Aerosoft CRJ preview pictures

[Car147 2,279]

A buy for me for sure.

[tweekz 2,165]

9 minutes ago, Car147 said:

A buy for me for sure.

I've always had a heart for those short range planes. They seem more adventurous and still have that majestic (no pun intended) feeling of airliners.

And on the other side, they are always fitting better into my schedule of free time. 😄

[JasonPC 173]

I hope the thing can follow the stupid magenta line this time. But I will definitely wait to buy this. I'm not going to be fooled three times.

Edited December 16, 2020 by JasonPC

[Adrian123 1,015]

Fly around in MSFS with all that junk and say the CRJ isn't worthy? That's Orange man stuff. 😉

[The Flight Level 2,113]

4 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

This might be the first aircraft I buy for the sim.

Took the words right out of my mouth! Those screens shots are looking very good in my eyes! I hope Aerosoft really nails this one.

[Ricardo41 5,949]

How Aerosoft releases go:

1. Hyped up release, promoted in the Aerosoft forums. Lots of pre-release posts from M.Kok. 

2. Release and disappointment 

3. The blame game begins. 

4. Abuse is heaped on Hans Hartmann

5. Gaslighting begins - remember "Wingflexgate"?

6. People swear they'll never buy another Aerosoft product again. 

7. The caravan moves on.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

[Car147 2,279]

Nice to see some positive posts.

[simon747 185]

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

How Aerosoft releases go:

1. Hyped up release, promoted in the Aerosoft forums. Lots of pre-release posts from M.Kok. 

2. Release and disappointment 

3. The blame game begins. 

4. Abuse is heaped on Hans Hartmann

5. Gaslighting begins - remember "Wingflexgate"?

6. People swear they'll never buy another Aerosoft product again. 

7. The caravan moves on.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

Well, I am prepared to work with them on an evolving first airliner add-on in an EVOLVING platform.  The CRJ is not an entirely new add-on, so alot of issues will have been addressed over the years.  I have never experienced issues with either the Aerosoft Airbus or CRJ that caused me problems even on first release.   Flight Simulator has issues that need working on, I have ways around those issues, as there are many benefits to the new platform.  I am pleased they are introducing an airliner that will fly some shorter routes that will be updated as things move along with a simulator that seems to get updated quite a bit also.   Showing some flexibility seems to be the key to enjoying all this new simulator has to offer.

Edited December 17, 2020 by simon747

[BigDee 119]

Spoiler

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

How Aerosoft releases go:

1. Hyped up release, promoted in the Aerosoft forums. Lots of pre-release posts from M.Kok. 

2. Release and disappointment 

3. The blame game begins. 

4. Abuse is heaped on Hans Hartmann

5. Gaslighting begins - remember "Wingflexgate"?

6. People swear they'll never buy another Aerosoft product again. 

7. The caravan moves on.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

Many of those points fit perfectly to FS2020. It`s easy to get misled when seeing good looking pictures of a well modeled plane, but no, Asobo did an excellent job teaching it`s not only about graphics.

So, Aerosoft are the ones that didn`t adapt FMC in some planes, they are officially "not intented offering professionalism", as it costs roughly 20 000$ per customer and on the other hand PMDG has not started working on its plane, because the official FS2020 editor just cannot simply handle it. 

 

So people, buy it, buy, buy, buy. 

 

[omarsmak30 4,068]

8 minutes ago, BigDee said:

PMDG has not started working on its plane, because the official FS2020 editor just cannot simply handle it. 

Did they explicitly mentioned that somewhere that FS2020 editor can't handle it? 

[tup61 1,564]

15 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

This might be the first aircraft I buy for the sim.

Same here. I'd rather have a Dash 8 Q400 but this might do for the time being.

Afaik the CRJ falls in the same category as the Q400 when it comes to the amount of options, complexity of the cockpit, etc. GA's are nice (specially in MSFS) but often too simple to handle (from c&d to c&d) while big airliners are too complicated: not that I can't handle them but I never have the idea I can MASTER an Airbus 320 or Boeing 747 completely. There always are options and buttons I don't 'get'. In the Q400 I could understand and manage and control and master everything. It has the right amount of buttons for my brain. 😎 I think and hope that also goes for this CRJ. (Right?)

Besides, I like the Aerosoft way of doing things more than the PMDG way: I prefer the 'daily systems' to work as they should and am not interested in failures or systems you'd only use once every few years... if ever.

[Scottoest 1,561]

3 hours ago, BigDee said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Many of those points fit perfectly to FS2020. It`s easy to get misled when seeing good looking pictures of a well modeled plane, but no, Asobo did an excellent job teaching it`s not only about graphics.

So, Aerosoft are the ones that didn`t adapt FMC in some planes, they are officially "not intented offering professionalism", as it costs roughly 20 000$ per customer and on the other hand PMDG has not started working on its plane, because the official FS2020 editor just cannot simply handle it. 

 

So people, buy it, buy, buy, buy. 

 

Pretty sure PMDG never said they hadn't started on the NG3 - only that it was really slow going.  And I think that's more because they are waiting for tools that will allow them to port over their older code that uses things like GD+, since it would be prohibitive to redo everything from scratch with new tools when they can just wait for that legacy support.

Aerosoft on the other hand built the CRJ from scratch with the tools MSFS primarily uses, and a lot of help from Asobo in clearing roadblocks.  Mathijs mentions actively exchanging messages and files with Asobo developers late at night on Saturday and Sunday nights.

[Los 416]

4 hours ago, tup61 said:

Besides, I like the Aerosoft way of doing things more than the PMDG way: I prefer the 'daily systems' to work as they should and am not interested in failures or systems you'd only use once every few years... if ever.

This is it exactly! I have the PMDG 737NGX sitting next to AS A320in P3D. Never enabled any failures on the 737 - so I paid extra for options I never use.

Had “shiny new car dealer floor syndrome” wanting all the options instead of thinking, do I need them?

Not doing it again in MFS, so far only bought the Carenado 182 because it’s so versatile, fast enough, and no guilty feeling of flying just to the airport next door.

This is looking promising, but all these months without airliners (by personal choice) has flipped me to GA simmer, not sure if I’ll go back l.

[threexgreen 3,139]

1 hour ago, Scottoest said:

Aerosoft on the other hand built the CRJ from scratch with the tools MSFS primarily uses, and a lot of help from Asobo in clearing roadblocks.  Mathijs mentions actively exchanging messages and files with Asobo developers late at night on Saturday and Sunday nights.

I think there is a misconception that it's only Aerosoft who have full access and are working with the developers. Mr. Randazzo had said several times that PMDG are in close and frequent contact with Asobo. He actually posted on the Aerosoft forums that if it weren't for Covid, PMDG would have moved half their staff to France for two months. Mr. Kok also said the reason why PMDG are taking longer is not because of a lack of access.

You're right about PMDG's development process for MSFS, it's slower than anticipated but work on the NG3 hasn't stopped.

[marsman2020 1,310]

7 hours ago, simon747 said:

The CRJ is not an entirely new add-on, so alot of issues will have been addressed over the years. 

Aerosoft has said that there is very little in common between the MSFS version and the past versions.