Perhaps they need to lessen the affect of turbulence on scenery in VR because its all bigger compared to monitor 2D based scenery.
I still think the biggest problem is that 3 dimensional distance based perspective is not properly represented in the sim. If you are in a vehicle and it jolts, objects outside the vehicle that are close will appear to move far more than very distant objects will. In the sim the whole scene moves equally including objects that are far away in the distance.
Interestingly, these same conversations took place in XP11 forums regarding VR and turbulence with the same alternating opinions on how it should be done. Some came to the conclusion that it just isnt possible to simulate turbulence in VR without some sort of physical movement of the pilots seating position to enable them to make sense of what they were seeing visually.
It’s possible it just feels like that because your visual field is surrounded by objects much closer to you, like structural elements of the wind screen, the glare shield etc.
If you were to hold up a rectangle in front of you, like a picture frame, and look towards the horizon, if your view is shifted by turbulence, your view though that rectangle could change dramatically. That doesn’t mean the horizon has moved noticeably more, its just because the distance between your “eyes”, and the rectangle is so much shorter than the rectangle to the horizon.
It’s a perspective thing.
Another example would be if you were to stand in front of any object right in front of you, like a pole that was in line with your face. If you jump up, and down on the spot you would see that pole disappear out of view below, then appear as you land. But the horizon wouldn’t appear to move. It is, but it is impossible to discern with the naked eye because it is so much further away.
Essentially its the parallax effect, like you would see when looking out the side windows of a car or train. The trees, and buildings near the tracks appear to be moving much faster that those in the far distance, but they are “moving” at the same speed.
Well if you sit in the cockpit of say the 172 and adjust the view on your joystick, you will see that if the vent moves up or down 2 inches on the monitor, trees hundreds of yards away move two inches too. In reality those trees should move far less than that because they are a lot further way. 3D distance is not factored into the view we see in the sim, its just an image and the whole thing moves like a photograph.
Interesting. And that should be easy to test. It’s possibly skewed by the the zoom level of the camera, and a more zoomed in view may give better results than a zoomed out view.
Maybe that would help but 50% is where cockpit view is in my sim and that gives a reasonable view without too much side distortion due to the fact that the sim doesnt properly support ultra wides yet.
It definitely can be done in VR, DCS as a flight sim does VR pretty well. Turbulences feel good but don’t distract from looking around. And you can even click on buttons in the cockpit. I can’t tell how they did it but it works really well.
There’s a tricky balance at play here. How do you get the visual effect of movement inside the cockpit without causing functional difficulties? It’s going to be really frustrating to click and adjust all those tiny knobs and switches when they’re constantly wiggling all around the screen.
There is a difference though, you are at least sat in the thing that is moving around when in a real plane so to some degree move in the same direction as those switches and knobs.
I’m just gonna leave this here. As much as I would LOVE to get one, I need to be able to easily swap my flight sim space to a work space during the day. Lol how else am I gonna pay for my toys?
Really, no offence intended but it is actually quite the opposite of what you say. For example (putting it simply) if the plane jerks to the right, your body feels like it has moved left. Or if you have sudden drop in altitude, your body stays where it is making you feel like you have gone in the opposite direction. It is physics. Think about being in a car and turning to a sharp right, your body continues on its original path (for a moment in time anyway).
The PPL Human Performance & Limitations and Principles of Flight exams are very interesting and explain a lot about this whole scenario.
And of course a mouse is different to fingers having hold of a real knob. But yes your fingers do sometimes slip off of buttons in slightly rough weather. There are all sorts of factors in a real life flight of light aircraft that will take you by surprise after being used to a sim.
You fly mainly with one hand on the yolk and the other hand either adjusting controls or holding on to the front bezel to keep yourself stable.
And just using the throttle, you often need to brace your fingers against the side so that the throttle can be controlled finely and doesn’t move erratically in gusty weather. Which admittedly is something you cannot do in the sim. Haha.
