I made two flights yesterday in Southern California with the latest update to SU10 beta, and I agree that the gust behavior appears to be much improved.
What I was seeing in the first version of SU10 was instantaneous changes in wind speed and direction when flying level, and the changes were occurring much too often (every few seconds). It made flying a light GA aircraft very difficult and unpleasant - especially when flying an approach.
On yesterday’s flights, there was were still gusts, but less often, and the changes were more gradual. I don’t know if this is a change in the coding of the latest SU10 beta update, or a change in the Live Weather feed - or both.
What on earth are you talking about? It wasn’t me saying people should learn to fly a real plane if they want real weather. Have another go at reading my post that you felt the need to reply to in context.
Agree, What i’ve also noticed is that clouds creates some turbulence again while flying inside them. Not as much as they should but it’s improved. I think it’s as it were at release again.
A thing i have noticed is that the winds doesn’t feel strong until right above the ground. Can’t relly describe the feeling. I will show in a video when flying c172. As soon as i about to touch down the gusts kicks in and pushes me sideways.
Edit: crosswind 27KT g42 just for testing the gusts effect. Not optimal for landing in 172LOL. Wanted to show that the force of gusts doesn’t apply until when landing. Should have felt much pushes higher up in the air as well. Maybe the frequency is still to high to actually feel the gusts? Shouldn’t be like flying on rail on approach in 27KTS gusting 42KTS.
To me the gusts near ground are correct but higher up is wrong. Maybe they need to do it like this to reduce complains about turbulence but it makes it harder to land when gusts suddenly kicks in some feets above ground.
Let me know your thoughts about this. I could be totally wrong about this.
I really hope Asobo have already coded in the hooks for a realism slider in live weather. Easy to realistic, no other options and then let’s see who is brave enough!
I think that would make everybody enjoy the sim and complains to get rid or limit realistic features will stop Easier to manage too, without complains about realistic features.
I think realism many has different opinions about though. I’ve seen those that fly IRL says it’s too much and then some other real pilots says it’s too less. I think it’s too less but the turbulence we have is not perfect simulated. Will never be 100% simulated. Should only be improved and get better simulated. We didn’t have thermals or gusts in su8. Now we have both. No wonder it feels too much when two weather features are suddenly added. With every single new feature of real weather conditions we will see they are overdone because we are not used to the new feature. When they add thunderstorm clouds simulate air that suddenly makes our plane be uncontrollable, guess what we would see here after that?
Many complains about mountain waves been to much, but the thing is that they can be really strong IRL in high windspeeds.
then we have microbursts, wind shear and many more things that causes turbulence we not have simulated yet.
How can we say turbulence is overdone when we not have all of the turbulence in the sim yet?
Not even if we get this turbulence it’s overdone.
Extreme : Aircraft is violently tossed about and practically impossible to control. May cause structural damage. This we should try to avoid with radar and forecast in the sim instead of complaining about.
Now we have this in the sim:
Light Slight erratic changes in altitude and/or attitude. This is normal
Then a slider may be good but i think it should be to tune it to what we find most realistic. I think that is not a thing we will get though. Turbulence ON/OFF i think is a more realistic thing to get in a near future.
I agree, i can’t tell for sure. I just want the clouds to indicate there is unstable air. Then how much turbulence should be different depending on how unstable that air mixing is density, temp and such things. But they showed us a video demonstrating that thing before release of this sim. And that showed much more unstable airflow especially in thunderstormclouds than we get in the sim now.
Stratiform clouds = none to minor.
Cumuliform clouds = minor to moderate, depending on the vertical thickness (cumulus humilis/mediocris/congestus) and instability values (e.g. CAPE, lifted index etc.)
Cumulonimbus/Nimbostratus clouds = moderate to severe, again depending on several criteria which can be quite easily predicted by NWP models. Imagine flying into a storm with environmental CAPE values exceeding 5000 J/kg along with high wind shear and helicity values. That would most likely made the turbulence severe to extreme.
