  Now it's just contentious.

I believe the OP has a valid question/point here, which relates to the new turbulence slider.  Isn't it supposed to generate the same type and degree of turbulence as before when set to the Realistic level?  Or has it in fact been dialed down all across the board?

I'm not a real pilot either nor an airliner guy but that isn't the point here.  

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Stoopy

[Bobsk8 12,732]

29 minutes ago, aerostar said:

where do you fit in ...?

About 600 hours flying real aircraft, and about 30 hours flying full motion sims, civilian and military. Let's hear your experience?

Edited March 24, 2023 by Bobsk8

[Farlis 2,287]

39 minutes ago, Stoopy said:

Isn't it supposed to generate the same type and degree of turbulence as before when set to the Realistic level? 

No. They announced it back in January that they are tweaking the system and that even the realistic option will be less bumpy than it used to be.

[WestAir 2,522]

From what a lot of people are saying, the calm weather is greatly improved, while the dangerous weather is a lot less dangerous. Given that 95% of flying will be in calm weather, Asobo made the right choice.

I am looking forward to seeing some plane-rattling weather in the coming years, though. Sometimes blue skies gets boring.

[A330B747 15]

in the video it's said: in REALISTIC mode the new turbulence are better in general but about the heavy turbulence it's easier to manage them and the aircraft and you need less input on the rudder compared in real life. 

i suppose that Asobo think about Xbox users too who use realistic mode but then use the pad. so the team has improve it but the heavy turbulence have been domesticated so it's easier for all. And what about hard simmers like us and professional hardware? i don't know

ground physic = need an entire system update only for that (x-plane another level)

suspension physic = need an entire system update only for that (x-plane another level)

heavy turbulences = for mainstream users on the rails (but why then you call it REALISTIC in the game menu?) 

[Krakin 5,767]

3 minutes ago, A330B747 said:

i suppose that Asobo think about Xbox users too who use realistic mode but then use the pad.

The most vocal people from what I saw were on PC so there's little reason to have this speculation.

[WestAir 2,522]

7 minutes ago, A330B747 said:

ground physic = need an entire system update only for that (x-plane another level)

suspension physic = need an entire system update only for that (x-plane another level)

heavy turbulences = for mainstream users on the rails (but why then you call it REALISTIC in the game menu?) 

I would absolutely love it if we had an SU focused entirely on ground and suspension physics and another SU entirely focused on the flight model (with the number one priority being whatever makes it so you don't need full aileron into wind and makes PIO so easy in the sim).

But Asobo recently hired the right devs for this job. I'd be surprised if this didn't happen.

[hangar 661]

7 hours ago, aerostar said:

With the voices of the smaller GA aircraft fliers managing to win the day and pressure Asobo/MS to cut down on the amount of turbulence experienced in the cockpit, I find that airliners turbulence effects and realism have been neutered.

I was getting much better more realistic turbulence before in my A320/737 than now.

It is frustrating to be taken a step back in realistic realism development.

It is so unreal looking/feeling when in turbulent weather and the plane hardly   -  drifts, weathercocks, wiggles, bobs, dips, balloons, rocks, rolls and doesn't get windshear...  anymore.

Back to boring approaches that make it harder to maintain interest.....

Can all those who notice this please join and generate a voice directed at Asobo/MS in order to remedy this....   and counter the fair weather (like to have the plane on rails brigade) who don't really know what turbulence is like for real. ( or those who actually DON'T want any turbulence !)

 

PS - I added this part to let viewers know that yes, I did set the option to 'Realistic'

If you want any aircraft to become more sensitive to turbulent winds you can adjust these 3 parameters in the flight model config:

pitch_gyro_stability = 1
roll_gyro_stability = 1
yaw_gyro_stability = 1

Just replace the "1" with a decimal numbers between 0-1 (such as 0.25, which would be decreasing turbulence stability in an aircraft by 75%).

See if that helps get a better result for you.

Edited March 24, 2023 by hangar

[The Flight Level 2,113]

Just tuned in to AVSim! Before this one goes crackers, you can have pilots with thousands of hours, pilots with a few hours and all the stuff in between, there will always be opinions to what feels most realistic in a stationary home computer regarding gusts and turbulence. It is all about the individual preferences approaching realism based on what the user has experienced in real life.

[LRBS 948]

In the airline industry, we use these guidelines, I think that the following will shed some light and perhaps a better understanding regarding this "turbulence" topic. Each airplane category will be a factor.

 

Mountain Waves

Detour around known or forecast mountain wave activity. If a detour is not possible, maintain a flight level at least 50% higher than the mountain range. This avoidance technique should not be attempted if jet stream activity exists near the mountain waves, causing turbulence at all levels from the surface through the tropopause. Severe turbulence accompanied by altimeter errors of up to 2,500 feet can be anticipated in areas encompassing mountain wave activity

 

Turbulence

 

General

Turbulence can cause physical injury to cabin occupants. Cabin crewmembers are especially vulnerable to injury due to close proximity to equipment (e.g., galley carts) and the fact that they spend much of their time out of their seat belts.

