Jump to content

Anyone got the RealTurb addon(s)?


Stu Antonio

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Stu Antonio

    15

  • steven neill

    14

  • James Goggi

    12

  • Markus Burkhard

    11

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

@Holger Teutsch @Stu Antonio @Daniel Corbe So I've flown the approach into LOWI as specified above: Historical weather for December 23rd, 19:20 UTC. I run my AS turbulence settings at almost defa

It's very good indeed - first time I've seen realistic low level wind in the simulator.

Maximum cloud turbulence: 20% Maximum wind turbulence: 20% Realistic thunderstorm up and downdraft rate: disabled Enhanced turbulence: disabled  

Khoa Nguyen
On 7/14/2020 at 5:22 PM, Koen Meier said:

i believe he is waiting on active sky to be out of open beta.

RealTurb for v5 is out today!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Chris Frasure
1 hour ago, phil highton said:

Any feedback, I installed it last night, but had no time to test? 

Did you have it for v4?  It does essentially the same thing for me in v5.  Depending on active sky conditions, it will buffet the plane.

Link to post
Stu Antonio
Just now, phil highton said:

Yes I did, was never sure wether it did anything or not lol :D

Haha.... +1 bro! 

Link to post
  • 2 months later...
Camille MOUCHEL

hello, as real turb is indepednant from AS, shall I set turblence/thermal to 0 in AS to avoid conflict with real turb or real turb will overwrite anyway the winds and thermal from AS ?

 

EDIT:

 

why do you have to buy by region ? i gues it's the same code for each region ? anyway i only fly in europe so not a big deal

Link to post
Koen Meier
11 minutes ago, Camille MOUCHEL said:

hello, as real turb is indepednant from AS, shall I set turblence/thermal to 0 in AS to avoid conflict with real turb or real turb will overwrite anyway the winds and thermal from AS ?

 

EDIT:

 

why do you have to buy by region ? i gues it's the same code for each region ? anyway i only fly in europe so not a big deal

the code is created per region because each airport in that region has a different effect when a windshear hits the aircraft.

Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL
1 minute ago, Koen Meier said:

the code is created per region because each airport in that region has a different effect when a windshear hits the aircraft.

doesn"t make any sense why would the effect be different at LFPG and GMMX ?

Link to post
duartevieira
3 minutes ago, Camille MOUCHEL said:

doesn"t make any sense why would the effect be different at LFPG and GMMX ?

It’s all to do with the terrain Camille different shapes and sizes as well it’s so cheap anyway and it’s normally 40% off 

Link to post
duartevieira
4 minutes ago, Camille MOUCHEL said:

doesn"t make any sense why would the effect be different at LFPG and GMMX ?

Take for example lpma cos of its terrain and the way the half of the runway it’s build on sea it’s for different effects it takes all that into consideration 

Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL
Just now, duartevieira said:

Take for example lpma cos of its terrain and the way the half of the runway it’s build on sea it’s for different effects it takes all that into consideration 

yes but LPMA is included in europe like LFPG, LFPG is flat as hell unlike LPMA, so saying that each region is different is BS imo as even with the same region go airport will have extreme difference in topology ie EHAM oR LFPG compared to LPMA, LOWI...

 

Can we tune down the effet ? it seems to over exagerate the effect :

here the wind is less than 4 knots but the aircraft react like if the wind was 10kg gusting to 25tk

 

 

Link to post
Karl Brooker

So you've posted a video from another person? Who is using a different add-on aircraft? Do you know their settings in AS?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL
2 minutes ago, Karl Brooker said:

So you've posted a video from another person? Who is using a different add-on aircraft? Do you know their settings in AS?

people here said that Real turb is INDEPEDNANT from AS, so ....

Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL
On 7/17/2019 at 2:36 PM, Kian Andrews said:

I agree with Andy - very realistic imo. Plus it is independent of Active Sky settings which is nice. Definitely worth the money I'd say particularly if you enjoy flying to places like Funchal, Gibraltar, etc makes it much more realistic!

 

 

Link to post
Simon Kelsey
2 hours ago, Camille MOUCHEL said:

why do you have to buy by region ? i gues it's the same code for each region ? anyway i only fly in europe so not a big deal

The literal point of RealTurb is that it simulates the specific local effects at each airfield. So for each region you are getting a bunch of airports which have all been individually coded.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL
11 minutes ago, Simon Kelsey said:

The literal point of RealTurb is that it simulates the specific local effects at each airfield. So for each region you are getting a bunch of airports which have all been individually coded.

ahhh so real turb only worrks on selected airport ? so if i fly on a non famous airport in france, it won't work ?

