Simply a shame that Carenado has not bothered to (a) Have their own support forums thus leaving it to the users to solve their issues and (b) they have never bothered to improve their release process so as to produce SUITABLE documentation.

Yes, given the many aircraft they have released it's hard to understand why they would not have their own support forum.Speaks volumes about the company.

But they've not done too badly thought eh? :smile:

But they've not done too badly thought eh?

 

That's a fact. They continue to push out acceptable models and with each new release there appears to be a stampede of first adopters. i.e. a nice rush of revenue. Until that stops happening what we will continue to see will be business as usual.

 

And why not?

Geez...where else can you buy a product and have absolutely no support from the company making the product...it's sad they don't stand behind their products. It's actually a joke and folks keep buying into it!

As the old Northern(UK) saying goes, "There's nowt as queer as folk" :smile:

 

 

It's actually a joke and folks keep buying into it!

I believe there are several folks that have walked away and ain't looking back. I think my last purchase was the piston Malibu; I don't even remember. I prefer the full service developers. In other words, it's the difference between filet mignon and a hot dog. 

Carenado has their own support model: https://carenado.zendesk.com/hc/en-us. Whether they actually fix what people find is another matter, but the point is, they DO have a support system.

The almost never do anything about that and people don't see ZendDesk as a true support forum because you are only at their mercy. I find it a sad state of affairs.

 

I am not buying anything else from them, just want to keep the 2 I have up to date and document all the huge gaps they have left.

1:There are plenty of people who are more than satisfied by the superb graphical offerings.

2: Of those people there are a substantial number who require more than 'pretty'

3: Of those there are several people who know how to make things better from an FDE point of view.

4: Which in turn make groups 1 & 2 happier. Which convinces more people to buy the aircraft and then carry out the mods.

Carenado happy, punters happy...ish  :wink: 

 

5: then there are the thieving swine who pirate them and don't give a toss either way. :mad:

I have a number of their earlier planes and enjoy them to this day, I just think that Carenado could be such a fantastic company if they just hired a good system programmer and was more proactive on their support...hey what a concept!

 

Cheers

Martin

1:There are plenty of people who are more than satisfied by the superb graphical offerings.

2: Of those people there are a substantial number who require more than 'pretty'

3: Of those there are several people who know how to make things better from an FDE point of view.

4: Which in turn make groups 1 & 2 happier. Which convinces more people to buy the aircraft and then carry out the mods.

Carenado happy, punters happy...ish   

 

5: then there are the thieving swine who pirate them and don't give a toss either way.

 

Have no knowledge of Ron's 5). but he is so spot-on with the first 4.  Honestly the aircraft I fly most often are now the Real Air TDv2, the Carenado C90B, and the MilViz B55.  I have not needed tech assistance for the Turbine Duke. Had to totally rely on fellow members here for help with Carenado models, but got that help and subsequently am very happy with the Carenado models I fly (also the 337, 208, 210, PA46). I ran up against what once was best described as arrogant response from Milviz support, but note clearly that earlier attitude has evaporated into a much more cooperative sequence of support and updates recently.

 

Carenado is not all eye candy, as some say. I experience a very similar level of flight and realistic performance dynamics from the RA TDv2 to the Carenado C90. Clearly agree the performance of the two models is vastly different, but they are both realistic to their types.  But the RA TDv2 is much more complete in its systems modeling. No comparison there. You can forget the pitot tube heater in the C90 and never know you forgot it. Forget it in the RA TDv2 and climb well into the negative C° OAT range (say -10°C or beyond) and you will soon loose your Airspeed Indicator, until a minute or two after you slap your forehead and turn on that switch! Thats just an example.

 

On another note, if it's Eye Candy you want, just look to repaints by Ron. Then buy those models. 

 

 

Geez...where else can you buy a product and have absolutely no support from the company making the product..

 

Reality XP?

My cable/internet/phone company?

My antivirus software company?

My local newspaper when they miss delivering?

Medicare?

USA Veteran's Administration?

My computer manufacturer?

My printer manufacturer?

Can you elaborate on the C90B ITT modeling issue and how others (e.g. Flight 1) have dealt with it? I'm currently operating and enjoying the C90. One significant plus is B. Stolle did the FDE. 

Interesting. Now that you mention it,  I think I do recall the Aerowrx B200 being ITT limited at altitude. I just finished ferrying the Carenado C90 from Spain to Texas. I thought it a bit odd that my limiting parameter at altitude (FL220-240) was often RPM. I can confirm the FSX Carenado C90B ITT does decrease with altitude. 

 

I will test fly the Flight 1 B200, Carenado B200 and Real Air Turbine Duke in the next day or two and see how they handle the ITT issue. 

 

Les Parson

I emailed Carenado with a question about their Cessna 182 and received a prompt, courteous, and valid reply.  I didn't need a forum.

Thanks:

Jim Elder