A Plea to Carenado/Alabeo

[~Craig~ 10]

Carenado/Alabeo summed up (IMHO);

 

Over the years;-

 

• Overall quality and attention to detail has gone down
• Texturing artistry has gone up (considerably)
• Prices have gone up (considerably)

Remember the old Carenado C182RG, 210, etc, for FS9? ...... Relative to the standards of the time (2004-2006), everything they put out was top drawer.   These were the days before the Carenado 'conveyer belt' was established.

 

I guess we take it or leave it.    C/A with their chosen business model must be one of (if not THE) most financially successful FS businesses around.   Look how quickly they churn out $25-$40 addons, and look at the size of the GA flight simmer market.   Seriously, I would not be surprised if the two Chilean gentlemen that founded and own C/A are driving around South America in Lamborghinis!  (and who can blame them, if they are).      I honestly wouldn't be surprised if C/As profits are higher than PMDGs, on account of (i) how small the C/A development team is, (ii) How simple their products are and thus how fast they churn them out, and (iii) how wide the 'relatively basic GA' market is within flight sim.

 

Now, I don't really like any of the above, but it seems that C/A are primarily business people.  Look at the passion we see when Cap'n Randazzo posts with updates.   Look at the commitment we see from the likes of FSL to deliver just one astounding product.   And then we have C/A churning out textures with only basic (default based) functionality - and even those usually have many bugs.    And we hear nothing from them. No attempt to interact with the community (except a few pics on Social Media).

In a free market, we vote with our wallets.     We cannot blame C/A if we are all weak and addicted and just cannot resist buying their mediocre offerings, even where we know we'll regret it and complain at the inevitable bugs. :smile:

 

I did this recently with their PA38, their Piper PS-28 Cruz, their DA-40, etc, etc.    All have stunning textures..... and poor immersion, feeble sounds, dull characteristics, default systems, and unconvincing FDE (in my opinion).

 

Addicts - Flight Sim Anonymous anyone?

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

Seriously, I would not be surprised if the two Chilean gentlemen

 

I've wondered, for a long time, if they don't communicate because their English is not good.  This would explain a lot to me.  I've heard they're good guys.  But, to be able to make really nice, complex planes, they're going to have to find a way to establish a good beta program.  Milviz, A2A and PMDG have to have solid betas.  Perhaps, they're only using local people for their testing but the testing, if it exists, hasn't been up to par.  Honestly, though, if it weren't for Bert Piek, I'm not sure they'd have sold nearly as many as they have.  I'm, honestly, a little surprised they've pulled off as much as they have...a fairly functional GNS530, an FMS and now they're going after Navdata.  If they'd get a beta program they might, actually, do amazingly well with some of these planes.

 

Gregg

[1mikel151 71]

People continue to buy their overpriced garbage, so why should they change their standards? They wrap fancy textures around half @$$ default functionality and then have the nerve to charge 35-40 bucks for that? It's not about being prideful in their design, it's just carbon copy one product after another and watch the cash come in.

 

 

You forgot "IMNSHO" which is the case since you have no actual data to base your tactless statement on.. :rolleyes:

 

I am with the OP, they need to go back to what they do right and stick to it. I wish they would do a turbo beaver, with their graphics, it would be a joy to fly.for me.

[~Craig~ 10]

You forgot "IMNSHO" which is the case since you have no actual data to base your tactless statement on.. :rolleyes:

 

 

The points that HighFlyer made, whilst perhaps not too diplomatic, are certainly held by a number of people.  He's not out on a limb with that outlook.    

 

Pretty textures over primarily default functionality, some killer bugs on release (like ADF not working, fuel level indicators not working, etc) ? .... yes.  

[Holdit 551]

QFT.  Very much my perception of the Carenado business model unfortunately.

 

+2. 

 

If people want Carenado to change, they need to stop buying Carenado products now, and stop being seduced by every pretty little thing with wings that flutters its sun visors coquettishly from Carenado's online shelves.

 

Every purchase is a vote in favour of the current customer-contemptuous business model.

[~Craig~ 10]

coquettishly

 

Nice word! :smile:

 

[Adj.]: The actions of a woman who makes teasing romantic overtures; a flirt

 

This certainly could describe how the Carenado Piper PS-28 seduced me!   

[Jimmy RFR 406]

 

 

I wish they would do a turbo beaver, with their graphics, it would be a joy to fly.for me.

 

I'd buy it too.  And likely fly it a lot.  And the whole time, be wishing it had the depth of the AS Twin Otter. ^_^

[LHookins 3,103]

My first ever payware aircraft was their 337 Skymaster.  I was shocked to find that I had more tweaks in this premium payware aircraft to get it to working right than I had in the default Grumman Goose.  A lot of this stuff would be very simple and easy to fix (I was able to do it without problem), but when I went looking on the Coronado site for someone to send these fixes to, I ran across an announcement that if we find anything wrong with their aircraft, they don't want to know about it.  Um... OK...

