EuroWings BAe 146 Problem

[Scott Miller 12]

Purchased EuroWings' BAe 146 (the solo package, not the Commuter Airliners package)from Simware a couple of days ago. I noticed a weird problem after loading a 146-200 with the EFIS panel. Within the VSI gauge I can see several TCAS symbols and the words "TA ONLY". I've only skimmed over the user manual at this point and didn't see anything mentioned about the BAe 146 in this package having a TCAS display.

 

Has anyone else seen this? Could a TCAS gauge for another aircraft be causing a problem with the VSI on the EuroWings' BAe 146 EFIS panel? I've never seen something like this before but I guess it isn't outside the range of possibility...

 

The more important question, of course, is how to correct the problem other than flying only with the analog panel...

 

Speaking of which, I'd be tempted to switch to Matthias Lieberecht's outstanding BAe 146 panel for FS2004 if EuroWings' BAe 146 didn't come with the same FMC that came with Dreamfleet's B737-400 for FS2002...

 

I was somewhat surprised that EuroWings' BAe 146 didn't come with a VC. I thought pretty much all FS2004 payware aircraft did. Still, for $16, I'm not complaining...it'll keep me happy until Quality Wings releases it's BAe 146 package...

 

In the meantime, though, I could use some help resolving this odd problem...

[graemeb 14]

The Eurowings BAe 146 is a very old package (released 2004). I think you might have been better off purchasing the QualityWings one, which is quite new:

http://qwsim.com/index.php/home

[Dillon 2,194]

The Eurowings BAe 146 is a very old package (released 2004). I think you might have been better off purchasing the QualityWings one, which is quite new:

http://qwsim.com/index.php/home

 

I second this suggestion...

[scianoir 610]

I second this suggestion...

 

Me too - it is a superb addon!

 

But the first version released by QW is the later Avro RJ series with the BAe 146 series update to appear in a few months time (included in price).

 

Bill

[Scott Miller 12]

The Eurowings BAe 146 is a very old package (released 2004). I think you might have been better off purchasing the QualityWings one, which is quite new:

http://qwsim.com/index.php/home

Graemeb,Please don't get me wrong, I do appreciate your recommendation, along with the others, BUT, just because something is new, doesn't automatically mean it is better and conversely, just because something is "very old" (by who's standards anyway?) doesn't automatically make it obsolete (or worthless for that matter).There are two problems with QW's BAe 146 product, first I have QW's Ultimate 757 collection, which is indeed an excellent product, but QW insisted on inflicting on those who purchase it, an "Addon Manager", a thinly disguised attempt to "encourage" one to buy other products. In FSX this isn't as intrusive, not being visible unless you pull down the module menu, as it is in FS2004 where it appears on the menu bar separately taking up valuable real estate for no good reason (other than to try to get you to buy something). I'm guessing QW has included the "Addon Manager" with it's BAe product as well.Secondly, QW's BAe product is incomplete as Scianoir correctly points out. I refuse to pay full price for an incomplete product. I did download the QW BAe 146 from Flight1 shortly after it was released only to learn when I started to pay for it that it wasn't the BAe 146 at all but the Avro RJ (which I have very little interest in), something which is not mentioned in the product description, at least not at the time (and which constitutes false and misleading advertising on both QW and Flight 1's part as far as I'm concerned).Finally, my current system running an AMD Athlon 64 +3200 with a 256mb GeForce Nvidia graphics card (I know, a real dinosaur!) is almost as old as EuroWings BAe146 and the frame rate while running FS2004 and QW's 757 (with even just moderately dense scenery) drops down into single digits. Obviously, the same is sure to be true of QW's BAe146. I'm holding off for a few months getting a new system capable of running either QW's 757 or BAe146 at decent frame rate with all the FS sliders to max and everything turned on. I just had to reinstall all my software after having to replace my primary hard drive less than a year ago. Just reinstalling all my non-FS software took several weeks! I'd *really* rather NOT have to go through that ordeal twice in the same 12 month period...Given all this EuroWings' BAe146, even with the bug in the EFIS panel, is a far better choice than QW's "BAe146" until I get around to upgrading my system...

 

Sorry, guys, I dind't mean for my post to be one long paragraph! I had it broken up into three paragraph's but my formating wasn't retained for some reason!

[graemeb 14]

Scott,

I was only wanting to make you aware of the newer package, which, in my opinion is far superior to the Eurowings version. I still have the old Eurowings RJ installed, and can advise you that the TCAS display on the VSI is correct (not a bug). This was a standard type of TCAS instrument display before the modern ND displays superseded it. There is no way to alter the "TA ONLY" mode as far as I can recall. You could, of course, retrofit the Lee Hetherington TCAS if you wanted more realism.

 

FYI I also have the "Addon Manager" for the QS757 and all the FSDreamteam products and have never had any problems with it. The new QW 146 uses the Flight1 wrapper and not the Addon Manager system to authenticate the license. As for Qualitywings "false advertising" I am afraid I beg to disagree. It is clearly spelt out on the website that "The initial FS9 release will ONLY include the Avro. The BAe146 will be made available later on....Please keep in mind that your current purchase only includes the FS9 version, and ONLY includes the Avro. Stages 2 and 3 will be FREE Updates."

 

Sounds reasonable to me.

 

Cheers,

[ErnieAlston 33]

I was somewhat surprised that EuroWings' BAe 146 didn't come with a VC. I thought pretty much all FS2004 payware aircraft did. Still, for $16, I'm not complaining...it'll keep me happy until Quality Wings releases it's BAe 146 package...

