Taxiing the C441 Conquest

[RichieFly 712]

On 3/3/2017 at 0:49 AM, polizei said:

I don't 'highly dislike' your opion at all.

You love to mention that you are a  1 time only Alabeo buyer and it's pretty clear that you will not fall into the Alabeo/Carenado trap again so I don't understand why you waste your time in these forums. Why not ask Alabeo for a refund and stick to the planes you like ?

Posting here over and over again will neither change peoples opinion about Alabeo/Carenado nor will the way Alabeo/Carenado build, market and sell their planes, change.

Concering RichieFlys comment;  'really frustrating to operate' isn't very specific.

 

 

 

I believe my comment hits the spot. This aircraft is really frustrating to operate, in the context of the thread's subject. And, if it makes any difference to the subject at hand, I do have RW time in the Conquest.

[FDEdev 955]

Well, if you have flown the 441 IRL than I fully understand your comment.

Interesting is that no one of the self proclaimed 'hard core simmers' complains about the totally wrong implementation of the start locks, the most noticable bug IMO.

[Tango777 4]

I think that the above post was aimed at me, the last sentence in particular.

P.S. For whatever it is worth, I do have time in the real world including Cessnas, but not the 441. But what do I know....

[KenG 492]

The current start sequence is a compromise. Alabeo was given all of the correct information including real world videos of Conquest engine starts. Using just .xml coding and their knowledge/limitations of the FDE this was the best they could do. 

[FDEdev 955]

On ‎03‎.‎03‎.‎2017 at 2:35 PM, KenG said:

Carenado/Alabeo are also known for making a few updates then calling it good enough. They don't do service packs on products months or years old. They started doing 2.0 updates for a short time and then abandoned that quickly. 

That's definitely not the case. When they are updating older version for e.g. P3D v3 they usually are fixing a lot of remaining bugs as well. E.g. in case of the PC-12 v2.

[RobertBernardK 7]

My worst fear is that the Garrett (that looks like a dash ten TPE) on the incoming 690B of Carenado have the same basic bad code of the Conquest, DO228, if that happens the plane sadly will be a NOT to the people like me that have flow Rockwell planes and Garrett turboprop.......  For me....  The only garrett that seems to be close to the real is the Garrett on the Metroliner of Razbam. 

Redgars 

[KenG 492]

16 hours ago, polizei said:

That's definitely not the case. When they are updating older version for e.g. P3D v3 they usually are fixing a lot of remaining bugs as well. E.g. in case of the PC-12 v2.

 

Please show me where that is not the case. When was the last 2.0 update released? Show me one product where they released an update 6 months or a year after initial release. Other than their handful of 2.0 updates. We are not talking alternative facts here, just looking at their release schedule and the updates they make to their products. They already abandoned the PA46 after one update and a Navigraph pack (that they charged extra for) that undid many improvements of that update. 

[FDEdev 955]

e.g. the PC-12. today

[KenG 492]

You are absolutely correct, they did just release the PC-12 today. Can't remember when the last 2.0 was released, seems like it has been awhile.

[Haggis 3]

*Warning, small rant ahead  :)

</rant>

I wish I would have read this post before buying the C441.

I'm a moderate to hardcore simmer.  Although, i don't know why anyone would be into sims and not want accuracy & realism (I can recommend some cheap Nintendo flying games :P)  I mean the money we spend to 'Simulate' Reality should speak for itself !

Leads me into why I've bought a few Carenado/Alabeo planes already at $35 to $50 a piece, with the numerous Avionics issues, you'd think i'd learn my lesson.  But i bought into the pretty airplane models & hype like most do.

'Rocket' taxiing doesn't really bother me as much as they can't seem to simulate a good FMS or autopilot system without a ton of bugs that never get fixed.  It leads to so much frustration i just leave them in the hangar. 

They've grown lax and left it up to the flight1 GTN addons to take the load of having a 'Usable' frustration free navigation experience. 

I'd be thrilled with 2 great solid aircraft a year from them, if only that were the case.  

I see they are cranking out assembly line aircraft for X-Plane now, but is the quality any better due to different code?  Anyone have experience with them?

I think eventually people will grow wise to their 'Quantity over Quality' approach, and it will catch up to them.

</endrant>

 

 

[Haggis 3]

I really don't mean to bash Carenado/Alabeo, I don't blame the developers, it's the guys in suits who are pulling the strings for more profits, I get it.  

It's better to be honest & open, like going to a restaurant and finding the service or food terrible, not saying a word to them.  And they are left wondering why they went out of business...

[RodgerC 58]

Don't think anyone probably follows this anymore, but I sure wish I would've read it before I bought this airplane.  I like everything about this airplane except trying to taxi it.  And that pretty much ruins everything else.  All the other reviews said it was great.  Yeah, right.

[ThomasAH 61]

I'm following here, but I decided to to stick with the Flysimware version.

Maybe I'd buy the Alabeo version if it received further updates, but ...