Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
CODY614

Pa34 Seneca V Gripes

Recommended Posts

 

 


Anyone able to tune the ADF?

 

Sorry for the delay, but I'd stopped flying it until last night when I tried out some new sounds.  Yes, I can tune the ADF, but it's the usual very finicky Carenado ADF setup.  Move your cursor to the right hand frequency (the standby).  Move it around just underneath the numbers and you should find some very tiny clickspots under each digit.  When you hit the microscopic spot, spin the mousewheel.  They're very small and tough to locate.  Basically impossible to tune in any turbulence.

 

Once you've tuned, hit the flip-flop button to move the modified standby to the active frequency.

 

Better yet, use a radio panel as I do.  That's the only reasonable way to tune most Carenado ADF's. :(

 

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But yet, when someone asks for a GA recommendation in the fsx forum, everyone shouts Carenado! They have about 25 aircraft released where PMDG have 5! Something has to give and it shows. I stopped buying their stuff over a year ago, it amuses me that people still complain with each release even though each aircraft is probably a few weeks of development before punting it out the hanger!


-Iain Watson-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But yet, when someone asks for a GA recommendation in the fsx forum, everyone shouts Carenado! They have about 25 aircraft released where PMDG have 5! Something has to give and it shows. I stopped buying their stuff over a year ago, it amuses me that people still complain with each release even though each aircraft is probably a few weeks of development before punting it out the hanger!

 

Ditto. I broke my no-Carenado rule sometime last year and bought the Alabeo Tomahawk on special offer, and found that it was impossible to tune the ADF radio. Turning the knobs just rotated the compass card on the gauge. I reported it to Alabeo who told me it was a known issue and they would be releasing a fix. I checked their site a number of times during the following months but never saw any sign of a fix for it. Apart from that, the Tomahawk wasn't a bad release at all, but the ADF business to me betrayed a staggering contempt for both the testing process and the notion of product/customer support. Since then my Alabeo/Carenado rule is firmly back in place.

 

Even if you are looking for a GA aircraft, there are other outfits creating them: I can think of five off the top of my head. The ongoing draw with Carenado seems to be that the aircraft look pretty. And indeed they do, but for me they're all fur coat and no knickers. As has been said already, it won;t change until people vote with their credit cards and go elsewhere. Every sale is an approval of their business model. Anyone who wants them to change their business model needs to change their own purchasing model first.

  • Upvote 1

Paul Synnott

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I stopped buying their stuff over a year ago, it amuses me that people still complain with each release even though each aircraft is probably a few weeks of development before punting it out the hanger!

 

Iain, I think that's a bit unfair, as there is clearly a great deal of effort in some of their releases, and the texture modeling alone is generally superb and obviously a product of skill, care and effort beyond just a few weeks.  People forget that there are some things they do well - and others they simply don't and oversimplify the buy/don't buy decision.

 

I choose my purchases pretty carefully and especially so with Carenado, but I still do buy some of their releases as I have a number of their planes that I quite enjoy flying - most notably the 337 and the recent Malibu Mirage - that are very enjoyable with perhaps a tweak or two.  Not without a flaw here or there, but enjoyable and accurate in the areas that matter to me.  So, when Carenado do a new release that appeals to me, I try to judge as to whether I think it's the kind of plane that they can execute reasonably well.  Planes like their recent Phenom are pretty much a no-brainer thumbs down for me, as the systems involved are more than I think Carenado have either the skills or desire to execute well.  Others?

 

My hope for the Seneca was the same that I'd had for the Malibu.  It's a simple enough plane and included RXP support which always helps.  I also knew that with Bert's G500 mods, the JetProp worked quite will with RXP, and Bert had committed to taking a look at the G600 as well, so I expected the avionics wouldn't be a huge issue.

 

Unfortunately that's not turned out to be the case, at least so far, given the number of other shortcomings.  Nevertheless, it was a plane I wanted and it was worth the calculated risk.  With a SP and hopefully some further adjustments mixing and matching sound, this could still be an OK plane.

 

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another SP is on the way, I've been told.. with every fix, I am liking this airplane more  ^_^


Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 As has been said already, it won;t change until people vote with their credit cards and go elsewhere. Every sale is an approval of their business model. Anyone who wants them to change their business model needs to change their own purchasing model first.

Or maybe people just need to understand that Carenado is one of those companies that produces "lite" aircraft and should stop expecting in depth system models from them. I mean if they have released 25+ aircraft and not one of them goes very in depth with systems why are people assuming Carenado is the one doing something wrong? Maybe everyone else is just misunderstanding what Carenado is advertising. As much as I would love to see Carenado release some aircraft with in depth systems I understand that they are clearly not interested in that.

 

As for bugs, every aircraft released will have bugs. Even companies like PMDG, Majestic, or [insert your favorite company here] produce aircraft that have bugs on their first release. As long as they are addressing them and fixing them in a timely manner I have no issues with that company.