 

The Eurowings product was originally an FS2002 product.

 

Regards.

Ernie.

[ddk 0]

there is a vc version . it is johns bae146 and also premier, but not have interactice cliks

[Scott Miller 12]

there is a vc version . it is johns bae146 and also premier, but not have interactice cliks

I also have both Jon Murchison and PAD's BAe146 planes. The PAD BAe146 does indeed come with a VC. Though a bit crude, it's certainly better than nothing!I use Matthias Lieberecht's BAe146 panel with Jon's plane. A better panel than what comes with the PAD BAe146 but lacks a VC...

 

The Eurowings product was originally an FS2002 product.

 

Regards.

Ernie.

Quite true, but EuroWings could have added a VC when they ported it over to FS2004...

[Scott Miller 12]

Graemeb,

 

I do appreciate what you were trying to do and you may very well be right about the QW BAe146 being superior to the EuroWings BAe146. However, that isn't relevant to the reasons I stated for going with the EuroWings BAe146 (chief of which is, as I explained, is that it is better suited for my current system).

 

Thanks for explaining the nature of the TCAS display in the VSI. I assumed it was since the users manual for the EuroWings BAe146 makes no mention of it.

 

I don't have any FSDreamteam products so there is no need to have the Auto Manager to authenticate any of it's licenses or that of QW's 757. Every other payware product I have for FS performs the license authentication during the installation process via a serial number that you type in. The only reason for adding an "Addon Manager" to the FS menu bar, as I said, is to promote the FSDreamteam/QW product line.

 

QualityWings may have spelled out the contents of its initial BAe146 product on ITS website but Flight1 (where I downloaded QW's BAe146) most certainly failed to do so. QW must share the blame for Flight1's failure to alert the buyer that they aren't getting a complete package BEFORE they download the Flight1 wrapper for QW's BAe146. I didn't actually purchase QW's BAe146. As soon as I saw the warning message while using the Flight1 wrapper I exited the wapper without going through with the purchase. I'll wait until the package is complete before considering purchasing the QW BAe146 again (and after I've upgraded t a system capabile of handing it at a decent frame rate).

[Dillon 2,194]

reasons I stated for going with the EuroWings BAe146 (chief of which is, as I explained, is that it is better suited for my current system).

 

(and after I've upgraded t a system capabile of handing it at a decent frame rate).

 

How do you know this if you've never ran it on your system?

 

I remember thinking the same thing about Flight considering how poorly programmed FSX was but bit the bullet and tried it because it was free. I'm glad I did because I began to believe the hype that FSX graphics come at a steep hardware price. Now I know for a fact FSX was just badly coded. Flight1 offers your money back so you have nothing to loose. Instead of writing it off as a 'no go' you might be surprised...

[Scott Miller 12]

Dillion, did you not read in my previous post regarding how QualityWings' 757 runs on my system? It stands to reason that I'd get the same thing with QW's BAe146.

 

Frankly, I find your comparison of Flight to FSX laughable (as is your claim that FSX is "badly coded")...To call Flight (which belongs on an XBox, Play Station, or PS2/3, not a PC) a "flight simulator" in itself is laughable...I'd be deep into FSX at this point if I didn't have so much time and money in FS2004. I wouldn't have Flight on my system even if it AND all it's addons were free...

[Dillon 2,194]

Dillion, did you not read in my previous post regarding how QualityWings' 757 runs on my system? It stands to reason that I'd get the same thing with QW's BAe146.

 

Frankly, I find your comparison of Flight to FSX laughable (as is your claim that FSX is "badly coded")...To call Flight (which belongs on an XBox, Play Station, or PS2/3, not a PC) a "flight simulator" in itself is laughable...I'd be deep into FSX at this point if I didn't have so much time and money in FS2004. I wouldn't have Flight on my system even if it AND all it's addons were free...

 

First off the BAe-146 runs better than the 757 (at least the initial release). All in all for what you get the QW BAe-146 is just a better product performance wise and everything else.

 

As far as FSX goes it took 5 years for that sim to get off the ground where many could play it. No other version of FS holds that record. People still today with anything less than an i7 complain about performance.

 

Flight is actually an outstanding base product. Unlike FSX it ran very well on moderate systems on day one and looked almost as good as FSX with add-ons. The problem with Flight is it's a gutted version of the Flight Simulator we know and love yet the FDE and feel of the sim is the best I've seen yet from a PC simulation of Flight. Again without having it on your system you wouldn't know this. I felt the same way as you about Flight until I tried it. You don't need an i7 to run Flight just a Duo Core 2.66 or up. No other simulation of Flight Microsoft has ever released has the performance to look ratio of Flight. When you buy your new i7 for FSX give Flight a try and you'll be amazed. We all are hoping it grows into much more than what it is. Maybe someone with a bigger vision will take the helm as lead developer of Flight and truly exploit this platform. It's truly the Windows7 of Simulators for Microsoft like XP was to FS9. FS2000 was like WIndows ME for those that remember that and Vista is FSX in my book.

 

Bottom line is you really need to try products out for yourself before you have these condescending opinions about them. It's something we all need to learn from time to time instead of letting others sway us on products. We all miss out on allot drinking the cool aide of popular opinions...

[lars_roennig 0]

QualityWings may have spelled out the contents of its initial BAe146 product on ITS website but Flight1 (where I downloaded QW's BAe146) most certainly failed to do so. QW must share the blame for Flight1's failure to alert the buyer that they aren't getting a complete package BEFORE they download the Flight1 wrapper for QW's BAe146.

 

How exactly is this false advertising?

 

 

Lars