Not that it is a bad thing but before arguing about this you guys need to go up and fly a PA28 or Cessna in slightly choppy weather. It is often the first thing that surprises new students. Air sickness is common when starting off. You feel everything and your body gets tossed about. You get used to it but it happens. It can be very hectic and certainly not relaxing all of the time. And nothing at all like being a passenger in an A320.
And that is just basic PA28 etc. Then give the Extras a go…
Granted harsh movements would make it difficult in either but even small movements in the sim make it hard to keep the mouse over controls in MSFS because they drift away from you even in gentle flight and you dont have the advantage of being able to grip something like the G100s rotary controls like you do in a real plane either. Its not relevant how many planes I have flown, its obviously harder using a mouse to control buttons and knobs on a screen using a mouse when you are rigid and the object you are trying to control moves away from you all the time than it would be if you were in the real thing. I dont have any problems using buttons and controls in my car even when its being bumped around on UK roads.
Sorry but there is no real comparison between a sim on a screen in 2D being operated by a mouse from a rigid seating position and being in a vehicle operating controls from a seat that is to some degree moving in unison with the object you are sat in. The only thing I will concede is that in moderate and harsh turbulence it would be difficult in both the sim and the real plane to operate controls but we are starting from a disadvantaged position immediately with the simulator.
I will say one last thing on this. Even in XP11 where the cockpit moves a lot less than it does in MSFS Laminar felt the need to give us pop-out controls and panels because they recognised that the physical disconnect between the user and the cockpit made using those controls with a mouse tricky.
Right, not going to argue any further on this one tbh, it is a waste of time unless you have experienced a real light aircraft in some way it will never be understood or accepted.
I was not trying to say that you cannot control the stereo in your car. lol. I used the car as an example of the physics of movement only. Being in a light aircraft is a very different thing.
Also regarding buttons, if it really bother folks there are panels available etc. anyway that is another story and another angle altogether.
If you are not prepared to accept info from a real pilot but really want to understand a little more, have a quick look at this video, which shows a guy flying a light aircraft in normal weather. (the title is to do with him getting stuck above cloud).
Look how the plane moves about in normal flight. Some of the camera shots from underneath show this very clearly. Watch from about 2:15
Well here is a video showing DutchPilotGirl operating controls in her plane with far more ease than the sim allows for. See 4.45. Sorry but its just not that easy in the sim.
An option would be good as there is still unwanted movements in preset weather. Either that, or please tone it down considerably, in line with feedback from real life pilots. Thank you.
My point is that turbulence effects, at least where I fly, are completely over the top - sufficiently so as to make the plane unflyable - more like a thrill ride than a normal flight. Note that I have flown light GA aircraft, (as a passenger), over similar terrain IRL and the turbulence was nothing like that found in MSFS.
Also note that I am using custom weather with no winds and the turbulence effect is so extreme that it’s like flying through a hurricane.
A workaround I discovered - though totally insane, it works: Drop the outside temperature considerably lower than the default outside temp of 59°F. (or, whatever in °C) See update below.
Despite that, at 59°, the ground turbulence effects - even over asphalt - should not be so extreme.
In my case, I selected “January” as the month and dropped the temperature to around 2-4°F as is normal here in Moscow Russia, and the turbulence disappeared.
However, the apparent turbulence does need to have some kind of adjustment.
============================ Update:
The apparent turbulence appears to depend more on month than outside temperature, however both have an affect. Use “month” as a course adjustment of turbulence and “outside temp” as a fine adjustment.
If I set “June” and “0°C”, turbulence is still excessive.
If I set “January” and “0°C”, the turbulence still exists but is less severe.
If I set “January” and “-10°C”, the turbulence is almost gone and is more like what I have observed IRL over similar terrain in the summer over parts of Suffolk County, Long Island.
As much as I would LOVE to get one, I need to be able to easily swap my flight sim space to a work space during the day. Lol how else am I gonna pay for my toys? 
