Major issues with turbulence - seriously unrealistic!

Thanks everyone for the invaluable feedback and discussion, I’ve tried to summarize the related observations. I hope we manage to get concrete response and planned resolution from the developers.

Sim update 4 - weather effect on aerodynamics:

  • Ridge lift - exists
  • Turbulence doesn’t impact pitch and roll axises, highly unrealistic
  • Thermals - exists but only relatively close to the ground. Also, not as strong as IRL .
  • Thermals “Albedo” effect is still not implemented ( per developers, to be implemented in the future)
  • Turbulence in clear air and in clouds (SU4) - severely limited and weak
  • Updraft/downdraft velocity - limited to 1000ft/min ( per developers )
  • Gusts are totally broken…

Anything else missing to a “TLDR” summary?


I actually doubt vertical drafts exist at all. Will submit a bug report with the link to this thread later today. Developers may think that this is a features request, but considering what they promised (a realistic flight simulator with realistic weather effects), this is a BUG.

1 Like

I would go further with turbulence, I’ve tried in a number of live weather situation and can’t get any noticeable turbulence effect.


Very interesting discussion and some very good points made in this thread.

I agree that turbulence and other weather effects should not be reduced to make the sim easier to fly.

I have seen two different links for votes here in this thread (and voted), but both of these threads do not explain clearly enough what kind of change would be warranted.

Maybe the OP of this thread, MarinaraTrain42, or someone else who has time to stay with the issue can make a polite, but clear worded VOTE thread with description of the problem as well as the envisioned solution?

Personally I have had very positive experience with some of my problems with the sim actually getting solved due to strong votes on those issues. So my guess is it would be the same with this issue if enough votes are collected.


Splitting the vote does not seem a good idea to me. As they count all these things separately (vertical airflow is now #7 and #10 and some lower rank). Please vote the existing wishlist topics when the subject is the same, or closely related.

The most recent with a LOT of votes is Homieffm’s topic,

… and the big one is


Good point, but I think the existing VOTE threads are not clear enough on the issue. (No offense intended towards the OPs of those threads)

No wind gusts regardless of how I set gust sliders. No data displayed in the “Wind Graph”

If I was Asobo I would see this as fixed when the gusts are shown in the wind graph.

Almost nonexistent turbulence within storm clouds?

This thread is not about turbulence in general, but about turbulence specifically in clouds.

As far as I understand, what we would want is not a better wind graph display, nor is it only fixing the amount of turbulence in clouds.

Instead what is experienced is a generally too weak effect of turbulence and drafts on the airplane - in the air as well as on the ground. The whish would be to have those simulated as realistically as possible without decreasing the effects of turbulence or drafts to make the sim easier to fly.

Maybe I missed a VOTE thread that clearly states this - if yes please point me to it - or it does not exist yet. If it does not exist yet, might make sense if it was created.

Well, this one you mentioned:

Thermals, Up&Downdrafts - Realism update needed!

seems to be pretty close on the issue.

1 Like

That tone is (was) because I advocate the subject very often… and very persistent. I want to fly sailplanes and I want to have turbulence and I want a control for it. I want it all. And that’s why I will always fight any sidelinks. This Wishlist thing is a ranking. In preparation of the updates, Asobo/MS make a top 24 of wishes, see the blogs of @Jummivana,

At first, I criticized Homie’s topic as well, but because there is so much interesting to read there, it could become the future topic. But I really hate this selection process, for this reason… Don’t see it as a personal attack, I just want to discourage posting too many different links to different wishes. That won’t help. In fact… better find them all… and vote for all… but there the forum vote limit comes in. You have only a limited count of votes.

Good info that everyone only has a limited amount of votes. Did not know this.

So if we were to recommend one thread to vote on this issue it would be Thermals, Up&Downdrafts - Realism update needed! I guess… - So here goes another one of my votes :wink:


Thanks for linking and voting for this topic! :slight_smile:
The up&down draft limitation is the reason you almost got no turbulences and no dangerous weather situations you would encounter in real life, so that’s the right wishlist thread to vote for.

Votes are ‘‘limited’’ , but everybody has 10.000, so no real reason to hold back :wink:

Yes, and they do that by making something gorgeous, entertaining and educational for us. That’s great business and there’s nothing wrong with that.

We really need to stop referring to the turbulence encountered in the sim as “Severe”. The level of turbulence encountered in the sim is a long way from severe. Let’s implement the same criteria real pilots use to report turbulence in a PIREP. Keep in mind that it is important to indicate the aircraft as well as the conditions as light turbulence in an airliner feels very different in a 152.

Incorrect categorization of intensity is how we ended up with reduced turbulence effects in the first place. Non pilots need to be made aware that real turbulence, even light or moderate is a lot more pronounced than they think.

The turbulence depicted in the video is “Occasional Moderate” at best.


I shared this with @BarrelYew322834. It helped him understand turbulence. I should probably share with the rest of you…

What we have in the simulator is a bit of a Frankenstein. Jetstream windshear effect and windshear rotor effects are poorly depicted and often too quick. Picture a river swollen with spring melt and you can imagine what that transition layer looks like. Now imagine going down that river in a submarine.

Pilots will avoid that boundary layer. It is ok to fly well above, below or in the jetstream but you do not want to subject your passengers to the boundary.

Moderate turbulence is a VERY unnerving experience for passengers and if encountered in a light aircraft at lower altitudes due to mechanical turbulence or storm fronts can leave inexperienced pilots shaken.

Severe turbulence is not something any general aviation casual pilot would ever want to encounter. Note the description… “Occasional loss of control.” I have encountered turbulence in a King Air that revealed years worth of dirt and debris, lost nuts and bolts and numerous pens that were thought lost. The bruising from my shoulder straps and lap belt made me look like a car crash victim.


As @willisxdc suggested, this is all we have at SU4 MSFS Update. He guided me a lot on the Live Weather Test. Route was EGGW - BKIF at FL 340 TOW 72000 Live Weather. @Evol3443 @MarinaraTrain42

I have noted in dev update 10 June 2021, that the Live Weather and Accurate Wind Reading is in the Top 2 Bug List. Hope this will be rectified in SU6 + SU7 (That’s is somewhere on September and Nov-Dec Update)

I have exactly the opposite going on at the minute with the FBW, flying in normal settings that I never change the aircraft is literally being thrown like a kite, the turbulence looks to be more pronounced by a long way, this is all the way through the flight. Looking into it at this time of posting.

Could you specify the Route? And Time of Flight?
And also, FBW Dev Version with FADEC Engine and New Flight Dynamics is Lighter (Greater Lift) than Asobo a320. That may be one reason FBW feels as said.

Hi BarrelYew322834

I tried the next flight and it was much smoother, the flight highlighted was the turbulent one.
Note, I am using the FBW that is now listed in the Sim.

Okies, I got it.
This week almost all days, its is expected to have high wind speed at FL200 - FL350 on and around San Francisco Area. You are using FBW Stable Version which has Greater Lift than Asobo a320 Flight Dynamics even without FADEC Engine. The wind speeds over the Area at FL 180 is 85 Kmph and FL350 is 105 Kmph which might cause Light Turbulence and Lift for FBW. The head wind is shifting through the route from different angles throughout the route. That’s why you felt FBW is having greater Lift and much Lighter.

you dont have more/less lift because of headwind/tailwind while airborn.
the plane is moving at the same speed in the mass of air. Only the ground speed will change

*you’ll have a change of lift with windshear though