Turn On Turbulence

Yes, they mentioned in a q&a last november they wanted to implement the options for turbulence first. Then they are able to improve the turbulence in the CFD simulation. But we need to have an aircraft that has cfd enabled. I feel it’s confusing. We have two kind of CFD simulations in the atmosphere. One locally around the aircraft (more detailed) and one global CFD (less detailed). I hope they are able to get the aircraft CFD global as well then we don’t have two types of CFD. Only one fluid as it is IRL. I think it will feel more realistic and dynamic.

Maybe su13 will be the atmosphere update we all are waiting for? :slight_smile:

1 Like

Where is the slider for strenght of turbulence? Cant find it (SU12, not beta).

asssistance opt

Hello Captains!

Well, after SU12 released yesterday we still have to raise votes to make it loud as much as possible!

On my side I’m really happy with ground/terrain turbulence (especially during the approach) which is very well made by Asobo, that is now even better represented than in Xp12/Active Sky, it is much more complex and same for the wind representation so yes I do review my last point of view somehow that msfs atmosphere is more complex than XP12 after digging much more than previously with the combination of XP12/AS Open Beta … BUT …what is about the most complex atmosphere in a flight sim if some crucial features are still definitely missing in that last SU in order to make our msfs skies realistic?
I mean bad to severe turbulence and its dangers!

Asobo said clearly and explicitly that they will unlock vertical winds (up/downdraft) for SU12, also unlimited for TS as they claimed!!!
By the way, at the first place I’d like to know where TS are located in msfs while there are plenty on earth mentioned from METAR/SIGMET like it occured yesterday?

What’s going on?!
What about CB/severe Turbulence?

How could we have a real picture and the danger that could be encountered in severe turbulence if “we” still fly a PA28 in TS??! Lucky simmers or even real pilots if they are happy with that of course, I really do understand that it doesn’t matter for most of the majority of simmers but it’s still matter for others therefore I accept that this post could be boring and repetive but we were supposed to have a new option “Low” and “Realistic” TURBULENCE hence at the end of the day: what “realistic” means to Asobo in 2023 after the very release date?!

I don’t want to steal the words of Captain NG Driver but indeed “severe weather conditions is way too friendly” compared to real life, as we were many to report it since 300 years (almost) lol… and sure that I second what it is said in his video… We should expect much more turbulence in bad weather to make the msfs atmopshere realistic as it was promised since the video advertisings but let’s pass it, however it was said recently in the previous Q&A … so what!!!

This flight sim has yet the best potential ever over other flight sims I believe so yeap on my side it becomes very frustating because Asobo gave a lot of expectations out and always like to say we will do this and that here and there so it creates a lot of joy by listening them during Q&A.

Frustating only in bad and unsafe weather conditions because I really do like flying msfs now in nice live weather (turbulence in that condition are well done imo) or other conditions instead of the weather conditions that show CB or “severe METAR” so that I don’t have to say to myself:
" dxxx I don’t care about creating a Flight Plan based on the weather (which is so enjoyable on my side to care about point A to B for my leg as I do in RL) or dxxx there a big dark cosmetic CB in front of the nose of my bird that I finally do not need to avoid… or why do I have to set seat belt ON after FL100 and Engine Ice ON if going through CB is just a cosmetic matter? "…

I don’t know what to say more, I will feel it like boring if I continue even for myself so I shut up and I go to fly! ( Again the other part of turbulence is very well done in msfs as I’ve never seen so far in a flight sim, the way now the airplane behaves because of winds, of turb relief etc is quite close to reality, it has to be added in this post so Asobo I love you but … well let’s go on the tarmac!) :small_airplane:

Enjoy the video, fly safe (no doubt, no danger) :see_no_evil: :cloud_with_lightning: :face_with_peeking_eye:

How REALISTIC is the new REALISTIC TURBULENCE setting in MSFS? | Real Airline Pilot - YouTube

1 Like

I’d have to go back to check, but my understanding of that slider is not to affect in any way the actual turbulence i.e. it does not alter the weather, but it instead affects how much said turbulence is affecting the plane, and how much it experiences the turbulence.

A bit like Star Trek inertial dampers in that respect. :slight_smile:


From the video alone you can see that as far as existing turbulence simulation goes, this looks pretty much spot on. You can see how the IAS tape doesn’t toss around like it’s getting electrocuted all the time anymore, which is great. Those sporadic bumps now and then are exactly how wind turbulence should feel.

Now, this is not to say the turbulence experience is all complete.

There is Cloud Turbulence™ still entirely missing.
I’d like for everyone to remember this before throwing out comments of “it’s been nerfed too much” - It does not seem like that is the case.

The turbulence factors that are there appear very much correct now. (hurray!)

It is the factors that aren’t there which may cause moments of “this isn’t enough turbulence”.
That is, weather-related disturbances, especially inside/around clouds.

I reckon if they keep these settings and continue on to introduce realistic cloud/thermal turbulence conditions, we’ll have an entirely realistic sim which really does feel like the real thing.

I’m pleased to see improvements in this regard. SU11 actually had me stop playing for a while, and now it feels like it’d be pleasurable to get back in again.