Link to post
Koen Meier
3 minutes ago, Camille MOUCHEL said:

ahhh so real turb only worrks on selected airport ? so if i fly on a non famous airport in france, it won't work ?

it will work but there used to be a pack called EU summer desitnations which included EU summer airports like tenerife.

Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL
4 minutes ago, Koen Meier said:

it will work but there used to be a pack called EU summer desitnations which included EU summer airports like tenerife.

well already included in the EU package

 

NOTE: "RealTurb Summer Destinations" are also included in the "RealTurb Europe" package! More information here

Link to post
Markus Burkhard
16 minutes ago, Camille MOUCHEL said:

ahhh so real turb only worrks on selected airport ? so if i fly on a non famous airport in france, it won't work ?

No, it will work on ALL airports in the region you purchased. Many airports can use the same code to generate the desired effects. However, many other airports have a very unique topography, requiring custom effects for all those cases. The more unique the terrain surrounding the airport, the more work is required to adjust the effects for an airport. So that's why you pay per region, to cover costs for developing all those specifically coded and unique terrain features around airports.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Markus Burkhard
2 hours ago, Camille MOUCHEL said:

people here said that Real turb is INDEPEDNANT from AS, so ....

It takes the winds coming from AS and modifies those according to the terrain. So the stronger the stuff coming from AS, the stronger the effects can be.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL

purchased real turb europe, AS turbulence setting : 20% thermarl rate: 300ft/min

 

landing at LOWI but can't see any turbulence?, seems that the wind was shifting a little bit but was it due by AS or real turb ? did notice some thermal rate in short final but again, was it because of AS or Real turb but i hoped the ride to be more bumby because of the terrain but it wasn't the case

 

 

Link to post
Markus Burkhard

Looks like the wind was blowing along the valley, so it can't get very bumpy influenced by terrain when the air doesn't hit any resistance/obstacles. 

In any case, max. 300fpm thermal rate is a bit low, try AS default values.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Camille MOUCHEL
14 hours ago, Markus Burkhard said:

Looks like the wind was blowing along the valley, so it can't get very bumpy influenced by terrain when the air doesn't hit any resistance/obstacles. 

In any case, max. 300fpm thermal rate is a bit low, try AS default values.

is +-1000ft/min due to thermal realistic on an A32X due to weight ?

 

because imagine being a standard -3.0° apporach path around -700ft/min and suddently because of thermal you get in a couple of second +1000ft/min so you new VS is now +300ft/min (climbing)

I don't know what value to set in AS to get realistic behaviour

Link to post
  • 2 months later...
Holger Teutsch

Yesterday tried LOWI on VATSIM at 1930Z,  wind was 50+ knots at FL100 and calm on the airport. Realturb went wild. RNP 08 Z and LOC DME were both unflyable, wild turbulences, alpha floor etc. I finally gave up and disconnected.

Today I tried out different AS settings for Realturb. With the settings below both approaches are still very bumpy and difficult but at least I ended safe on the ground.

[Wind options (and effects)]
MaximumSurfaceWindSpeed=100
MinimumWindTurbulencePercent=0
MaximumWindTurbulencePercent=20
MaximumWindShearPercent=10
DisableWindsAloft=0
InterLayerInterpolation=1
WakeTurbulenceStrength=50
MaximumDowndraftRate=750
MaximumUpdraftThermalRate=750
TurbulenceScalePercent=20
RealisticThunderstormDrafts=0

HTH

  • Like 1
Link to post
Holger Teutsch

I tried again this particular LOWI approach with various settings. Realturb seems to add it's effect on top of AS' effects. So in AS all sliders to the very left and I got the same wind shears and and near stalls at the same locations. Also digging a bit in the dll (for Linux lovers: strings + grep) and looking for variable names of AS' api only revealed that realturb reads ambient wind from AS and injects directly into p3d.

I looked at the topography nearby LOWI in Google earth and I think realturb just does a tremendous job. Got the wind shears where two valleys join.

Lesson learned:

If flying on VATSIM disable realturb. The controller only sees wind calm on the ground and gives instructions that simply don't work.

Link to post
Markus Burkhard

Holger, 

will I be able to re-create your scenario by using AS historical weather set to last Wednesday at 1930 UTC? Or did you have VATSIM weather selected in AS?

Link to post
Holger Teutsch

Markus,

I had VATSIM weather on but all my subsequent tests were just with the historic weather

LOWI 231920Z VRB02KT 9999 SCT120 02/02 Q1016 NOSIG

As I do not know if and how the flight plan affects weather synthesis I attach it. And A319, GW ~ 59 to.

