It used to be very different before WU4. Before it was impossible to keep it on the runway while landing or taking off above maximum listed cross wind for the Bonanza. Now it doesn’t matter what the wind does. Land at a 30 degree crab angle, plane auto corrects and is stable right on touch down. Before you would get gradual grip and drive right off the runway.
Landing and take off have become a bit more difficult since last update in other ways. Wing stall speed seems to be higher now, much easier to fall over when taking off too soon / too steep of an angle. And also less drag while landing, I have to slow down earlier now, but still keep speed up to avoid the higher stall speed. However the transition to ground effect or maybe the severity of it is better now, much easier to make a smooth landing without bounce or ‘stepping down’. Maybe the sensitivity has improved, easier to make a perfect flare without overshooting and going back up.
Yea they need to see who are making such complaints. If it’s coming from gamers then they shouldn’t listen but if it’s coming from long time simmers/aviation’s enthusiasts, and more critically from real world pilots then they need to be listening intently. (As far as physics and aerodynamics go)
If you are expecting all turbulence to be the same you are quite uninformed. There are a lot of categories of turbulence. Ive not seen turbulence be unrealistic as you described, even in the new sim update. Should it be stronger on GA? Well depends on what is causing the turbulence. It sounds like you are taking turbulence as one size fits all rather than there being variable on conditions.
I think he’s talking about an obvious turbulence but the plane doesn’t react accordingly. Although I’ve noticed decent turbulence during climb while cruising, upon landing and takeoff all behave differently as you stated. Haven’t come across moderate to severe turbulence yet though. It could be calmer wind speeds and jets streams out there nowadays
thanks for sharing my thread Thermals, Up&Downdrafts - Realism update needed!
I’m trying to push this for quite some time now and share all interview parts and some additional infos to this topic.
So thanks for everybody who votes there and keeps it alive with comments, slowly getting to the 200 Votes mark (it’s the biggest if I’m not mistaken).
Still a long way to go before it gets to the top 50 . But glad I’m not alone at least and it’s starting to get some traction. So thanks again for every help.
I think the main problem with this topic is that a lot of people don’t know how the wind/ turbulence behaviour is in real life, so not a lot actually asking for it. But I bet the majority wants the realism, even casual simmer, because realistic behaviour means much more fun in this case.
when I think that the other simu was treated to fly on a rail, I see that today, it is not better than that In the middle of a Fabien storm, landing in a B737-800
made during the Fabian storm. I realize more and more, that their communication to be there for 10 years corresponds to the time it will take them to reach the realism they made feel, during their trailers and to purge all the players who complain about not being able to fly with their XBOX controller … with conditions approaching the reality.
There is a difference when you fly autopilot. When I fly manually in a heavy storm, with a small aircraft, my plane goes anywhere. Banking, stalling you name it. Great. I love winds. But I agree it is incomplete.
As far as I know in MSFS wind and airflow are in horizontal direction and it works over large, moving areas, like “mini stormfronts” of some kind moving around and hitting aircraft. Sometimes that movement has a vertical component and when that hits you, you get “turbulence” combined with heavy wind. I’ve never seen upward only air streams like thermals, there is always a stronger horizontal component.
For a while now, this is #7 and #10 in the current wish list. But #7 is still “not planned yet” by Asobo/MS and they regard it as something that third party developers should do… #10 (below) is started… In the official wish list, #7 does not say “thermals and turbulence” it sais “open up the weather system to third parties” but the topic was about the same thing. This wish is undercounted, there are in total at least a 1000 votes for this when they would add up every wish topic, also wish topics about turbulence. It’s actually the same thing.
Rather strong. Considering that @MarinaraTrain42 and most others here are right.
The turbulence effect is unrealistic, whether you have seen it or not. There is no doubt that it has been dialed back since release. I used to have to hand fly the King Air when departing north from CYVR and climbing out over the mountains. Even a mild breeze off the strait IRL will make you glad you bought the sheep skin covers for your shoulder straps when making that trip.
Thermal turbulence combined with a constant stiff breeze can make an approach in CYXJ in the 320 (I used to do it in a 737-200 IRL, but now I am forced into this bus thing in the sim) a very uncomfortable ride. Not uncommon to have hard drops and kicks that would knock anyone standing to the floor, (or sometimes ceiling ). That same approach done in a 172 would challenge even the best pilots.
These kind of events are common in real aviation but non existent in the sim. I completely understand that if you have only encountered mild turbulence while sitting in the cabin of an airliner, real turbulence in a light aircraft would seem unworldly. My wife has flown a lot in airliners but the first time we hit moderate turbulence over the Rockies in our Baron, she cried…
Asobo got caught by the crying from far too many of the uninitiated. Dialing back the effect of turbulence quieted those users and so they thought they had won the day. Sadly it removed the only bit of realistic turbulence we had. I agree that they need to model far more variation in the way the air moves and work on each piece of the airframe being affected independently. Until we get the port wing being hammered 10 feet up as the tail is dropped into a hole, I would be happy with the old model back.
