My biggest pet peeve of this feelthere cockpit is the totally wrong-dimensioned  centre window post. It is way too thin. 

Other than what others have pointed out regarding fonts and some average texturing, the package seems somewhat interesting. Nice to see FT alive again (their ERJ145 for FS9 was awesome back in the day)

I'll be purchasing this next month and let the initial defects be surfaced and resolved.

Appreciate if we can get here initial thoughts about the product!

Bought it (175 - 195 since I fly the 195 IRL), some first impressions:

- Some MCDU pages are missing (like Flaps selection at TO and LDG, RTE send you to FPL, FIX page is incomplete)

-Start Up procedure is ok, couple of thing missing (some EICAS messages)

- AP is way too violent

- in TRS TO-3 is missing

- can't set the altimeters to STD: the click spot it's hard to find

- Anti Ice remains ON after TO and never turn off during flight.

- PFD/ND are a bit hard to read in some moments and some fonts overlaps

- VC model is too big and proportions are wrong (not too big deal for me)

- It's nice to hand fly

-FPS are great, really light on the sim.

- External model is super (even if on the 195 the 2R door is too big)

- Pitch during the Approach it's WAY to high (on the 195): at flare I was at almost 20° with Flap 5.

Hope to see some updates in the future to address some of these things, I think that 60$ it's a bit overpriced...for that money it should be better.

Does it have the Terrain Display on the ND?

Kind Regards

Patrick

5 minutes ago, PatC said:

Does it have the Terrain Display on the ND?

Kind Regards

Patrick

No, I forgot to mention it.

Do the v3 aircraft have steep approach capability for e.g. the likes of London City Airport? I think it is a real shame if they have not incorporated some functionality for this, akin to the Aerosoft A318, on account of the Embraer being one of the few jets using London City (in the guise of British Airways primarily at LCY).

Also, is the aircraft RNAV capable? I believe that I tried a few RNAV approaches with the previous version for P3D v4, which the product was not capable of following (e.g. RNAV into Kathmandu).

 

 

I paied but still waiting for "being processed ", they said it will take up to 5 hr....

Their old E190 use exactly the 170's aerodynamic and fmc data, gives a way to low LRC speed and too high take off trim, Also both E170 and 190 have very different N1/FF figure for LRC and M.78 cruise compare to realwolrd AOM table, I hope this time it will be better...

2 hours ago, francy25 said:

Bought it (175 - 195 since I fly the 195 IRL), some first impressions:

 

- in TRS TO-3 is missing

 

Ciao Francesco,

In TRS page of E175 TO3 is there and working,

I suppose you've tried the E195. Probably a bug to highlight to them 😉

Ciao

Just a thought here, but if some of these details are missing or not perfect as pointed out by our friends who fly the real bird, then perhaps its not the fullest max study level aircraft else we would be looking at a $140 plane like FSL or PMDG.  

Im all for high level systems fidelity to be as accurate as possible and hope for the best, but at a lower price point to save my wallet, I will accept slightly less so long as everything is functional  and works the way it is supposed to  for what is in there.   Judging from the preview beta vids done by RL pilots, its rather quite good, and reflects the real counterpart well in its flight dynamics, and systems.   I think its great we have an aircraft thats quite detailed other than a Boeing or Airbus for once.  Will get this come payday. 

Yikes $60 each for 170/190 and 175/195. That’s a little high, I was expecting around half that. Liveries also seem lacking at this time.

23 minutes ago, HighTowers said:

Just a thought here, but if some of these details are missing or not perfect as pointed out by our friends who fly the real bird, then perhaps its not the fullest max study level aircraft else we would be looking at a $140 plane like FSL or PMDG.  

Im all for high level systems fidelity to be as accurate as possible and hope for the best, but at a lower price point to save my wallet, I will accept slightly less so long as everything is functional  and works the way it is supposed to  for what is in there.   Judging from the preview beta vids done by RL pilots, its rather quite good, and reflects the real counterpart well in its flight dynamics, and systems.   I think its great we have an aircraft thats quite detailed other than a Boeing or Airbus for once.  Will get this come payday. 

Agree, It would be wonderful to have a "study" level rendition but I think that is not necessary: in the end, majority of the simmer just fly from A to B.

But some of the things that are missing (IMO) are part of what I consider the "minimum equipement" in a 60$ (I paid 68 €)  add-on, for this money I expect at least a VC that is correct in dimensions and proportions, high definition instruments (while here are not so HD), complete MCDU, and so on.

But apart from these elements, I think that it's nice add-on to have and a great aircraft to fly. And I hope that feelthere will continue to work on this plane to improve it!

53 minutes ago, pablo636 said:

Ciao Francesco,

In TRS page of E175 TO3 is there and working,

I suppose you've tried the E195. Probably a bug to highlight to them 😉

Ciao

Grazie,

I'll report it in their forums!

The VC looks weird, cartoonish,squashed together. Plus less than 6 repaints? Is FeelThere planning to fleece us (again) by selling repaints? I sure hope not.

42 minutes ago, HighTowers said:

Just a thought here, but if some of these details are missing or not perfect as pointed out by our friends who fly the real bird, then perhaps its not the fullest max study level aircraft else we would be looking at a $140 plane like FSL or PMDG.  

Though, if you want all four models you are looking at $120, so it is in the neighborhood. Too rich for my blood.

Also: E195 fuel tanks capacity is 13120Kg while I can only get 9330Kg: I highly suspect that they are using the same weights figures for the 190/195.

 

Oh,no, The aerodynamic is as bad as the old one.

Just did some quick test

LRC FL300, very typical

For E190, with 10200LB, the FMC gives me LRC for M.66, but AOM gives me M.72

manual Speed to M.72 the aircraft gose FF:1640PPH and N1 on 75.7

on AOM, for 50000kg weight, the FF should be 1056Kph(2330pph) N1 should be 83.5

 

For E170, with 82000LB, FMC LRC is M.68,AOM M.67, so that's OK

But, with M.68, FF GIVES 1200PPH. while manual gives 1756PPH under same condition.

and N1 as low as 77.2 rather than 83.2 on the AOM.

 

So.... as "good" as the old one.... that makes my fuel plan from AOM's SFP chart useless,  always overweight on landing....

I had backed up my original version aerodynamic tweak, I'll see if it works with the new one then....