Samuel Scully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe people just need to understand that Carenado is one of those companies that produces "lite" aircraft and should stop expecting in depth system models from them. I mean if they have released 25+ aircraft and not one of them goes very in depth with systems why are people assuming Carenado is the one doing something wrong? Maybe everyone else is just misunderstanding what Carenado is advertising. As much as I would love to see Carenado release some aircraft with in depth systems I understand that they are clearly not interested in that.

 

As for bugs, every aircraft released will have bugs. Even companies like PMDG, Majestic, or [insert your favorite company here] produce aircraft that have bugs on their first release. As long as they are addressing them and fixing them in a timely manner I have no issues with that company.

 

Of course there's nothing wrong with releasing aircraft without indepth systems - I don't recall reading anyone saying that.  'm not talking about in-depth systems. One of my favourite FSX add-on aircraft is actually a Carenado offering, and without in-depth systems. What I am talking about is bugs. I've never bought anything from PMDG, so I can't comment about their bugs, but you're right, bugs you can forgive (even though you might wonder about what kind of Keystone Cops beta testing is going on, cf. my Tomahawk example above). What's unforgivable is a persistent refusal to fix a bug long after it's been pointed out. Two differences between PMDG and Carenado: PMDG do offer the systems depth, so it's small wonder that more bugs leak through, and PMDG appear to be in the habit of actually addressing those bugs - that counts for a lot. I've bought add-on aircraft from a variety of sources, but I don't recall any developer whose testing process appears to be as sloppy as Carenado's.

 

I would have no hesitation in buying from PMDG. I would only buy a Carenado aircraft now if it came with a very hefty discount - and if I'd informed myself about which bugs remained and had decided I could live with them..

 

Of course, if people don't care, then they should keep on buying, which appears to be what's happening anyway.

 

 

As long as they are addressing them and fixing them in a timely manner 

 

"Ay, there's the rub." :smile:

  • Upvote 1

Paul Synnott

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course there's nothing wrong with releasing aircraft without indepth systems - I don't recall reading anyone saying that.  'm not talking about in-depth systems. One of my favourite FSX add-on aircraft is actually a Carenado offering, and without in-depth systems. What I am talking about is bugs. I've never bought anything from PMDG, so I can't comment about their bugs, but you're right, bugs you can forgive (even though you might wonder about what kind of Keystone Cops beta testing is going on, cf. my Tomahawk example above). What's unforgivable is a persistent refusal to fix a bug long after it's been pointed out. Two differences between PMDG and Carenado: PMDG do offer the systems depth, so it's small wonder that more bugs leak through, and PMDG appear to be in the habit of actually addressing those bugs - that counts for a lot. I've bought add-on aircraft from a variety of sources, but I don't recall any developer whose testing process appears to be as sloppy as Carenado's.

 

I would have no hesitation in buying from PMDG. I would only buy a Carenado aircraft now if it came with a very hefty discount - and if I'd informed myself about which bugs remained and had decided I could live with them..

 

Of course, if people don't care, then they should keep on buying, which appears to be what's happening anyway.

 

 

 

"Ay, there's the rub." :smile:

Yes, but didn't someone just say on this post that they were working on a fix soon? So there you go, they are addressing the issue and fixing it. I own a couple Carenado aircraft and some of them I really enjoy and a few of them I don't fly so much anymore so I am really indifferent on the subject. And I can think of one company that probably has a sloppier testing process who's name also starts with a "C"  :wink:.


Samuel Scully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but didn't someone just say on this post that they were working on a fix soon? So there you go, they are addressing the issue and fixing it. I own a couple Carenado aircraft and some of them I really enjoy and a few of them I don't fly so much anymore so I am really indifferent on the subject. And I can think of one company that probably has a sloppier testing process who's name also starts with a "C"  :wink:.

 

I'll consider something fixed when it is fixed - not when it's going to be fixed. The Tommy's ADF was "going to be fixed" too. The B58's Stuka stall bug was never fixed by Carenado - Bernt Stolle had to sneak a patch out past the guards, so forgive my lack of faith...

 

I think I know of the "C" you're referring to...second initial "S" by any chance? I've ever bought anything from them - entirely on the back of their appalling reputation.  But, if that's the case, then you're hardly setting the quality bar very high. I'm reminded of a scene from Fawlty Towers:

 

Mr. Hamilton: "What I'm suggesting is that this place is the... the crummiest, shoddiest, worst-run hotel in the whole of Western Europe."

Major Gowen: "No! No, I won't have that! There's a place in Eastbourne..."

 

:smile:

  • Upvote 1

Paul Synnott

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll consider something fixed when it is fixed - not when it's going to be fixed. The Tommy's ADF was "going to be fixed" too. The B58's Stuka stall bug was never fixed by Carenado - Bernt Stolle had to sneak a patch out past the guards, so forgive my lack of faith...

