Wake turbulence and carrier

[Bankler]

@BIGNEWY

Is the optional Wake Turb setting supposed to affect the carrier landings at all? Like control strength or presence of burble or similar? Or is the Wake Turb setting ONLY supposed to enable wake turb caused by other aircraft?

[BIGNEWY]

36 minutes ago, Bankler said:

@BIGNEWY

Is the optional Wake Turb setting supposed to affect the carrier landings at all? Like control strength or presence of burble or similar? Or is the Wake Turb setting ONLY supposed to enable wake turb caused by other aircraft?

I will look for the answer, I do not recall off the top of my head. 

[BIGNEWY]

Hi, 

checked with the team the wake turbulence tick box option effects all turbulence including the burble. 

[Bankler]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi, 

checked with the team the wake turbulence tick box option effects all turbulence including the burble. 

Thanks for the quick reply! Does that mean that the burble effect is completely disabled if the wake turbulence tick box option is off?

[BIGNEWY]

12 minutes ago, Bankler said:

Thanks for the quick reply! Does that mean that the burble effect is completely disabled if the wake turbulence tick box option is off?

Yes this is what I have been told, if you see different please attach a track replay. 

thank you

[Bankler]

10 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Yes this is what I have been told, if you see different please attach a track replay. 

thank you

No, I think this checks out. I just assumed that the burble effect sucking you down would be on regardless of the tick box. As it's quite a different thing from aircraft wake turbulence, I thought this was completely separated. I thought I felt that down draft, in a nice way, after the burble was implemented, but I guess it was placebo then. 

---

As a sidenote, I never fly with wake turbulence on because of the unpolished state of it. In DCS a fighter can flip another fighter of equal size over if #2 flies through #1's air 20 seconds later, making an ordinary 4-ship overhead break with 5 second break intervals about the most dangerous things you can do in the game, which is not representable of real-life aircraft of fighter jet size. It's a shame, because certain aspects of the wake turbulence feel great! The tech is absolutely impressive, but would need massive tweaking.

A nice quick and non-controversial solution (to avoid the debate), would be to change the setting from an on/off tickbox, to a 0.0-1.0 slider, setting the intensity of the turbulence. Ideally a similar one to scale how long the wake turb hangs around before it fades out. But I guess this is something for the DCS wishlist section.

[fagulha]

On 11/22/2022 at 1:49 AM, Bankler said:

No, I think this checks out. I just assumed that the burble effect sucking you down would be on regardless of the tick box. As it's quite a different thing from aircraft wake turbulence, I thought this was completely separated. I thought I felt that down draft, in a nice way, after the burble was implemented, but I guess it was placebo then. 

---

As a sidenote, I never fly with wake turbulence on because of the unpolished state of it. In DCS a fighter can flip another fighter of equal size over if #2 flies through #1's air 20 seconds later, making an ordinary 4-ship overhead break with 5 second break intervals about the most dangerous things you can do in the game, which is not representable of real-life aircraft of fighter jet size. It's a shame, because certain aspects of the wake turbulence feel great! The tech is absolutely impressive, but would need massive tweaking.

A nice quick and non-controversial solution (to avoid the debate), would be to change the setting from an on/off tickbox, to a 0.0-1.0 slider, setting the intensity of the turbulence. Ideally a similar one to scale how long the wake turb hangs around before it fades out. But I guess this is something for the DCS wishlist section.

+1.

[MARLAN_]

On 11/21/2022 at 7:49 PM, Bankler said:

No, I think this checks out. I just assumed that the burble effect sucking you down would be on regardless of the tick box. As it's quite a different thing from aircraft wake turbulence, I thought this was completely separated. I thought I felt that down draft, in a nice way, after the burble was implemented, but I guess it was placebo then. 

---

As a sidenote, I never fly with wake turbulence on because of the unpolished state of it. In DCS a fighter can flip another fighter of equal size over if #2 flies through #1's air 20 seconds later, making an ordinary 4-ship overhead break with 5 second break intervals about the most dangerous things you can do in the game, which is not representable of real-life aircraft of fighter jet size. It's a shame, because certain aspects of the wake turbulence feel great! The tech is absolutely impressive, but would need massive tweaking.

A nice quick and non-controversial solution (to avoid the debate), would be to change the setting from an on/off tickbox, to a 0.0-1.0 slider, setting the intensity of the turbulence. Ideally a similar one to scale how long the wake turb hangs around before it fades out. But I guess this is something for the DCS wishlist section.

Would be awesome to have a slider. Something like 20% of current turbulence seems right based on what I've heard from SME's.

[draconus]

If it needs fixing then report it and let it be fixed. Making alternative atmosphere and physics sliders for everyone does not make sense.

[Nealius]

With the massive performance hit wake turbulence on causes when there are multiple AI aircraft in the mission, having burble tied to it is not ideal. They should be two independent settings. 

[joker62]

1 hour ago, Nealius said:

With the massive performance hit wake turbulence on causes when there are multiple AI aircraft in the mission, having burble tied to it is not ideal. They should be two independent settings. 

I fully agree! Waiting for how ED will decide on this.

[Bankler]

On 11/23/2022 at 9:37 PM, draconus said:

If it needs fixing then report it and let it be fixed. Making alternative atmosphere and physics sliders for everyone does not make sense.

I think you are correct. But we already have on/off settings, allowing players (server owners) to choose, so in a sense we are already there.

Now, I completely agree that having one (1) single (or default) value that is realistic would be ideal! But starting that debate with ED... I just don't know. I have had 3+ Hornet pilots witness that the Tpod laser code can be set on the ground, but ED chooses to ignore that and mark the bug report as "no evidence". That one is a completely objective simple fact, but it's still like talking to a wall. Wake turbulence is a much more complicated subject, and I don't have the slightest idea what kind of proof would be good enough for them. So in that sense, a slider would be a great solution. ED wouldn't have to admit they were wrong about anything (they can sell it as a "beginner friendly option" to lower wake turbulence to X%), and more importantly they wouldn't have to spend more valuable time researching it. They must have already spent huge resources on the implementation (super impressive engineering work, nearly nailing it, except for the exaggerated effect). Leaving it to the players might be the most pragmatic solution, I think.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Bankler

[Nealius]

+1 to a slider option. The same thought process is already standard for "takeoff assistance" in the warbirds, so there is precedent. 

[Sickdog]

+1 +1 +1 +1 for a slider for Wake Turbulence, I've been saying this for awhile!