I don't know exactly where to put this.. so..

 

I'm looking into learning and flying one of these.. but which one is easier to learn to fly.. 

 

pros and cons of each?

 

I'm leaning toward the dash 8.. simply because it is the latest and newest one out and it is a more common aircraft and hauls more virtual passengers.  I think I would like that.. but..

 

thanks

 

That's a good question. Well, I've burned more engines with the J41 but that's from their geared nature. Adding, it served as a learning lesson so any later airplane would benefit from those engine fires. :ph34r:

 

The docs on the J41 are very good and the tutorial on the Q400 is too, so I'd say it's on the same learning level when having in mind that the J41 features the mentioned 'tricky' engine setup.

 

The framerate is a lot better on the Q400 and the bird is bigger and faster. But the J41 will get you into smaller airports, too small for the Q400 for example. On the sounds and optics, they are again on the same level. Meaning that you won't see blurry textures or FS9-portover details or something.

 

You can pop up the displays on the Q400, that's something I sometimes missed in the J41. And both could need an extra service pack in my eyes. That's to fix smaller issues. Now that point goes to the Q400 as it's likely to arrive soon. Not so on the J41. :mellow:

 

My guess is that a fan of free turbines will be in heaven (literally) with the Q400. The startup phase is amazing and a first in FSX. The J41 features geared turbines and does its best to make them happen in FSX though.

 

Extra points. The J41 isn't flown with a full FMC like on the Q400. So if you would like to run the default GPS (there's a popup) or even completely without the 'FMC', it should work. On the Q400 though, you may have to invest some time to learn the internals of this unique setup as it differs a lot from the more common Boeing FMC setups.

 

And, yes, I really like the weather radar and terrain display on the Q400. The J41 does not feature these items but can be retrofitted with the RXP or CS weather radar. There's a free spot in the VC.

 

Extra optics. The J41 features VC rain effects. Might be a reason for the not so stellar fps, but it's nice. Both planes can show you icing effects though, with the Q400's actually working. ^_^

Tough question. I have both. The answer for me would be; which one do you envisage flying the most?

They are both superb simulations. The J41 is an obviously more dated aircraft, but like the majestic simulates icing conditions that actually show up on the wing leading edges if you have this graphic option turned on. It is easier to smoke the engines of the J41 if you do not have the props set the correct way. It has an easier load sheet that alters the weight and fuel on board and this can be done from within the simulation. The Q400 you must start the configuration sheet outside FSX and send it to the program after you have configured the loading - doesn't work as well as the J41 IMHO.(Although it does show weights and pax numbers the J41 doesn't identify the centre of balance figures).

 

The Majestic Q400 Flight Engine runs outside of FSX so the flight modelling feels right, and it doesn't overload the FSX engine so flights are smooth with no pauses or freezes on my system, but turbulence affects do not manifest themselves in the cockpit in any real sense. However, the feedback I have seen suggests most users report the aircraft feels right with that "heavy" feel to it.

 

As for the J41 it flies and feels about right.. (I have flown in the J31, not the J41 - but can remember the noise and speed sensations). It does have a programmable interface that isn't as easy say as the 737 NGX and frankly, I never really use it preferring to fly VOR  from A to B.

All in all, I enjoy both but if I had to choose i would say the Q400 offers a little more for your dollar remembering the J41 has been out more than a couple of years now and is just a tad less sophisticated from a software point of view.

 

As for the Q400, I am Just waiting for that update that allows the aircraft to interface with ASE or GSX ground handling properly  and responding to turbulent weather..- both issues proving difficult to resolve with the external flight modelling.

 

hope this helps.

Great read from Ray. I must add that the J41 features a very nice and intuitive load manager running inside FSX. You get that interactive load sheet and can alter the values directly.

Both are great aircraft. The Q400 gets points for not easily blowing up the engines, but I think the J41 handles a bit easier. It doesn't bleed speed well though so descents are a bit trickier. Both are a heck of a lot of fun though.

You might want to take a look at the Q400 forum and see what issues are being discussed before you decide.  http://majesticsoftware.com/mjc8q400/support.html

Great summaries. The only thing I can add is that the Q400 is not recognized by Air Hauler. A non-issue if you don't use AH, but putting it out there in case you do.

Q400 is MUCH easier on frames.

 

I love the J41 but would go for the Q400. I love the sound set, the flight dynamics and it is a little easier to learn as well.

i would say the q400 is slightly easier to learn.

 

mainly because, the js41 it is pretty easy to blow up the engines if you aren't paying attention, and their startup/shutdown procedure is more finicky.

 

you can't go wrong with either one...they are both great simulations! two of my favorites in fsx for sure!

 

cheers

-andy crosby

Hi all,

 

Well difficult to say really. The Q400 is a much more modern creation only months old, where as the J41 has been out a number of years, which at the time it came out was an amazing addon, doing things that others only dreamed off doing.

 

So the Q400 is probably kinder on frame rates and still being updated and tweaked.

 

It's true the J41 will blow up it's engines easier on start up, due to them being permanently coupled to the propellers so you have to make sure the props are set in the correct position on start up, there is a very nifty switch to do this on the center console! 

 

Neither plane has any kind of Auto throttle system so your going to have to manage your speed manually, however the Q400 does have an FMC which the J41 doesn't although it doesn't work like any Boeing or Airbus one you might be used too in the past.

 

I like the load sheet for the J41 being inside the sim and when you remove passengers from seats they actually disappear from the seat when you look inside the cabin.

 

After all that it's a difficult call, there isn't much in it, I guess the Q400 might have a longer range, but not sure really. So I guess it all depends on frame rates really, if they are important to you with a mid range system then probably the Q400, if you have a wonderful monster system then it doesn't matter about frame rates then go for both lol.

 

I have both and fly both about as much as each other, the Q400 when I want a small airliner and the J41 when I want a big GA, ok I know it's not, but you see where I'm going here.

 

Interested in anyone else's views on this too.

I'd say Q400. FSX is exceedingly poor at modeling turboprop engnes. You can test this with the default Kingair; the amount of lag in response from the engines is shocking. While the J41 is a fine addon, it's a 'lite' sim for PMDG, and one that suffers from the afore mentioned problem, making stable approaches tricky. The Q400 doesn't suffer from this, because it does all the modeling outside of FSX. Move the power levers, reponse is almost instant. Plus, it's a proper study level sim.

Whichever you decide to fly you will enjoy it.

 

If you fancy a great virtual airline that utilises both types, check out INTERCITY AIRWAYS.

 

http://viaintercity.com/

While the J41 is a fine addon, it's a 'lite' sim for PMDG, and one that suffers from the afore mentioned problem, making stable approaches tricky. The Q400 doesn't suffer from this, because it does all the modeling outside of FSX.

Jordan, after reading your post, I'm not sure if you are aware that the J41 models a geared turbine setup whereas the Q400 renders a free one. This difference may be more apparent than the actual modelling finesse of the FDE.

 

Another and very current example of the geared setup would be the Aerosoft Bronco by the way. Again, very different to fly and operate than the more commonly used free turbine setup like with a P&W PT6A.

 

Further reading on the fixed shaft ('geared') turbines. http://www.pilotoutlook.com/airplane_flying/turboprop_engines_types

And the same on the split shaft ('free') ones. http://www.pilotoutlook.com/airplane_flying/split_shaft_free_turbine_engine

The PMDG J41 has FS2Crew support the Q400 doesn't. So my vote goes to the J41

Good point on the addons for the addons. B)  You can fly both, the Q400 and the J41, with MCE.