[OPINION, NO EVIDENCE] Wake Turbulence Too Strong?

[Sordsman]

Hey All,

 

I've noticed recently that the wake turbulence while flying the Viper seems to be much stronger than it used to be. For example, when doing an approach to land, after an overhead break and proper spacing, I (wingman) would hit wake turbulence that was strong enough to almost roll my aircraft completely over on short final. Now, I am no real world pilot so I can not say for sure this is incorrect.

 

After discussing the issue with others in my group (most of which are real world pilots or were at one point) they all suggested that the wake turbulence on the Viper may be a bit over exaggerated. I'm curious if there have been anyone else who has experienced this issue and if this is correct behavior or should it be corrected by ED.

 

I would like to note that I have always flown with wake turbulence on and know what it used to feel like as I often experienced it. At that time it was much more manageable. I would appreciate any feedback or discussion on this. This is also specifically talking about the Viper, I have not tested any of the other modules to see if they experience the same thing. Thanks!

[deadpool]

Afaik an F-16 currently creates the same wake as an FA18 .. and yeah .. it's a paperplane when receiving it and we only joke about it anymore .. You can fly formation with someone and feel one of your wings wanting to go down either towards or away from him ..

 

Or you are affected by wake when flying on the outside of the turn of a turning tanker .. lol.

 

And the intensity is like being hit with a baseball bat on the side of your head at times.

 

I have great video footage of me landing in formation with someone and the wake turbulence from landing next to him combined with the ridiculous lateral friction (a problem that has been known since a year + a fix suggested and ignored) lead to a flipover in the most benny hill kind of fashion.

[MAXsenna]

Out of curiosity. How hard is the strain on one's computer to have it turned on? My computer is very old, and I need all the FPSs I can get from it.

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[deadpool]

Out of curiosity. How hard is the strain on one's computer to have it turned on? My computer is very old, and I need all the FPSs I can get from it.

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

 

I fly with an i7 4790k and a GTX 1070 and the only strain on my computer is the kicking it receives when these ridiculous wake turbulences flip the plane again.

[MAXsenna]

I fly with an i7 4790k and a GTX 1070 and the only strain on my computer is the kicking it receives when these ridiculous wake turbulences flip the plane again.

Cool, thanks! Sorry for your computer though!

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Mars Exulte]

Wake turbulence isn't anything important and is grossly exaggerated, that's why real world pilot curriculum makes a special point to emphasise how dangerous it is to pass behind another plane. Large aircraft like airliners (ie tankers) are potentially dangerous up to several miles AFTER they've passed by... So, yeah, I can see how sloppy formation flying can be a problem.

 

If the wings are wanting to roll while flying with someone/something, by definition it means you're in the wrong position.

[Dee-Jay]

Not a bit exaggerated ... A LOT exaggerated. (Better doing without at this stage).

[MAXsenna]

Wake turbulence isn't anything important and is grossly exaggerated, that's why real world pilot curriculum makes a special point to emphasise how dangerous it is to pass behind another plane. Large aircraft like airliners (ie tankers) are potentially dangerous up to several miles AFTER they've passed by... So, yeah, I can see how sloppy formation flying can be a problem.

 

If the wings are wanting to roll while flying with someone/something, by definition it means you're in the wrong position.

Yeah, I've seen it on TV. I have "all" MayDay/Aircrash Investigations (or what they're called) episodes.

I was just under the impression that I've read somewhere that it put some strain on the computer. I think might have it on though. In the first M-2000 mission of the included campaign, it suddenly behaved very funny.

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[SCPanda]

Similar experience as well. Wake turbulance feels really strong in the Viper (although I fly the Viper only and always with wake turbulence on, so I have limited knowledge about this issue on other jets).

 

In the current state, I am scared of taking off and landing in the Viper when there is someone taking off or landing in front of me (it happens a lot in MP since most severs do not have a working ATC, or the airport is just way too busy). Formation flying is somewhat manageable as long as you are careful and do not fly in the wake of your wingman.

[unknown]

Yeah, I've seen it on TV. I have "all" MayDay/Aircrash Investigations (or what they're called) episodes.

I was just under the impression that I've read somewhere that it put some strain on the computer. I think might have it on though. In the first M-2000 mission of the included campaign, it suddenly behaved very funny.

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

 

To quote myself from back in April, performance is hit with many aircraft around(i have it turned on again, much more fun to AAR)

@ wake turbulence

I did a quick and dirty test in the ME. 60-70 FA-18 Hornets in close formation and 2 hight level to each other:

- only AI lowest drop 31 fps

- 1 FA-18 set as client -> player control wake turbulence off -> flying behind the other 18's fps drops to low 30s

- 1 FA-18 set as client -> player control wake turbulence on -> flying behind the other 18's fps drops to 9-12 fps

 

Settings in Sig, latest OB and driver installed.

 

Edit: 2D not VR

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4303199#post4303199

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

Personally I don't think the effect is too strong, just that the area of effect is too large (too far to the side from wingtips for example).

[deadpool]

Wake turbulence isn't anything important and is grossly exaggerated, that's why real world pilot curriculum makes a special point to emphasise how dangerous it is to pass behind another plane. Large aircraft like airliners (ie tankers) are potentially dangerous up to several miles AFTER they've passed by... So, yeah, I can see how sloppy formation flying can be a problem.

 

If the wings are wanting to roll while flying with someone/something, by definition it means you're in the wrong position.

 

If wake turbulence was programmed accurately and the plane was symmetrical I would tend to agree with you. Sadly we don't live in such an ideal world. But I read between the lines and don't think I need to discuss this further with you.

