Aerosoft CRJ worth it?

[GHarrall 494]

53 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

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.

It did handle it. I just flew it as outlined in previous posts.

[ShawnG 1,823]

2 hours 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.

to be honest,  the only source I had that it couldn't fly oceanic waypoints was you, and it appears from another user that that might be incorrect, or at least incorrect as of the latest patch.  I agree in general about the simulator bit, I do tons of illegal stuff in p3d-land myself.  The issue I have is your expectation that an aircraft will do anything other than it's real life counterpart.  by all means try whatever you want, but it's a bit unfair to trash a product simply because it doesn't do a route the real aircraft wouldn't fly.  

I also highly doubt that Portugal's flight requirements would allow an aircraft that has never been certified for ditching to fly a long overwater leg, but I am obviously not an expert on Portuguese aviation law, so I suppose I could be wrong.

[Mitch24 194]

16 hours ago, DEHowie said:

If your not interested in looking at failures etc i find it a very cool little jet to fly.

A lot of complaints come from people who have never learnt to fly and rely fully on autothrust then when they mess up the get frustrated at the jet.

When they fix the tracking issues im intigued what people want if they continue ro complain.

Having only come back to simming after a long break due to real flying travel etc the simming community has changed.

Numerous complaints because people want to be spoon fed, the inability to deal with basic things like flying aircraft without autothrust and the immediate criticism of any product without it even if accurate to reality.

The placement of PMDG etc on a perch of perfection which to anyone with real jet time knows how great that they are they are far from perfection.

The CRJ is a great little jet "pilots" like to fly and from the 10 or so flights i have done is reflected nicely in the sim. The fact that people dont know how to fly it is not warrent for criticism of the manufacturer but only of themselves.

Next time you fly the PMDG 737 or FSLABS A320 turn off the Autothrust they are just aeroplanes. You never know you may just learn something.

In short id buy it again in a heartbeat.

I actually agree with this statement. When I voice my complaints about the CRJ it's ONLY about the Nav issues! Which is a big deal with any Airplane add-on! Without the NAV, you pretty much have to hand-fly everything.

Other than that, it's a great add-on!  

[nealmac 260]

6 hours 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.

Just flying that route now, there's a couple of sharp turns on that SID and I thought it might go haywire on me, but I have to say it handled it pretty well. It's a bit of a mystery as to why you and some other people are having problems. 

[nealmac 260]

I have to say, this is a very boring flight lol.

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

1 hour ago, ShawnG said:

 (...) but it's a bit unfair to trash a product simply because it doesn't do a route the real aircraft wouldn't fly.

I also highly doubt that Portugal's flight requirements would allow an aircraft that has never been certified for ditching to fly a long overwater leg, but I am obviously not an expert on Portuguese aviation law, so I suppose I could be wrong.

I'm not trashing it. I said it was unreliable based on the experience i had with it. I don't even own it so it's fairly limited to be honest.

Portuguese laws are as strict as any other, so if it applies in other countries it would be applied here as well. Lots of aircraft types fly in the islands or to/from them, i don't think all of them can ditch. But that's a whole other subject.

 

If you're managing to fly these legs, obviously the issue will be with the CRJ my friend has installed and i will stop talking about it (and most specially because i don't own it like i said above). It never flew them correctly and i'm assuming too much already. Sounds like it needs a full uninstall/reinstall to make sure and i'll pass this onto him.

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

3 minutes ago, nealmac said:

I have to say, this is a very boring flight lol.

That's why nobody tests things properly :P

It was the first one i did and found issues straight away with the release version.

[nealmac 260]

18 minutes ago, Nuno Pinto said:

That's why nobody tests things properly :P

It was the first one i did and found issues straight away.

Guess what? When I reached waypoint GUNTI I had the LNAV problem. That's the first time I've had that problem since 1.0.0.5 hot fix. So now I'm really stumped as to what the problem is.

[nealmac 260]

I used HDG mode until I reached BAVAS and then the LNAV seemed to work ok again.

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

Hans said there's still a few things to iron out, so, once again, i'm confident he'll look into it and fix them definitely.

[GHarrall 494]

54 minutes ago, nealmac said:

Guess what? When I reached waypoint GUNTI I had the LNAV problem. That's the first time I've had that problem since 1.0.0.5 hot fix. So now I'm really stumped as to what the problem is.

If you check back on my experience with this route there were some issues with those long legs. Some weird left / right s turns but they eventually sorted themselves out and got back on track. This is a known issue with long legs and is being looked at for the next patch.

The SID flew perfectly.

so just to be clear.....the orIginal poster who complained about this route and trashed the product doesn't even own it and has "limited experience" with it?????

 

[b1bmsgt 206]

23 hours ago, Mitch24 said:

It's called a: "One-man-work on it in my spare time" show

I have one word for that...

 

Virtualcol

 

Cheap, frame rate friendly, and what features it has, they actually seem to work!

 

JMHO, of course! Not everyone's cup of tea, to be sure!

 

Russ

[NickJZX 17]

This is definitely something I'll be keeping my eye on, despite the mixed reviews it looks like something that I'd really enjoy flying.

[fluffyflops 1,848]

7 hours ago, ShawnG said:

I also highly doubt that Portugal's flight requirements would allow an aircraft that has never been certified for ditching to fly a long overwater leg, but I am obviously not an expert on Portuguese aviation law, so I suppose I could be wrong.

A application for a temporary air worthiness certificate for the overflight,  landing and ppr permit.  used for delivery flights or flights to the dessert for storage after alot of the equipment has been ripped out to make sure the bank doesn't get hold of it.

Unfortunately an aircraft such as the aerosoft crj that is riddled with bugs like the Crj,  a sensible ANAC officer would refuse the application right off the bat.   It helps to be able to fly in line to the destination 

[ShezA 176]

7 hours ago, Nuno Pinto said:

I'm not trashing it. I said it was unreliable based on the experience i had with it. I don't even own it so it's fairly limited to be honest.

Portuguese laws are as strict as any other, so if it applies in other countries it would be applied here as well. Lots of aircraft types fly in the islands or to/from them, i don't think all of them can ditch. But that's a whole other subject.

 

If you're managing to fly these legs, obviously the issue will be with the CRJ my friend has installed and i will stop talking about it (and most specially because i don't own it like i said above). It never flew them correctly and i'm assuming too much already. Sounds like it needs a full uninstall/reinstall to make sure and i'll pass this onto him.

You don't own it....and you are thrashing the product?

For some of the users having issues, try and reinstall with a complete delete of all folders. The aerosoft forum has posts on this. Then install the latest build and see. It certainly works well enough for me but there are certainly some items which are WIP.

1. LNAV refinement, turns are still being worked on
2. HUD display issue
3. GSX door recognition
4. Frame rate fluctuation, this one I have reported on seems to be related to some system calculation which is occurring every few seconds
5. Minor issues with FMS display

I am going to fly that route above and report back too.

Shez