Sign in to follow this  
Captain45

List of quircks has been sent to the Dev.Team

Recommended Posts

Dear fellow simmers. After many hours of testing and reading all posts about Carenado's B350i on this forum, I created a 'list of quirks, that I uploaded to the support desk. I have over 100, sometimes irretating and confusing hours on this kite and I think it's time for some re-coding of the software. Until SP1 arrives, I'll leave it in my hangar. Below the text:

 

Dear Carenado development team,

 

If flying the B350i had been on the same outstanding level as the visual aspects of the product, it would have been congruent in terms of quality. Unfortunately this is not the case and the B350i needs a Service Pack badly to bring flying on the same level as the visuals. Sim-pilots sure like beautiful pictures, but we are mainly in the game for flying. I dare to say that the present B350i is not ‘fit to fly’. Here’s a list of candidates for improvement:

  1. The way flipswitches (that go up and down) are used is not consistent. Some of them move up by a left click and down by a right click, while others (some in the same group) are going up and down by a left click. The Fuel Quantity test switch works contra: down=left, up=right, which adds to the overall confusion.
  2. The instrument that counts the engine hours (low on the co-pilot side) is multiplying the hours by 10. No big thing, but not correct either.
  3. Ground Power only works with the External Power switch to ON and the Voltmeter bus selector switch to Tpl Fed instead of the Ext Pwr position.
  4. In the PFD’s communications line the UTC updates with passing a time zone border. UTC is UTC and it only changes when time passes by and NOT with a time zone border crossing. The same goes for the times behind the list of waypoints on the MFD.
  5. The Pilot and Copilot OVHD Flood lights and the Cabin Lights are not switched by the designated switches on the overhead panel but are only, and always, ON if the INSTR INDIRECT switch is ON.
  6. The sun visors can only be moved from extreme left to extreme right and vice versa, and nothing in between.
  7. The Flight Guidance Annunciators (FGA) on the PFD do not consistently match the status of the various functions of the autopilot all the time. Sometimes, what is displayed, is an old situation that is no longer active. Since the autopilot buttons have no green led-light when active (which is exactly like in the real world Proline21), pilots must be able to rely on what they see in the FGA on the PFD to know what state the autopilot is in.
  8. On the FMS it would be more convenient to insert an Altitude or Flightlevel for the whole flight when you initially insert your flightplan.
  9. On the FMS LEGS pages, the altitudes behind the waypoints must be kept at all times and not replaced by the default 28000 every time you go to the DEP/ARR pages for check or update.
  10. When on the PFD ‘FMS’ is under the Preset and the VOR or LOC information is shown in green, pushing the Preset button when there is an active flightplan, results in an automatic NAV ON for the NAV button of the autopilot. This is not logical if your departure is on Vectors and you have to start your flight in HDG mode instead of NAV mode. When there is no flightplan active, NAV stays OFF, which should always be the case.
  11. Pushing any operational mode of the autopilot to ON, being it NAV or HDG, must automatically set the other to OFF. APPR is different. The aircraft can be under NAV or HDG mode, and vertically on its way to join an ILS. When the APPR button is set to active the text should be in white in the FGA on the PFD and state change into APPR mode should be automatic. That does not happen consistently. Sometimes you have to click APP off an then ON several times to get it done, and sometimes the APP function is ignored completely. OK. Hand-flying an ILS is more fun, but in a CAT III situation one must be able to rely on the Proline21 to do the job properly.
  12. Capturing the Glideslope before the Localizer is alive makes the autopilot do nothing. The autopilot must be able to capture the GS and after that the LOC.
  13. The VNAV function is only for simpilots who never step-climb (or -descend) and who do not fly on SIDs and STARs with altitude constraints. Serious (and realistic) simpilots cannot use it and must climb on FLC/Speed and descend on VS. But there is more:
    1. Altitude Preselect has no function during VNAV. Please keep in mind that although a flightplan is f.i. at FL280, ATC most of the time will step-climb you to that level. The altitude that you are cleared to must be set in the Preselect and VNAV must stop climbing at that level upon reaching. Of course this must also be the case when descending under VNAV.
    2. Vertical flightpath in SIDs and STARs: the altitude constraints are not flown as they should. It does not matter if the WPTs read 4000, or 4000A, or 4000B. All are treated as 4000 exact to be on overhead the WPT. The A and B cannot be inserted in the FMS, only the numbers.
    3. Altitude action points, like (460), or directional action points, like (INTC), in SIDs and STARs are not always treated as they should.
    4. When you have passed all action points like mentioned above (c.), and switch to VNAV, do not expect the aircraft to behave as it should. If things go the wrong way, you have to switch VNAV OFF, set ALT to HOLD again, engage NAV and engage FLC/Speed. That is not realistic.
  14. When I use FLC/Speed to step-climb based on ATC’s instructions with ALT on HOLD, some not so logical things happen:
    1. While I’m climbing to a cleared altitude before reaching and I dial in the next higher altitude or FL that I am cleared to on ATC instructions:
      1. The mouse-over text of the FLC button reads OFF directly; the Flight Guidance Annunciators on the PFD  sometimes shows ‘PTCH’, so the pitch is the same (PWR is untouched) and I have the push the FLC button again once to keep on climbing on speed. Or…
      2. The mouse-over text of the FLC button reads OFF directly; the Flight Guidance Annunciators on the PFD shows ‘FLC’ and the speed and climb angle stay the same. So apparently this is the PTCH state. To be sure I must click the FLC button twice to get the mouse-over text to be ON again. Or…
      3. The same as by ii. but now the speed accelerates while the FGA reads FLC and mouse-over text is OFF. Click the button twice to engage FLC again and lower the speed to keep on climbing.
      4. I simply cannot believe that in a real world Proline21 equipped aircraft it works in the same confusing and un-consistent manner.
    2. However, upon reaching an assigned and selected altitude, the mouse-over text on the FLC button and the Flight Guidance Annunciator in the PFD tells me that FLC is still ON. The aircraft is accelerating so it behaves correctly. I have to click the FLC button once to read the mouse-over text as OFF and see in the Flight Guidance Annunciator on the PFD that it is now on ALT.
  15. The DIR function in the FMS is not causing the autopilot to fly a direct course from the position where the aircraft actually is to the selected direct-to waypoint. It takes the course from the waypoint before that in the flightplan to the ‘direct to’ selected waypoint and that can be a completely different direction. In fact, it flies to the extended course line over those two waypoints what can lead to a giant D-tour in most cases.
  16. Lateral flightpath in SIDs and STARs: are not drawn and flown exactly as they should. There are crazy nose-shaped D-tours or circles where there should be a straight line.