SWR74A_LSGG_LOWI.pln

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Daniel Corbe

I've been thinking about uninstalling RealTurb NA because it seems like without fail, if I'm landing at high elevation airports in mountainous terrain, even the slightest bit of surface level winds make it impossible to land with realturb running.   

Link to post
Stu Antonio

I had similar experiences at LOWI, weather was nothing really special but I had to abort two approaches and divert because of nearly uncontrollable aircraft behaviour. Also thinking about stepping away from RealTurb, I never had the feeling it added much to my experience without conparing it directly to the same situation wirhout RT. I wasn‘t even sure it worked or was installed for quite some time. So in my opinion, the benifit is somewhat mediocre. 

Link to post
Holger Teutsch

I think reality lies somewhere in between. With the above mentioned weather with AS alone and all sliders way right including enhanced turbulence it is basically a gentle flight with wind smoothly interpolated from 50@FL100 to 0@0 AGL. That's not very believable either.

Link to post
Markus Burkhard

@Holger Teutsch @Stu Antonio @Daniel Corbe

So I've flown the approach into LOWI as specified above: Historical weather for December 23rd, 19:20 UTC. I run my AS turbulence settings at almost default, just very slightly below what is default.

After having flown this scenario twice, I can say with certainty that RealTurb is not to blame. Two things you need to consider:

  • Yes, the wind at the airport is reported at just 2knots variable. Piece of cake then for an RNP08 Z approach, right? Wrong. So while there's hardly any wind at the surface, at 5000ft AGL there's already 25kts tailwind, and at FL130, where the FAF lies, it is 50kts tailwind!
    So in strong wind conditions it is VITAL to not only look at the surface wind, but also the wind along the approach path and in this case the terrain, because valleys tend to funnel a massive amount of wind if it tends to blow in the direction of the valley, which is exactly the case here with these westerly winds. 
    So you wanted to start an approach with a 3.6° slope, much steeper than usual, and start it with a 50kts tailwind. IRL this would basically count as insane, it simply won't work.
  • In bumpy conditions such as these, meaning strong wind inside a valley, you must be VERY careful with using managed speed during the approach. Because managed speed does NOT account for turbulence or gusty winds. If you just fly managed, the risk of dropping below Vref is very real. So you need to consider using selected speed to give yourself some margin towards alpha floor.

So I flew the approach reported by Holger twice, diving in with plenty of tailwind. Needless to say the first time I ended up 6000ft high. I did not have any drops into Alpha Floor range as I had given myself a healthy margin in speed, but I simply couldn't descend fast enough with AP on.

The second time, knowing what to expect, I used every legal measure to get speed down and descent rate increased, going towards Vapp only very late, at approx. 2000ft AGL to protect against gusts and windshear. I just barely made the runway regarding altitude, but ended up doing a hard landing because a tailwindshear caught me at 200ft AGL which was not recoverable without risking a tailstrike. 

So to summarise, RealTurb did nothing wrong. Yes it was bumpy, yes the speed was all over the place, but that can happen IRL and you can deal with it by giving you some extra margin. But with tailwinds THAT high and an approach path that steep, there's simply no safe way of getting down to the airport.

You guys talk about removing RealTurb, however this scenario clearly showed me that RealTurb is in fact absolutely brilliant! It takes the strong westerly wind and funnels it into the valleys around Innsbruck, and even creating windshear caused by two streams of wind meeting at the point where one turns into short final. 
This is exactly what would happen IRL! If you were to remove RealTurb, wind would once again completely ignore terrain, making this scenario a lot less realistic. Mind you, without RealTurb you'd still have 50kts tailwind at the FAF, at which it would still be a bad idea to commence a 3.6° approach.

So RealTurb in this case forces you to treat wind the same way as IRL, you need to take terrain (valleys) into account, need  to think about where wind streams would meet and what kind of windshear and turbulence this most likely would create.
With wind conditions like in this scenario, ATC would never have you fly an approach for runway 08. Latest after one aircraft being unable to maintain the approach path and go around, they would switch approach direction to 26. 

And yes, it can happen IRL that things are so bumpy that AT can't cope with it anymore and thrust needs to be commanded manually to avoid constant thrust change.
In my case AP and AT did what I asked them to do, as good as they were able to, which meant that speed and VS changes were very slow at times, but this is to be expected with such a strong gusty tailwind.

All in all, everything did perfectly. AS, RealTurb and the Bus. 
Use this exact scenario again but be aware of the overall wind direction, approach and land on RWY26 and give yourselves a bit of margin towards Alpha Floor, it will be challenging but good fun and perfectly flyable!

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 5
Link to post

×
×
  • Create New...