Hopefully in SU13 they can do something about the remaining weather issues that have only grown since SU7, so that real-world WX becomes something we can take seriously in the sim. Any other issues I have far less gripes about, as most of them can be modded away or circumvented somehow.
Anyways, that all off-topic.

I think they just might have finally nailed the “turbulence problem” satisfactorily. Now they can safely move on to implement new turbulence factors (like clouds), without worrying about having to fix the ones already there.


I’m on a trip in a Baron from Grand Junction Colorado to Las Vegas Nevada I have been getting buffeted around all day but especially around Brice Canyon. I really think they are close with the turbulence.
As Moach6908 said “this is not to say the turbulence experience is all complete” but it is much closer than it has been.


On the other hand, my last flight from LA to China had me cloud surfing for around 2 hours with barely any turbulence at FL340. I’ve flown that route 20 times in 6 years in the real world. Guess what? Those types of clouds are very common for that route and you’d be surprised to find out that for the majority of the time I remember flying in them, smooth as silk with a bump or two.

For those saying that turbulence is currently much better and those saying there is no turbulence (or not enough), pls remember my earlier post that turbulence has NOT been fully implemented for Jets (copied below).

So when you comment here, it would be good to know what plane you fly.

The turbulence (CFD or Control Flow Dynamics) has been implemented for rotating parts, such as props and turboprops, NOT jets, see here:

[Questions about pitch/roll/yaw gyro stability parameter - MSFS DevSupport 4](Questions about pitch/roll/yaw gyro stability parameter - MSFS DevSupport 4)

To quote from this:

So, both precession parameters only affect the influence of rotating parts on stability? That is, they would normally have no effect on a turbojet airplane?
That’s right, precession scalar are applied when computing engine torque in the case of piston engine and turboprops, not jet engines.

So if you are a jet flyer like me, we have to wait

The turbulence is not simulated at all yet. It’s only updrafts. They need to create mixing of air inside clouds to create turbulence. As it is now the air just moves up and that affects all type of aircraft right now not only GA. The thing is that we don’t have thunderstorm clouds in live weather or they are really rare that creates those updrafts.

1 Like

Yes, that is consistent with what I experience in my jet. It has to be serious CB to get the up- and down-drafts, and even then all that happens is my altitude fluctuates up and down. As you say, there is not much else that happens in clouds. Crossing the Alsp was a little more interesting, but again it was just altitude fluctuation

1 Like

SU 12 turbulence, or wind, or current is catastrophic. I don’t know what it actually is. The developer mixes it all back up, I can’t even describe what it is… They fly in, the plane doesn’t shake, the speed immediately increases from 100 kts to 200 kts, the plane moves back and forth. This has nothing to do with reality. Will they fix this? This phenomenon is getting worse…


Nothing to do with jets or props afaik.
I seeked out the most severe WX the planet can offer (C172 WBSim, realistic turb); from Asia to S.America i went storm chasing. The only turbulence INSIDE CLOUDS I experienced were light chops or no turbulence at all. A total joke imho.

*And to the ppl claiming to have severe turbulence etc - yes, that is MECHANICAL TURBULENCE close to the ground. Yes, that is in. And its working pretty good tbh.
*And we have ‘turbulence’ from GUSTS (although gusts dont roll the AC in the sim - just some quick yaw movement).
What we are talking about here is TURBULENCE INSIDE CLOUDS - turbulence caused by extreme updrafts (like front of CB) meeting extreme downdrafts(back of CB), extreme gusts inside clouds, ‘vacuume pockets’ causing the plane to suddenly drop etc etc - that is missing!
(Actually had some light chops inside clouds, which is a slight improvement, but its way too mild).

TURBULENCE INSIDE CLOUDS/CBs/THUNDERSTORMS etc (or at the button of Cumulus clouds for that matter) is totally dumbed down still, and you can fly a Fieseler Storch through a CB without any problems.

So please try and differenciate between MECHANICAL TURBULENCE + turbulence from GUSTS (the yaw movement changing 3 times a sec(seem a bit better in SU12 though) - would barely call it turbulence though) and TURBULENCE INSIDE CLOUDS , which is sorely missing.

In the Q&A Sebastian had to select some extreme values in the preset WX to force some turbulence.
Live WX seemingly dont inject these extreme values, and turbulence IN RELATION TO CLOUDS is still 95% missing, dumbing down the sim and making clouds just a visible feature and nothing you have to avoid.

Please continue working on this Asobo - as it still needs a lot of work/tweaking especially in liveWX.


I even deleted my post fed by some enthusiasm…

Just flew from LSZH to LFRB because of TCU and CB above and around LFRB so it was the good spot to “test” in Live Weather severe conditions… Well just gust winds made the B737 rolling on left and right but definitely no turb in clouds at all!
Yesturday indeed it was turbulent ( yeap still turbulence which include mechanical and other types of turbulence by the way) so yes it was challenging during the approach but indeed only due to strong gust winds, relief and ground (KBIF/KFHU) CAVOK …
Anyway we are all agree with the fact that SU12 don’t do the job in this very crucial area…

It will be great to have some fixes before SU13 but for that Asobo who is supposed to read the forum must be aware about those big time lack of features.

“Realisitc Mode” option shouldn’t be a “Cosmetic Mode”… even if I do appreciate the way that msfs deals so well with ground/relief turb especially when we fly in VFR, it feels so real in those terms…