Interesting thread and it may be a coincidence (or maybe nothing) but I was thinking about the “flyback” bug, which I encountered on the weekend trying to get the Citation into Saskatoon. It got me to thinking about the PMDG 737 in either FS9 or FSX that had a tendency to spontaneously decouple from the FMC and go into tight turns. The fix? Turn off turbulence. Maybe this background toying with turbulence is Asobo actually trying to solve other bugs. Just an idea…
Could be some truth in it, tend to agree with comments turbulence does appear to be underplayed with exception of flying over mountains, even then it’s pretty weak. Tried flying in some storm clouds or just underneath them… best described as sedate and benign.
Too many users (casual simmers) complained earlier regarding Bizzare flight Model (Updraft, Down and Sheers) that they are unrealistic to Fly. Some, I read like, someone’s Kids are feeling headache (NO Offence Intended), as they have Vision Impairment due to Heavy Turbulence. Then, some like, Overstressed and Incomplete Flight through Cumulonimbus Clouds etc.
Honestly, Asobo is tuning this into an Arcade Game for Casual Simmers.
They (Asobo) dun need to follow P3D and X11 for these Casual Simmers. Infact they need to Educate the Casual Simmers regarding Flight Dynamics and Wind Patterns. There you change the Game and be an Industry Leader. Cutting of the Realism and Arcading the Game is one of the Worst Approach for a SIM, but may be Good for an Arcade Game.
I wonder, they will someday cut the PARO (Bhutan) Approach or a Gibraltar Approach with no or Nil Terrain Wind, only to please these Casual Cries.
In another Note: I seriously suspect FPS Drops, Slutters or Performance Degradation could be another reason not to Implement Realistic Multi Grade & Direction Wind Pattern and Very High Altitude Change. Real time Injection of METAR and Conversion of 3D Space into Numerous Weather Boxes demands multi threaded Computing. Maybe, that’s why Asobo is limiting by Altitude Variance Limiting up to 1000 Ft/Min.
Literally, both casual and hardcore simmers could easily be appeased here by give folks the option of switching to a either a realistic or arcade / relaxed model. They already have a bunch of other assistance settings. Why not add this one as well? Doesn’t seem like rocket science to me…
Absolutely, Earlier I used to Fly to Tromso from Oslo, for analyzing different cloud layers, Sheers etc. Now its juz an Electronic Stability Control (ESC like in Cars) driven journey to Tromso - Sit back and Relax. The another thing I noticed is no Crosswinds at Tromso, Birmingham and Gatwick. Which was earlier in SIM and these airports are notorious for Crosswind in Real Life. Even a380s are pulled down by down draft at Gatwick Often.
Now a320 lands in Straight line at all these Airports (regardless ATC and FMS showing Crosswinds higher that a320s max Crosswind Capacity 48 knots)
The turbulence was great at the end of November, so much fun trying to alter any dials/buttons during cabin shakes, now sadly nothing of the sort, really hope this is sorted.
Definitely right! I believe that most of users have no idea of what turb is in real life which is understandable because they never flew in RL, that’s it… Remember how many posts we read that said turbulence is too strong in MFS2020 before Asobo put it down…
I used to fly in bad weather in RL and this since the begining of my PPL, yesterday in MFS2020 South of France was covered by a bunch of CB, well it was like flying on rails as usual and this morning I decided to get back on Xplane, sure the graphic is not that eye-candy despite of XEurope Simheaven/ortho sceneries but Xenviro or Active sky even if it’s not perfect do a good job, this is the only sim for which I have to pay attention when I create a VFR flight plan that makes me feel close to the real life…
Real pilots and hard-core simmers are defintely not the right target-market for MFS2020 (despite their big time “fake” advertised videos before the release date claiming that they will bring to us the best Engine Weather ever made so far in simulation… marketing!) … I can understand bugs of course but this is not about bugs anymore… so that my hopes start to be cold.
There’s the option to open a question before the Q&A, put in all relevant information etc.
Throwing in some links in the chat is certainly not the way to get attention since during the Q&A there is no time for Jayne to open links and read them.
Also external links are not welcome in the twitch stream which is probably the reason they got deleted.
Good to know… I didn’t know that. Anyway it doesn’t change a thing eventually. But by honesty I have to edit my previous post because it’s not about censure. My bad!
I was gonna try to record some turbulence, but for some reason Gusts don’t work anymore. I can set a constant wind, but no matter how strong I want to set the gusts, it doesn’t work at all. And the gust graph is not working too.
and it’s starting to get some traction. So thanks again for every help. 
). That same approach done in a 172 would challenge even the best pilots.