There might be more to come, but it would be nice if a Service Pack covers all important items mentioned above. It would bring flying the B350i at the same high level as the visual aspects of the product.

 

Dirk van Tongeren

PPL since 1992 and simpilot since the first existence of MSFS

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Pretty comprehensive list, although the airplane looks great from the external views.

14(4)= No, the PL21 would be un-flyable in this condition and I can assure you the real thing is not as complicated as this version.

13= Just a real world note, we generally don't use VNAV on SIDs, choosing to climb in a vertical mode, FLC being preferred. VNAV and all other vertical modes are pilot's choice for coming down.

 

I'll be waiting for another developer's model to finish WIP and resurface with a functioning PL21.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It didn't take Carenado long to reply. Here is what they wrote:

 

 

Carenado Support, Nov 28, 13:04 CLST:

Greetings,

Thank you for your valuable feedback.
We'll consider it to include as a modification on the future version we will release for the aircraft.

Regards,

Carenado.
To be honest.... I did not expect them to write: "Sorry, we've created an incomplete, not fit to fly aircraft." But a little bit of confirmation that this is the case and when they are going to issue SP1 would have been nice.
Probably it's going to be a very long wait with our B350i's rusting in the hangar.
Dirk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PPL since 1992 and simpilot since the first existence of MSFS

 

Come on Dirk,  You have been knocking around a while now did you really think that spending 39 dollars on a piece of Software would get all them Items on your list working correctly ?    :smile:   

 

Its a very well put together list alright but i think your only going to be annoying yourself with it  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


spending 39 dollars on a piece of Software

 

Ha, ha, that's a good one Elaine. LOL

 

I've spent 49,95 euro on the Majestic Q400 yesterday and for that I get not only a perfect working airplane, but also a bunch of manuals and a support forum as well. Some develop teams do understand their job.

 

Never mind. I had the time to sort things out for the B350i and if nobody kicks some axxx of the Carenado Dev Team members they might still think that we simpilots are only interested in nice pictures instead of working aircraft.  :wink:

 

Dirk

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, ha, that's a good one Elaine. LOL

 

I've spent 49,95 euro on the Majestic Q400 yesterday and for that I get not only a perfect working airplane, but also a bunch of manuals and a support forum as well. Some develop teams do understand their job.

 

Never mind. I had the time to sort things out for the B350i and if nobody kicks some axxx of the Carenado Dev Team members they might still think that we simpilots are only interested in nice pictures instead of working aircraft.  :wink:

 

Dirk

The masses on Facebook that follow Carenado and probably contribute 70% of their business wouldn't know about most of the things that are wrong with the releases. Bottom line, they don't care that much because it doesn't damage the revenue stream.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

 

LOL - as Carenado has proven over and over again - pretty shiny planes - sell - what's under the hood matters very little... I just want a single piece of Carenado navigation equipment capable of doing a correct "DTO" - it's really not too much to ask and probably one of the most commonly used ATC instructions used every day...

:wink:

 

Regards,
Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People - vote with your wallet!! As a real world pilot who has about 750 hours in a Pro-Line 21 cockpit - I can confirm with Dirk that there is SO much about this aircrafts systems that are wrong.

 

Carenado is the "puppy mill" of aircraft developers.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Me too, "I can confirm with Dirk that there is SO much about this aircrafts systems that are wrong." I totally agree with guys above.

 

- aircraft behavior very strange even in nice weather,

- Sometimes stuff dosnst work

- leaking good manuals. (my impression is they have not spend a lot of time making them)

- I use P3D v3.4

- sometimes these engines are hard to handle, maybe because of leaking manual.

 

 

I actual have the CT206H and it seems to be much more reliable and better model/programed than this nice new

King 350i...

 

 

 

Brgds

Søren

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