 

I think I know of the "C" you're referring to...second initial "S" by any chance? I've ever bought anything from them - entirely on the back of their appalling reputation.  But, if that's the case, then you're hardly setting the quality bar very high. I'm reminded of a scene from Fawlty Towers:

 

Mr. Hamilton: "What I'm suggesting is that this place is the... the crummiest, shoddiest, worst-run hotel in the whole of Western Europe."

Major Gowen: "No! No, I won't have that! There's a place in Eastbourne..."

 

:smile:

Valid point. And you are on the right track. I only buy stuff from them when it is the 9.99 sale because they do have a couple of aircraft that I like to fly but are not produced by any other companies. As soon better models are released I quickly uninstall them. Like I said earlier there are a few Carenado aircraft that I like to fly (Bonanza A36 for one), but it I am kind of in the same situation that I am in with the other company. Nobody produces many of those aircraft, so until a better replacement comes along for my A36 I will keep purchasing their some of their aircraft. Luckily we have some really great companies producing more and more GA aircraft (Milviz, RealAir, A2A, to name a few).


Samuel Scully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Luckily we have some really great companies producing more and more GA aircraft (Milviz, RealAir, A2A, to name a few).

 

That is absolutely true, and yet, when I go to the hangar and look for an airplane to fly, I often go to the Carenado aircraft: the F33 Bonanza, C337 Skymaster, their B1900, or B200 King Air, or lately, their Seneca V...

 

Why is that?  I think because these aircraft have "character".. the elusive sense of sitting in a real cockpit..

 

As long as an RXP GNS, or Flight1 GTN can be integrated into the cockpit, I'll happily go and take one of these for a spin..

 

If it is one of their G1000 versions,  count me out..


Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is absolutely true, and yet, when I go to the hangar and look for an airplane to fly, I often go to the Carenado aircraft, the F33 Bonanza, C337 Skymaster, their B1900, or B200 King Air, or lately, their Seneca V...

 

Why is that?  I think because these aircraft have "character".. the elusive sense of sitting in a real cockpit..

 

As long as an RXP GNS, or Flight1 GTN can be integrated into the cockpit, I'll happily go and take one of these for a spin..

 

If it is one of their G1000 versions,  count me out..

Yes, very true. The Bonanza A36 is one of the few glass cockpit aircraft they have done that I enjoy. I am not a big fan of their glass cockpit aircraft because 1) it is usually a very basic representation of the systems which makes it almost pointless, and 2) I get to see plenty of glass when I fly most of my airliners. Sometimes it is nice to have some pretty gauges to look at.


Samuel Scully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


That is absolutely true, and yet, when I go to the hangar and look for an airplane to fly, I often go to the Carenado aircraft, the F33 Bonanza, C337 Skymaster, their B1900, or B200 King Air, or lately, their Seneca V...



Why is that? I think because these aircraft have "character".. the elusive sense of sitting in a real cockpit..



As long as an RXP GNS, or Flight1 GTN can be integrated into the cockpit, I'll happily go and take one of these for a spin..



If it is one of their G1000 versions, count me out..

 

So true Bert.  I've been flying Carenado birds for two weeks solid now.  Before that a few days of a commercial type and before that more Carenado.  All single engine.  Not a spec of glass.  I have one of their glass planes...bought it, flew it for less than 5 minutes and stuffed at the back of my hangar and it sits.  I fly about half of my purchases from them on a regular basis.  The other half are either 'meh' because I didn't like how complete it was or because the RW airplane didn't mesh with me (can't blame them for the latter).  I have to be cautious when I buy...but when the right one hits...zzzzzing. 

 

Truly, if they want to do complex things then make one with strong p-factor on takeoff and slow flight.  Make the CHTs get hot if you push it too hard (and make cylinder 5 hot in the Mirage).  Make the S-TEC autopilot fully functional.  Finish the GNS 430.  Implement IAS and FLC.  Make the amps go up when you turn on icing...oh, and add icing and rain effects. And, btw, put some family in the airplane!  :)

 

Then we're talkin'!


Gregg Seipp

"A good landing is when you can walk away from the airplane.  A great landing is when you can reuse it."
i7-8700 32GB Ram, GTX-1070 8 Gig RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, based on the complaints here, I've taken the trouble to revamp the click spots for the ADF radio.

 

As always, contact me to request a copy.


Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope mine didn't sound like complaining...more like wishes :)

 

 

 


BTW, based on the complaints here, I've taken the trouble to revamp the click spots for the ADF radio.

 

How do you do that?  I have a couple on the Mirage I want to fix.


Gregg Seipp

"A good landing is when you can walk away from the airplane.  A great landing is when you can reuse it."
i7-8700 32GB Ram, GTX-1070 8 Gig RAM

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  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    50%
    $12,670.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...