I know that’s an oversimplification, but it beats the flying on rails inside clouds that we have now.
They’d also need to up the quality of their cloud rendering. Cumulonimbus and nimbostratus clouds aren’t quite there yet. You can see some puffs and cumuliform clouds, the structure doesn’t remind me of a storm though.
And as @Perrry said in a post somewhere, nimbostratus clouds are missing entirely. Although I have to admit I didn’t test that out of METAR areas, but that shouldn’t be a rule for you to experience vertically thick clouds that make you fly in IMC from the ground up to FL300. Those don’t exist now. They did before SU7 happened.
Even if t is, many here will say it’s overdone. Without it it’s not done at all. More realistic to have it simple than not at all in my opinion. Then it can be improved.
To me what they have shown what they can do with airflow is not that simple though.
But it will always be more basic than IRL how much work they even put into it.
I hope they dont do that, its non sensical to allow people to adjust live weather. If there are issues with live it should be improved but absolutely no manual adjustments. If people want to adjust weather to suit their preferences then use pre-sets, that’s what they are for.
Yes it is and as such one group who have weather setting options already could be asking for improvements to that aspect of the sim, they should not be demanding that live is also adjustable to suit what they want simply because they dont like, dont want to fly in or cannot fly in real weather.
Sometimes I don’t fly. I tour place to place, country to country. I start the sim in whatever location I happen to be in and if the weather is poor and sight seeing was what I was going to do but visibility is poor, I dont fly. I wait a day or I may decide to push on and fly IFR even if the weather is poor to my next destination and hope the weather is better. That’s as real as it gets using live weather.
But if they simulated a washing machine i would expect it to have centrifugal force.
Use the centrifugal force equation: F = m v² / r
I, want to let you know that i’m not against adding options. I’m against removing things that exists in real life from a simulator. If they can’t add options in custom-weather then they should have the feature intact until they can add that option.
I think it would be good if they could add the clouds from live-weather as a preset in custom-weather.
Quite. If some turbulent conditions in real life flying make people feel sick, is it unreasonable that the simulation makes people feel the same way in VR if those same conditions are being simulated? I personally dont think so. In my opinion, if people dont like live weather, turbulence and gusts, switch them off and go for pre-sets where the weather is predictable because that is what they are asking for, predictability and control.
I prefer my idea of it having to be unlocked, perhaps by some kind of meteorological course … for one thing it would likely be server based and could be useful keeping the idiots at bay in multiplayer.
The question with the complaints is simple (as ever) - is it real life experience or just a wish because you like it better that way - if it’s a bug and it absolutely doesn’t fit then it’s justified - Asobo (although they seem to make an effort) can’t fulfil EVERY wish. @Perrry You know exactly what happened to the weather because people complained that it didn’t fit after METAR. So now they are finally trying to go in a direction of “simulation” again, finally with turbulence (far too little for me, especially in storm clouds) and in storms a Cessna just gets torn apart - fact, even big airliners get into trouble there.
If you don’t like the realism - there are presets anyway, what’s so difficult about that, they don’t want it to be “realistic” anyway.
And there are again 300 entries about this topic - it is also quite egoistic on the part of those who present their personal wishes here, because this way it happens that 1000 people have things turned off for others.
I am also in the field of racing simulations constantly on the road and owned a tuned Ford Focus RS (not that that would be special now) but was even with this on a racetrack and there are people who have never driven the car themselves (at most with a taxi) and want to explain to you how it should behave! And I mean that as a conclusion - either you know or you inform yourself - but this constant "it’s too loud, too bumpy, sun is too bright, it’s too blue… etc is a bit too much for the development in my opinion (I know “simulation for everyone” but that’s exactly what I warned about) I think rather here 2 versions should be offered, a ProSim (with all that goes with it, high resolution weather, eventually with some subscription, WASM , C++ modules etc…) and a “Sightseeing” version for all those who don’t have more (sounds exaggerated but that would even save resources).
Of course, this is not meant in a bad way towards anyone!
Easier to manage too, without complains about realistic features.