 

Light Chop

 

Slight, rapid, and somewhat rhythmic bumpiness without appreciable changes in altitude or attitude.

Washboard type fluctuations in which the bumpiness is very light. It occurs at rapid and regular intervals and is similar to that encountered in a small speedboat cruising on water ruffled by a five to ten knot wind. There is no airspeed fluctuation and liquids do not spill out of containers.

 

 

Light Turbulence

 

Slight, erratic changes in altitude and/or attitude. Occupants may feel a slight strain against seat belts.

Unsecured objects may be displaced slightly. Food service may be conducted and little to no difficulty is encountered in walking.

 

 

Moderate Chop

 

Rapid bumps or jolts without appreciable changes in aircraft altitude or attitude. Similar to light chop but of greater intensity. The bumps and jolts are sharper, more like riding in an automobile running over railroad ties. Airspeed may fluctuate slightly and liquids will spill out of containers. Cabin service is difficult or not advisable.

 

 

Moderate Turbulence

 

Changes in altitude and/or attitude occur but the aircraft remains in positive control at all times. It usually causes variations in indicated airspeed. Occupants feel definite strains against seat belts. It causes rapid bumps or jolts. Unsecured objects are dislodged. Cabin service and walking are difficult.

 

 

Severe Turbulence

 

Causes large, abrupt changes in altitude, airspeed, and attitude, which at times can cause the aircraft to become momentarily out of control. Occupants are forced violently against seat belts. Unsecured objects are tossed about. Cabin service and walking are impossible.

 

 

Extreme Turbulence

 

Causes the aircraft to be violently tossed about and is practically impossible to control and may cause structural damage.

 

 

Clear Air Turbulence

 

Clear Air Turbulence (CAT) is a very serious operational factor to flight operations at all levels. CAT is

high level turbulence normally above 15,000 feet MSL. CAT is not associated with cumulus clouds or convective activity (thunderstorms)

 

 

[Bob Scott 7,721]

I've just cleaned out a bunch of ad hominem insults and bickering and given a few of the offenders some well-deserved time off from the forums.

Vigorous debate of the issues is acceptable--sneering insults directed at others because you don't agree with their opinions is *not*.

Be warned--if you feel the inclination to comment about another poster rather than about what they posted, you're about to be skating on thin ice.  We don't need the acrimony here.

[The Flight Level 2,113]

@LRBS Nice! First time to see turbulence subdivided with definitions like this!

[Pilot53 544]

I think the biggest problem with the turbulence is cloud based convective turbulence is completely absent.  It should never be smooth when flying into any cumuliform cloud.  Even cirrus clouds often have some light chop especially if they are associated with frontal systems.  Its like the devs have never been on a real airplane before.

[2reds2whites 827]

2 hours ago, aerostar said:

...well I'm glad I'm not the only one...

...and he is a real pilot,   wonder if he is classed as making idiotic suggestions...

....cut to the chase from - 16 mins ....

 

I don't agree with that in the slightest. I have no idea why he would expect more turbulence in those approaches. The first landing in the 737 is into a 15kt headwind 20 degrees off the nose. That's a 5kt crosswind component, which in a 737 might as well literally be nothing. Why on earth would you expect much (if any) turbulence there? 🤨

The wet weather landing looks entirely appropriate. 21G33kt on a low pressure, ISA- day. Looks spot on. 

I think that people forget that 3/4 of the effect of turbulence is the physical feeling of it - which you can't replicate without visual 'tricks' which if anything completely exaggerate the effect. 

[lwt1971 7,417]

3 hours ago, Stoopy said:

Isn't it supposed to generate the same type and degree of turbulence as before when set to the Realistic level?  Or has it in fact been dialed down all across the board?

Bottom line, current realistic setting does not completely equate to pre-SU12 turbulence. Latest info from MS/Asobo on the SU12 turbulence changes were covered in recent Developer livestream, my notes and timestamped video links on this topic from another thread below... note the specific video timestamp link where Seb walks thru the changes for realistic turbulence mode.

Thermals/Turbulence improvements (Seb)

• https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1772471519?t=00h17m06s
• based on tonnes of feedback from community, lot of improvements
• impact of sunlight energy: time of day, date, wind ... impact of clouds ... impact of storm clouds and winds
• extreme thermals and turbulence conditions
• turbulence control now available, does not take away thermals
• video on improvements in realistic turbulence mode: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1772471519?t=00h18m29s
  • thermals are very dependent on solar irradiance, latitude, time of day, etc play a big role
  • thermals are quite well aligned and appropriate according to clouds (and clouds' density/etc) in the sim now
    • keep in mind the visual representation don't quite show the true alignment in sim since it's visually hard to do
  • wind shear, vortex systems etc can arise in extreme situations
  • there are more planned improvements to keep improving thermals, and to keep implementing more from community feedback and gathering feedback from more pilots
     

Edited March 24, 2023 by lwt1971