Another rushed product. This time from Carenado!

[Skywolf 992]

I never buy or recommend Carenado

[n4gix 4,947]

One of the most overlooked commands just may be responsible for the failure to start. Moving the tank control should accomplish the same task as reported above...

...but usually a quick Ctrl-Shift-F4 will open the fuel petcocks and allow the fuel to flow!

[n4gix 4,947]

4 hours ago, virtuali said:

Maybe I'm following the wrong YouTubers but, it's fun how even this one used some terms like "put the mixture to Idle" and "Leaning the Propellor"...

Yeah, that sort of grated on my nerves a bit too... <sigh>

[bobcat999 8,444]

5 hours ago, Skywolf said:

I never buy or recommend Carenado

OK!  But to who? 

Not everyone is after a study level aircraft.  I really don't think they are as bad as they are made out to be, but some people seem to take great pride in having some kind of high level flightsim snobbery because not every button works as it should. 
They seem to think trashing Carenado gets them some kind of serious simmer badge of honour, but we all know what to expect from Carenado, so the bashing gets a bit tedious really - like virtue posturing.

The acid test?  They seem to be doing alright, they are prolific in releases, and the visual models are superb whilst flying nice enough for the type of people who buy them.

I bought quite a few Carenado/Alebeo aircraft for FSX and was fine with them.  The Apache was a blast and I loved it - flew it everywhere! 

If other people get enjoyment from them, why do other people try to trash them to try to claim some kind of flight simmer higher ground?  It doesn't wash with me.

Edited September 12, 2020 by bobcat999
Spelling

[Cyrex1984 175]

Carenado= great visuals. Bad sounds,Bad system simulation. 

[deetee 164]

Am I the only one lamenting the fact that Carenado did not include an integrated checklist,  which personally I think is a great feature of MSFS? Was it just too hard, or is it not possible with the current SDK?

[FrankR409 514]

19 minutes ago, deetee said:

Am I the only one lamenting the fact that Carenado did not include an integrated checklist,  which personally I think is a great feature of MSFS? Was it just too hard, or is it not possible with the current SDK?

In case you, or anyone else needs one, this is the check list I used.  I am also wondering why it would have been left out, but it’s all good now.

https://sportysacademy.com/files/2016/02/Cessna-182T-G1000-Checklist.pdf

 

[deetee 164]

6 minutes ago, FrankR409 said:

In case you, or anyone else needs one, this is the check list I used.  I am also wondering why it would have been left out, but it’s all good now.

https://sportysacademy.com/files/2016/02/Cessna-182T-G1000-Checklist.pdf

 

Appreciate it Frank, but my point was that they did not use the new functionality in MSFS, which is a real shame.

[Chock 17,769]

The OP video is exactly why you don't blindly listen to reviews on youtube coming from idiotic people who claim to know what they're talking about. Instead, go for the ones from people who actually bother to be at least a little conscientious in their research.

First up, he clearly had not read the included documentation, which if you're going to do a 'review' where you make a pronouncement about whether you think something is worth it or not, is not only the fairest way to go about it, but also prevents you from looking like a complete twot. For example:

If he had read the four manuals included, he would have known about this feature you get when you click on the Cessna logo on the yoke, and let's be honest, you could probably find that by accident anyway if, unlike that 'reviewer' you're not a complete dimwit. Not to mention the possibility of creating an electrical surge to the avionics from the magnetos by not having bothered to read the correct start procedure:

Which, among other things, lets you do all this externally, despite that 'reviewer' claiming otherwise:

So, we know what that 'review', and the opinionated nonsense expressed in it, is worth now don't we? But more importantly, if you don't own this product, and have merely watched a video by some self-appointed expert who can't even be bothered to do some basic research before doing a review which makes him look like a twonk, then you should probably not adopt his idiotic opinion for yourself as though it is fact, then start spreading it around with threads like this one.

 

Edited September 12, 2020 by Chock

[desbean 357]

"Another rushed product. This time from Carenado!"

 

Funny how a thread with this title convinces me I would like to have the product.

[Novation 534]

I've had a few Carenado AC's over the years and they do exactly what I want them to. I'm not into wasting my time (others can do what they please 😜) with so called study level aircraft. I'm happy to have a well modeled, nice to fly plane that does, more or less, what a small GA plane would do, given that I'm sat at a desk, with a basic HOTAS.

Thanks for the concern though OP 😙

[RustyFlyer 182]

This may sound a bit trivial but, um, stranger things have happened: I am simply wondering if he forgot to open the fuel tank selector when he initially tried his C&D start 😲😯😡.

[hangar 658]

To be fair about the YouTuber in question, I don't see his channel any different than the vast majority of similar type gaming channels out there where someone who is good at keeping folks entertained for 20 minutes at a time gets some regular followers who actually pay attention. It's no different than anywhere else in life...your popularity within groups is not typically based upon your competence, unfortunately, but rather your ability to keep people interested in what you have to say and exactly how you say it. This is why they are called "influencers" and those who are best at it get paid lump sums to livestream and create sales for the game publishers.

Youtube is largely about marketing and entertainment and much less about fact than most people are aware... and unless you already are aware of all the data yourself you likely have no real way of knowing which Youtuber's have done their research and know their stuff and which ones have not and do not. Even then it's largely opinion anyway and people make dumb mistakes all the time. Heck, even doctor's with their 170+ IQ's are out there making mistakes every single day.

This guy doesn't have alot of follower's and I know that he's walked away for a long period once before because of all the hate out here. I think this guy is just doing what he is passionate about and enjoys sharing his flightsim opinions regardless of not putting in ample time/research before posting... but how many of us hobbyists aren't guilty of that?

Unless someone has been watching YouTube for a long time and is fairly astute, then they may not yet have learned to take much of what they see and hear (no matter who it is) with a large grain of salt since it's nearly always just someone's opinion.

I think YT videos are best used to either extract very specific bits of data, or just to be watched with a slice a pizza in-hand. You can't base a purchase on the opinion of merely 1 YT'er without being called foolish, IMO.

Edited September 12, 2020 by hangar

[overspeed3 410]

Watched about 6 episodes of Star Trek Picard - but gave up after a while:  Plot was way too complicated... Apparently, the TV producers never heard of the KISS concept...

[Chock 17,769]

8 minutes ago, hangar said:

This is why they are called "influencers" and those who are best at it get paid lump sums to livestream and create sales for the game publishers.

Being able to influence things works both ways; anyone who publishes videos which might do that should be aware of this, and be cautious to remain accurate in what they say.

Stating that a product doesn't do this or that and doesn't include this feature (when it quite clearly does if you read the instructions) then pronouncing because of what you incorrectly believe to be the case, that the product is not worth it, is not just making you look like a twonk, it is affecting someone else's business by misrepresenting their product. You can 'influence' yourself all the way into a loss of earnings court case with that kind of sloppy reviewing.

Edited September 12, 2020 by Chock