Sign in to follow this  
Guest Icelandic_Canadian

posky CRJ fm :-(

Recommended Posts

The visual model is (apart from the flaps/inboard wingsection)VERY nice as usual, but as a real CRJ pilot I'm really frustrated with the CRJs fm.1. No roll spoilers. The real CRJ of course has roil spoilers2. Wrong inboard wingsection and flaps and flap tracks. No trailing edge dihedral on the inboard wingsection. That's why the flaps are way too high above the ground. The flap tracks are bonded to the flaps on the real plane. They don't slide along the flaps. Especially they don't extend beyond the flap trailing edge.3. Wrong gear retraction sequence. Gear retracts too fast and on the real plane the main gear retracts 5sec longer than the nose gear not vice versa.4. Wayyyy too much power and/or too little drag!!!!! Never seen 5000fpm climb rate on the real plane At the simulated max ZFW of 44000lbs not even 50% of that climb rate. (Not even at 36000lbs)5. Way too slow roll rate. The real one has close to 180deg/sec. 6. Way too responsive in pitch. Just look at the tiny stab and elevator. 7. Way too little drag with gear and flaps extended.What I don't understand, I wrote John Tavendale a few times and offered my support. He didn't even answer.Too bad as the CRJ initially looked very promising.RegardsBernt Stolle Capt CRJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

hey dont complain that much man. the model is great! and who cares if the main gear retracts 5 seconds later?U should be happy with this model. is is very nice...... and if you dont like the performance, u can donwload a new flight dynamic file...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bernt.It seems that you hadf to be in the team to tweak the FM. I'm glad that you commented those aspects.See you ;) .Regards,Pedro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi think that those points are very welcom. Off course that if you go only for the visual then the model is great, but there are other's that go for the "REAL AS IT GET'S" using a PC...Regards,Pedro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernt,Can you drop me an email at:warren@projectopensky.comI don't recall if John mentioned anything to me or not.Could've been a misscommunication.We had feedback from 2 pilots go into the CRJfrom 2 different US carriers.Pls drop me an email when you can.Thanks,Warren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see POSKY respond to this in a calm and professional manner. After ALL this hard work, it would be very easy to get upset by soemone making such comments. That said, I am glad that someone did make those comments, and that they were noticed this time. I work on the CRJ-200 every day and know quite a lot about its performance characteristics from the flight tests that we have flown recently. One of the biggest issues is the lack of power on this bird - remember this is a stretched Challenger that retains its Challenger engines. There has been a lot of weight added not only to the fuselage, but when loaded with thirty or forty passengers and all their baggage, compared to a Challenger with say eight passengers and their baggage, the aircraft really does not have such high performance numbers. I also agree with the other comments made by Bernt about the flight characteristics, again by reference to recent flight tests we have performed recently, such as the excessive pitch sensitivity.Thanks again for the first class model POSKY, I know it sometimes seems like people are "nitpicking" when they say the gear retracts too fast or that the performance is wrong, but hey, if you don't want realism, why go to all the trouble of making such a detailed model? If I didn't care about the finer points of the aircraft, I would just fly a tube with wings and a tail and be done with it :)I look forward to some revised flight dynamics in the future which will further ENHANCE this already great model.Thanks again POSKY!Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nick,But the wing is very impressive.Even at FL380 you have a superb turning capability with no barberpole in the vicinity at all. Something a 737 pilot can only dream about.The 700 BTW is one of the smoothest and most quiet planes I've ever flown in.Just a question. What's the coke tin can in front of the main wheels for? Bernt Stolle Capt CRJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the issue is whether the poster considers himself to be a pilot or an aeroplane spotter. Clearly, given his profession, it's the former and I must agree with that viewpoint. If you just want to look at the aircraft, go buy a video. If you want to simulate flying it, I rather think it requires a performance that at least tips the hat to realism. I can't help thinking that too many developers place toom uch emphasis on visuals and perofmance and realism comes second.Just my opinion, y'know Cheers,Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't work the -700, though we have one of them at work. I will check it out for you on Monday, if someone here doesn't already know! BTW, which airline do you fly for, or are you not able to say?Best Regards,NickPS - I am not a pilot myself, I just organize and coordinate the flight testing of the CRJ-200 an Dash 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"....Too bad as the CRJ initially looked very promising...."I love it....The flight model issues can be easily tweaked, if they prove a challenge...From the outside, this is a gem, I feel, but as freeware I wouldn't hold it to the same level of perfection as I would payware.... I think your post was worded well enough that they may look at the issues and offer a fix.What I really like about this model is the virtual wing view... More and more freeware designers are adding these in....it's great to see the pax recognized.About the only thing I saw--the ailerons don't move in the virtual wing view.... The flaps and spoilers do have movement--I remember this had something to do with part naming conventions, but my model design skills are still limited to flying spheres... :)Great job, POSKY team! -John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanx, and I work for Lauda Air.But we are in the process of phasing out the CRJs.I just don't know if they are phasing me out as well ;-)Bernt Stolle Capt CRJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernt,Sorry if I didn't reply? I usually reply to all, but at the time we previewed the bird I was getting bombarded with emails offering support, help etc, it was hard to cypher out the legitimate ones.Plus I have had some PC troubles and had to format a few times and lost many emails :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't they being transferred to Tyrollean?At least we see a lot of Tyrollean at Schiphol these days on flights that used to be operated by Lauda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish you luck with the future. It's a shame they are phasing out the CRJ, the Lauda scheme fit the aircraft very well I thought. Any time I hear of someone phasing out our aircraft from their fleets it makes me feel funny too, I guess that comes from working at BAe on the 146 and seeing what happened to that program. Still, Bombardier are the leading RJ supplier, so I guess I can breathe a little easier. I personally am looking forward to seeing our newest CRJ, the 900, in service VERY soon. Here is a picture I took of our prototype 900 a couple of months ago: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/241985/L/I just need to get some pictures of my 200 now. I already have my Dash 8 covered (not very well) here http://www.airliners.net/open.file/240844/L/Well, good luck!Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WarrenI know I am not the only one to say it but I want to emphasise the point: your reply, out of thousands I have read in past weeks, is exactly what this forum should be about and exactly how a mature response - whether from an 8 or 80 year-old - should be phrased. Good on you, sir.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitak.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/reds.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitakv3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news. I am by no means a real pilot but it seemed like it had tremendous power on take off and it was a bear to get it slowed down to final approach speed. With Bernt giving input and Warren being very receptive, it seems like we will be getting a revised FDE. Thanks to both Warren and Bernt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you mention the 'bombardment' i fully understand, thanx for your reply now :-)Bernt Stolle Capt CRJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's right.I flew the -7 and -8 for Tyrolean about 13 years ago.(Never ever again!!!!!!!)If you are at schiphol this monday between 1530-1700 LOC and see a Lauda Air CRJ, that's me!Bernt Stolle Capt CRJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bombardment for a Bombardier (duh) :-)Kitty MercuryCathay Pacific Virtual Pilot (CX252)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be at work then. If you get a 27 arrival wave when you fly over Amsterdam Buitenveldert, my office is directly underneath the glideslope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernt,Had to go in today for a short time. Snuck under our 700 and according to the label on the "Coke Can", it is a hydraulic damper. I figured it was something to do with the hydraulics. Anyway, the funny thing is this part doesn't show up in the landing gear section of the AMM, or at least not in the section I looked at!Anyway, here's looking forward to a revised CRJ FDE!Best Regards,Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A thread which potentially could have turned in to toys being thrown out of the pram, being handled in a timely and constructive manner. I look forword to an amended CRJ with genuine imput from a CRJ commander.Congratulations.George

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this