How is the new Virtualcol CRJ series pack?

[Joseph29 225]

I am thinking of buying this. Does anyone have it? Is it better (or improved) than the Wilco CRJ's?

http://secure.simmarket.com/virtualcol-crj-series-pack-v2-fs2004.phtml

 

[nonflyingdutchman 40]

Their best yet. Great looks. Easy to operate. Much better than the other one imho. Great fps (ideal around big airports)

[darem 84]

V1 was word not allowed. V2 is a positive surprise. It's their first addon I am actually using after trying :-)

[Joseph29 225]

Well  I went ahead and bought it. Now I did not fly it (it's late here now) so I can't say weather it's good in that department, but looks wise I think it looks great. I think it looks a lot better than the Wilco and Posky planes.

I will do a flight tomorrow and see how these planes fly and stuff like that.

[sascha 314]

Did you get round to flying the CRJ? I'm teetering on the edge of purchase.

[Joseph29 225]

Yes I did fly it. It flies real nice. But if your looking for a plane with full cockpit systems modeled then this is not the plane for you. I don't mind the lack of systems, ever once in a while I like a plane where I can just jump in the cockpit and take off.

[Flyboy49 10]

I would be interested in knowing whether the cabin  and tail logo lights work without the landing lights being on. Seems to be an issue with their previous E-Jets and Saab package.

[Joseph29 225]

7 hours ago, ChinookWind said:

I would be interested in knowing whether the cabin  and tail logo lights work without the landing lights being on. Seems to be an issue with their previous E-Jets and Saab package.

 

I did not notice if that happened. I flew the flight in the day time. I will load the plane up at night and let you know (when I get home).

[A32xx 129]

I have the VirtualCol Jetstream 31 and Dornier 328 Jet for FS2004. Both have very poor panels (which are easily changed) unlike the FSX versions, but the high reflections built-in to the INSIDE of the cockpit and cabin windows are a serious fault, which I and others have reported to them over the years, with no patch or Service Pack on the horizon yet. Never again with VirtualCol for FS2004.

[sascha 314]

I have a pack containing the  Saab 340, DH Twin Otter and Dash 8 + the Fokker 50 and they were all disappointing both from the model and texturing and the systems, especially the Fokker 50 which was nothing like the touted images (they must have been from FSX). But I do love the CRJ, and if it is indeed better than the Posky offering that would be good enough for me. Any chance of a video or some screenshots Joseph?

[meesterlijk 25]

I gave it a go yesterday and bought it. For me 19 euros is not that ammount that gives me headaches. 

Im not dissappointed. Dont expect a Quality Wings or iFly product but its nice. It flies well and it is easy to understand. The livery I flew with yesterday (CRJ200 American Eagle NC) is not very accurate imho. I havent checked the other liveries but the ammount is massive. 

For me this plane is a welcome part of my collection. 

[scianoir 610]

I bought it and it's quite well modelled visually both inside and out and the flight dynamics are reasonable. Unfortunately however the FMC is very basic and quite dysfunctional when used with the autopilot so I gave up on it. I also use FSX where the same issues are evident, however, it does fly very nicely when used with the GTN750 payware addon which, for FSX at least, turns it from a hangar queen into an airliner which I might fly fairly often. Just a pity the GTN can't be used in FS9. 

Bill

[meesterlijk 25]

8 hours ago, scianoir said:

Unfortunately however the FMC is very basic and quite dysfunctional when used with the autopilot so I gave up on it. 

Did you gave up on the entire plane or just the fmc? Its a pity that the fmc is not complete, the flightplan is filled in automatically and cannot ne adjusted in a extensive way. 

[scianoir 610]

Hi Bert,

I gave up on trying to use the FMC as I generally like to be able to input the flight plan myself and adjust it during the flight if necessary, but what you can input yourself, as you probably know is very restricted. Also I found that the autopilot function, even when not using the FMC, was quite temperamental.  When flying airliners I generally tend to use the autopilot for much of the flying apart from take off and landing, so essentially I gave up flying the aircraft in FS9 and instead have been using it in FSX where it flies like a dream when coupled with the GTN750. I use both FS9 and FSX but I do some of my IFR/airliner flying in FS9 where I am less likely to experience an annoying OOM error than in the more resource intensive FSX.  As you say, it's a pity a little more effort was not put into providing a properly functioning FMC as this is otherwise a very nice product at a reasonable price.

Bill

[meesterlijk 25]

I agree on that.

Im a fs9 user, Im a simmer who likes busy airports with up to date ai-traffic and sometimes I spend more times updating the traffic than flying. Everyone has their flaws ;-)

I also have so much addons on my sim, the most important reason that I stay with fs9. It runs great, beautiful framerates also on busy airports and indeed no oom's or ctd's. I think my pc can handle fsx or p3d but I spent so much time tweaking fs9 that I will stay with it for a long time.