 

Take a look at the textures for the instruments.  Several of the needles are incorrectly colored in the night version so that the needles don't show up properly and are hard to see.  It looks for all the world like they did it correctly, then went back and ruined it on purpose. 

 

In the end the Skymaster is my second most flown aircraft, so they did something right... although I had to invest a lot of hours to fix things that never should have been wrong in the first place, and there are still a lot of things I didn't fix.  If they want this stuff done right and they can't do it themselves, there are any number of people in the community who would be more than happy to fix the stuff for free in return for a copy of the aircraft for free.

 

Hook

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

I was shocked to find that I had more tweaks in this premium payware aircraft to get it to working right than I had in the default Grumman Goose.

 

I'm curious what you tweaked there.  I have the C337 but I don't remember having to do many tweaks.

[LHookins 3,103]

I'm curious what you tweaked there.

 

There was a lot of stuff that was just personal preference, like making the lights brighter and shifting red instead of blue.  I had to add a cockpit light so I could see some of the instrument needles at all.  The tooltip for the altimeter setting used an incorrect method of rounding and required a hack to the model files to fix.  The GEM gauge was a total rewrite, but that was for my own amusement.  Increase the steering angle from 35 to 44 degrees to correct for the published pivot point, although 65 degrees will allow pivot around one wheel if so desired.  Added fx_nav lights.  Sped up panning in right and rear seats.  Increased opendoor volume, used closedoor sound for closing door.  Reduced vacuum_system max pressure from 7.00 to 5.15 so gauge reads correctly.  Changed a large portion of the performance parameters in the config file to match published performance.  This is the stuff I remember off the top of my head.

 

Not fixed:  Fuel pump switches not correct, only left switches work, may have been fixed in an update.  Altimeter will not read below zero... ever been to the Dead Sea?  Could be fixed with a model hack, I'm guessing.  Those damned night gauge needles... I never got around to editing the graphics file for them as the extra cockpit light at least made them visible and useful at night.

 

The GEM gauge.  Each aircraft registration now has a different profile, and each profile will change slightly from day to day.  Lots of randomness where appropriate.  Temperatures have been adjusted considerably in the air file and gauge display.  I thought I could use some of the original code but none of it survived;  the gauge has much more function and the code is considerably shorter.

 

I really like this plane.  The design of the original aircraft seems to have been just what I needed, and Carenado didn't do too bad a job overall... it just had a lot of bugs.  I bought the 337 through Aerosoft, but only because they were the first to tell me about it and I didn't know at the time to go through Carenado directly... and thus I don't have easy direct access to any updates from Carenado which I've heard are available.  By the time I figured out how to get the updates, I'd already put too much work into the aircraft to lose it all.

 

I may buy another Carenado in the future, but only if I'm willing in advance to put lots of hours into fixing problems.  I've bought aircraft from other vendors, and had had to invest some time in them as well, but not nearly as much as this one. 

 

Hook

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

There was a lot of stuff that was just personal preference, like making the lights brighter and shifting red instead of blue.  I had to add a cockpit light so I could see some of the instrument needles at all.  The tooltip for the altimeter setting used an incorrect method of rounding and required a hack to the model files to fix.  The GEM gauge was a total rewrite, but that was for my own amusement.  Increase the steering angle from 35 to 44 degrees to correct for the published pivot point, although 65 degrees will allow pivot around one wheel if so desired.  Added fx_nav lights.  Sped up panning in right and rear seats.  Increased opendoor volume, used closedoor sound for closing door.  Reduced vacuum_system max pressure from 7.00 to 5.15 so gauge reads correctly.  Changed a large portion of the performance parameters in the config file to match published performance.  This is the stuff I remember off the top of my head.

 

Not fixed:  Fuel pump switches not correct, only left switches work, may have been fixed in an update.  Altimeter will not read below zero... ever been to the Dead Sea?  Could be fixed with a model hack, I'm guessing.  Those damned night gauge needles... I never got around to editing the graphics file for them as the extra cockpit light at least made them visible and useful at night.

 

The GEM gauge.  Each aircraft registration now has a different profile, and each profile will change slightly from day to day.  Lots of randomness where appropriate.  Temperatures have been adjusted considerably in the air file and gauge display.  I thought I could use some of the original code but none of it survived;  the gauge has much more function and the code is considerably shorter.

 

I really like this plane.  The design of the original aircraft seems to have been just what I needed, and Carenado didn't do too bad a job overall... it just had a lot of bugs.  I bought the 337 through Aerosoft, but only because they were the first to tell me about it and I didn't know at the time to go through Carenado directly... and thus I don't have easy direct access to any updates from Carenado which I've heard are available.  By the time I figured out how to get the updates, I'd already put too much work into the aircraft to lose it all.