[dawgie79]

Don't think it's overdone.

[Dee-Jay]

F-16 behind F-16 is clearly way way overdone. If it was like this, formation flight in close would be forbidden. Wing change also.

 

 

What you see in game is rather equivalent to an F-16 behind a C-5.

[Expert]

F-16 behind F-16 is clearly way way overdone. If it was like this, formation flight in close would be forbidden. Wing change also.

What you see in game is rather equivalent to an F-16 behind a C-5.

In your opinion why does this happen? is it a bug or they just haven't set the right parameters? Could it be that they don't have a science-based measurement?

[Dee-Jay]

In your opinion why does this happen? is it a bug or they just haven't set the right parameters? Could it be that they don't have a science-based measurement?

 

No idea.

I am also not 100% objective because I am basing my comment on personal experience (5500+ flight hours on various military aircraft), not on factual physical figures. I admit it.

 

I can just tell you that, if F-16 wake in DCS is realistic, I would never dare to flight in close formation, or trail, or change wing ... etc ... with that a/c in real ... even if it was (still is) one of my dreams, I would refuse to fly in backseat even if I were invited by the Thunderbirds.

 

 

Again, based on my personal jet-plane and turboprop experience, I would rather imagine a kind of turbulence/vibrations. Never something able to roll you upside down.

 

This:

 

 

No way.

Edited September 24, 2020 by Dee-Jay

[Sordsman]

Thanks everyone for your input. It seams to me like for the most part the wake turbulence must be a little out of whack. Until otherwise determined I will most likely just fly with it off for now.

[Pikey]

There's something excessive at the ground level for stationary aircraft. They shouldn't be affected but in multiplayer you can get a bit of latency and be flipped over, which isn't right, its a disturbed air pattern you have to fly through, so there are relative speeds to consider. The efffect seems to blow back at you as if it is travelling, which makes little sense.

 

I think it's modelled incorrectly personally because it doesnt account for how you hit the vortex, only that the vortex exists.

 

Also having to hold 15 degrees of bank next to a tanker is clearly wrong also.

 

It might not be wrong in every circumstance, but in some circumstances it is very wrong and I beleive this is more to do with how they model airflow.

 

Last thing - performance. There was a time in early development, where it would cause multiplayer servers to lag. I dont know anyone that has switched it back on yet, so all I can say is that it absolutely used to cause issues with servers. But for clients hosting themself, it's unnoticeable.

 

I hope it reviewed and finshed and done properly, it was a great idea.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

There's something excessive at the ground level for stationary aircraft.

A while ago a bug report was created about the night strike single mission (I forgot what it's called exactly): at the default parking spot, you just couldn't get the INS aligned while other aircraft were taking off, since the wake turbulence would shake up your aircraft enough to interrupt the alignment. Editing the mission, picking a different parking spot - inside a hangar for example - fixed it, but of course any DCS patch overwrites that change.

Last time I checked, that problem is still present...

[=475FG= Dawger]

No idea.

I am also not 100% objective because I am basing my comment on personal experience (5500+ flight hours on various military aircraft), not on factual physical figures. I admit it.

 

I can just tell you that, if F-16 wake in DCS is realistic, I would never dare to flight in close formation, or trail, or change wing ... etc ... with that a/c in real ... even if it was (still is) one of my dreams, I would refuse to fly in backseat even if I were invited by the Thunderbirds.

 

 

Again, based on my personal jet-plane and turboprop experience, I would rather imagine a kind of turbulence/vibrations. Never something able to roll you upside down.

 

This:

 

 

No way.

 

Having been rolled to 135 degrees of bank in a 95,000 lb airplane and having experienced dozens of wake turbulence encounters from the very minor burble to the above upset, I think the DCS wake turbulence is reasonably accurate.

[Dee-Jay]

Having been rolled to 135 degrees of bank in a 95,000 lb airplane and having experienced dozens of wake turbulence encounters from the very minor burble to the above upset,

 

 

What type of planes?

 

I also rolled 135° in a TB-30 two minutes behind a C-160. At 1500ft AGL, it is indeed unpleasant. A TB-30 is about 1500Kg, a C-160 is twenty times more.

I went a fair amount of times on Alpha Jet in the wake turbulence (and jet wash) of another Alpha Jet, and/or M2000 behind M2000, and/or Mirage F-1 ... I only recall about AoA variations and fair vibrations.

 

IIRC, on that one I take the wake of the lead at

... not catastrophic. I just loose some energy and can't stick the lead anymore after, so I have to ease the stick and go below him to let my jet "breathe".

 

Far from what I see in game in term of force and amplitude.

Edited September 25, 2020 by Dee-Jay

[gavagai]

I've heard from a rl Viper pilot that the effect is overdone. That said, I'm confident the effect will be changed and improved with time. ED adjusts this kind of thing until they get it right.

[Oceandar]

I've heard from a rl Viper pilot that the effect is overdone. That said, I'm confident the effect will be changed and improved with time. ED adjusts this kind of thing until they get it right.

This thread is tagged as [oppinion, no evidence]. I doubt ED would put it high on the list to fix/tune but on this case I surely am glad if I'm wrong.

[captain_dalan]

I've had it on since the very beginning. Can't imagine flying without it. Especially AAR. It would just feel so.....bland......

My specs aren't that high either:

i5 9600KF at 3.70GHz

32 GB RAM, DDR4, 4GHz NBF, 1330 MHz DRAM-F

GTX 1060, 6GB

[=475FG= Dawger]

I think the problem is not the amplitude but the location of the vortex. It seems to be too far inboard.