Aerosoft CRJ worth it?

[nealmac 260]

Cool. I'll give it a bash this evening, or over the weekend at the latest.

[ShawnG 1,823]

While you are giving it a bash, realize that this route would be illegal in the real world, since the CRJ is only able to fly 50 miles offshore.  you might assume that the real world crj's fms might have an issue following oceanic waypoints, since it wouldn't be required of it ever.  some of the other routes Nuno mentioned, to the Canaries, might be legal, but only if the route followed the north African coast line,  which probably would not be a route chosen by the usual sim route planning programs, which might include oceanic waypoints as well.  I'm all for fantasy, but you shouldn't expect a sim to be able to perform flawlessly a route that it would never fly in the real world.

That said, I own the CRJ, but only flew one test circuit manually the night I got it, so I'm not gonna sit here and say mine is working properly, I have no idea yet.  if it can't fly a sid right that could be an issue (as long as the sid didn't contain a manual or vector portion by design)  maybe this weekend, I'll invest some time and do a flight over land and see if all the rage is true.

[GHarrall 494]

1 hour ago, Nuno Pinto said:

I'm not interested in the CRJ as it stands, so feel free to try any that you wish. Perhaps LPPT to LPLA, BUSEN DCT GUNTI DCT 39N020W DCT BAVAS H121 LM as i couldn't even fly the SID without the CRJ running away from the route.

I just tried the start of your route.

It flew the BUSE5P SID no problem.

The bigger issue I see here is that you have DCT GUNTI which is a leg of 280nm!

Its already known that they are working on long distance legs as it can mess up the LNAV tracking but 280nm is taking the Michael a bit.

In case it makes a difference, I will disclose that Im running Navigraph 1710 as my FMC database for the CRJ.

[GHarrall 494]

Im now on MONUR DCT GUNTI (280nm leg) bang on track. No issue even with the length of the leg.

[Nuno Pinto 1,397]

Portugal has no airways above FL240. That direct is absolutely normal.

Did you reach 3920N and it flew to BAVAS correctly afterwards?

 

EDIT: BUSE5P is the one i flew, the wind made me use RWY03 which is the most common situation here.

[GHarrall 494]

Just now, Nuno Pinto said:

Portugal has no airways above FL240. That direct is absolutely normal.

Did you reach 3920N and it flew to BAVAS correctly afterwards?

194nm until i hit GUNTI

It flew the SID properly by the way.

[GHarrall 494]

That direct leg may be normal but my point is its already known that the CRJ has had issues with long legs on LNAV. This is being worked on for the next patch. Even with this, the CRJ is currently bang on track for GUNTI

[GHarrall 494]

104nm from GUNTI. Slight turn to the right and then back left to correct. Back on track but an odd behavior.

[Egbert Drenth 250]

38 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

..realize that this route would be illegal in the real world, since the CRJ is only able to fly 50 miles offshore.

Oops, I think someone should call the SAS.
They fly from EKCH to EGLL/EGBB/EGCC/EGPH/EGPD/EGAA.... All destinations require 50nm+ flying overseas...

[ShawnG 1,823]

4 minutes ago, Egbert Drenth said:

Oops, I think someone should call the SAS.
They fly from EKCH to EGLL/EGBB/EGCC/EGPH/EGPD/EGAA.... All destinations require 50nm+ flying overseas...

With proper routing, all of those routes could be accomplished without being more than 50 miles from land.  Or, SAS may have made the space sacrifice necessary to install the life rafts, which bombardier's omission is the reason for the restriction.   Flying from portugal out to the azores is definitely not solveable with clever routing however.  Either way the point stands.  You should not naturally expect an aircraft that was never designed for long trips over water to deal with oceanic tracks and waypoints.  

[Nuno Pinto 1,397]

I should expect it to fly over 'oceanic' waypoints, specially when you can find them over land/lakes too. That's not an excuse for erratic behaviour of a simulator.

AND we are on a simulator, so illegal routes don't apply here, only if you want to. Also, there's no ETOPS requirement to fly to the Azores from Portugal, if the aircraft has range and instrumentation, it can fly the leg.

[ms2 184]

Precision: I don't have any contact with aerosoft and said what I think without any influence.

I make some flight in Norway, France, Italy, Germany Alpes... and Canada with this crj but never think to do a trans-oceanic flight because this is not the function of this kind of commuters... 

I shall try following days the zone Spain Portugal and Azores as you suggest.

Compare aircrafts with crj that don't exist today in the version P3dv4 is not totaly serious... Mine two addon's prefered in v3 are Dash8/400 and Airbus 320 but they don't exist today for v4...

As many peoples patiently I wait for... new versions to make a real comparaison.

Are you sure that there are no problems any more for nav in the sim v4 version ? 

Today in Canaries zone, I have missing waypoints in Atlantic south with a new Carenado aircraft... I don't said directly that this aircraft is bad... because a simulator is a addition of hunders addon's... Perhaps I have make a miss with old fsx addon's added from rikooo!

Reading Avsim, many peoples have problems with PMDG in v4, are those aircrafts bad ? Personnaly I don't have so kind of idea,

Just, let some time to devellopers to make their aircrafts and addon's beter for 64 bits. Simply it is unpossible to realise in one shot a perfect addon. 64 bits version is a kind baby, not a adult today. 

I´m very happy to see this baby crowing and forgett many great frustrations of "out of memory" the nightmare of 32 bits version.

[GHarrall 494]

1 hour ago, Nuno Pinto said:

I should expect it to fly over 'oceanic' waypoints, specially when you can find them over land/lakes too. That's not an excuse for erratic behaviour of a simulator.

AND we are on a simulator, so illegal routes don't apply here, only if you want to. Also, there's no ETOPS requirement to fly to the Azores from Portugal, if the aircraft has range and instrumentation, it can fly the leg.

It flew the route no problem. I completed the approach into LPLA. There was some erratic left / right turns during the long legs but it did correct itself so nothing that isn't already known or being worked on by the dev.

The SID at the start of the route was no problem either.

[JRBarrett 3,076]

There is nothing about the CRJ itself that would prevent it from flying long overwater routes, other than the fact that in typical airline configurations, no provision is made for the required life rafts because of limited space in the standard cabin configuration. The Challenger 850 and 870, which are the corporate versions of of the CRJ-200 and 700 do typically come equipped with life rafts, and can be, and are, used on overwater leg greater than 50 miles.

Neither airframe can make a transatlantic crossing without at least 1 fuel stop however, due to the limited range. Also, there is a limitation on the maximum size of the FMS navigation database in the real aircraft due to the amount of system memory in the FMS computer. Normally, operators use a database specific only to the region they operate in. No such limit exists in the Aerosoft database however.

Although a real airline CRJ would not fly from mainland Europe to the Azores, it should be able to handle that route in the sim. I'm setting up to try the flight from Lisbon to Lajes using current Active Sky weather to see how it goes.

[Chuck Dreier 75]

Sadly, my opinion is my $50 was not well sent.  I'm sure Aerosoft will eventually iron out the kinks but for now the 700/900 is uninstalled and a "down the road" aircraft to eventually return to.