 

I may buy another Carenado in the future, but only if I'm willing in advance to put lots of hours into fixing problems.  I've bought aircraft from other vendors, and had had to invest some time in them as well, but not nearly as much as this one. 

 

Hook

 

That's an amazing list.  Even doing the research on things like turn radius, vacuum...and then knowing how to fix them is impressive and so needed for all of these airplanes. I've used LUA to 'fix' behaviors in the Malibu Mirage though I wish I knew how to do some of it with a hidden gauge or some other way.  Still, it works...no complaint there.  I think there is a patch for the C337 fuel pumps and Aerosoft should have it in their latest download.  Shouldn't be hard to incorporate if you keep a copy of your mods.   

 

It's not an airplane I fly much at night...for some reason...might be the lights.  The Stolle FDE on that airplane is just the best on any airplane I have.

 

What do you use to modify the .air file?  It'd be nice to get realistic temperatures in a number of their planes.

 

Gregg

[MarioB 4]

About 40 responses to 'A Plea to Carenado/Alabeo' and not a single response from the company.

 

Is that accurate or have I overlooked a company response?

 

I use to be enthusiastic about Carenado, they represented the very best in sim GA aircraft, not anymore.

1. I have to agree with LDP1949: no responses; there a lack of involvement and listening. Rule #1 of business ethics: listen to your customers!
2. Every month or so there's a new "fabulous" aircraft that looks great. Forget the fads and go back to the basics that made your reputation.
3. I REALLY miss the in-depth documentation. It indicates a lack of passion about their release.

Simply not interested in the monthly "new realeases". Give me a plane that's super-functional and thoroughly documented. I have only three aircraft in my hangar, but they give me lots of great sim pleasure.

[tttocs 301]

 

 

Fuel pump switches not correct, only left switches work, may have been fixed in an update.

 

It was.  I don't know if the fix ever made it into the general releases as it wasn't part of a service pack, but after a long delay (and lots of carping by many of us) they finally fixed it in a specific patch which addressed only this issue.

 

Even though you didn't buy directly from Carenado, you should be able to coax the fix out of them with an email.  I know others have.

 

BTW, you bring up a very good point about the lighting.  Carenado's night lighting is usually classic Carenado - ie, it looks superficially very pretty but is often not very functional.  I'm not much for night flying (nor was I when actively flying IRL) but when I do fly at night, it's generally not in a Carenado plane.

 

 

Scott

[LHookins 3,103]

That's an amazing list. Even doing the research on things like turn radius, vacuum...and then knowing how to fix them is impressive and so needed for all of these airplanes. I've used LUA to 'fix' behaviors

 

Ain't *that* amazing.   For example, the vacuum gauge has a green arc, and 7 was far outside it.  Other planes had 5.15 as the vacuum number in the config file, so I went with that one.  The pivot point I found on a diagram of the aircraft somewhere, and figuring out what angle to use was some simple trigonometry.  I haven't done anything with LUA yet.  Maybe I should.

 

Don't know for sure about making hidden gauges, but I've put "riders" in existing gauges a couple of times... stuff didn't show but worked in the background.  You have to get a gauge that's always visible to do that though.

 

 

 

What do you use to modify the .air file?

 

A program called AirEd.

http://simviation.com/simviation/?ID=200&page=2&mark=5895

 

 

a specific patch which addressed only this issue.

 

Ouch.  With all the things they could have fixed without much effort, that's kind of a slap in the face.  Well, nice that they fixed it anyway.  I have a lot of performance tweaks as well, and if I got the patch now I'd have to retest everything... too many hours of flight testing for me at this time.

 

 

 

Carenado's night lighting is usually classic Carenado - ie, it looks superficially very pretty but is often not very functional.

 

Everything looks great except for some of the gauge needles, which aren't lit up and are basically invisible at night.  This is fixable by the user with some graphics editing, and I may get around to doing it some time if I feel the need to fly at night again. 

 

Edit: Oh yeah... I could never find the dome light switch in the dark (was totally black on my screen), so I added a square on the GPS upper left that when you click it the dome light would toggle.  This was easier to find than  the switch over your head.

 

Hook

[CB183183183 9]

I sadly agree with a lot of the sentiment in this thread.  I have fond memories of flying their Mooney 201 and Cessna 210 for FS9 and working on my VFR cross country skills using a sectional.  I thought they did a fairly good job with their F33 Bonanza, but their move into glass cockpits and high performance aircraft has really hurt their credibility as a high fidelity publisher.  The 182T with the G1000 was a joke with little system simulations and heavy on frames.  Since then, I've read review after review about buggy releases with little regard towards customer feedback and improvements on the systems front.  

 

A2A is at the head of the pack and I applaud them for taking their time to put out good releases for the GA community just like Majestic and PMDG have done with their airliners.  Us FS peeps are an impatient bunch, but we know when we come across a gem of an FS aircraft.