Based on my experience with the P3D version of the CRJ, it won’t be “study level”  in the sense of simulating system failures, but it will be in the sense that users will have to follow checklists and proper preflight preparation to insure that everything works as expected. Example: if you forget to engage the stab trim computers before takeoff, the autopilot will not engage. If you neglect to arm the thrust reversers before landing, they will not deploy when commanded etc.

9 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

Based on my experience with the P3D version of the CRJ, it won’t be “study level”  in the sense of simulating system failures, but it will be in the sense that users will have to follow checklists and proper preflight preparation to insure that everything works as expected. Example: if you forget to engage the stab trim computers before takeoff, the autopilot will not engage. If you neglect to arm the thrust reversers before landing, they will not deploy when commanded etc.

I think that's what Aerosoft said already.  They said their CRJ for MSFS is very high fidelity in simulating day to day normal operations.  But it won't simulate emergencies or system failures.

20 hours ago, fogboundturtle said:

 

it has a hypnotic nose bobbing up and down thing going on in the climb

11 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I think that's what Aerosoft said already.  They said their CRJ for MSFS is very high fidelity in simulating day to day normal operations.  But it won't simulate emergencies or system failures.

i liked their logic there, under advice from real world pilots - failures are so rare it's not worth the coding time and additional cost

i'm fine with that, I have no interest in simulating failures

I appreciate that's very much personal preference, and some people will get particular enjoyment out of such a feature, but I don't believe the intention is for MSFS to be a platform where people can simulate real world failures and ops like a LevelD sim at the cost of being accessible and reasonably priced

imo P3D is the best platform for people who want that - it has incredibly detailed aircraft systems with less focus on the scenery, graphics and immersion we get with MSFS

Nice video.  I am wondering how this improves on the WT version of the CJ4 - a quick view suggests that the existing mod might be at least as good as this for a small jet.  But it does look very nice.

Edited March 3, 20215 yr by Paul_Yorks

38 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

The real CRJ can download external flight plans via ACARS if the airline subscribes to that service, but it will only give the departure, destination, and enroute waypoints. The SID, STAR and approach always have to be manually entered by the pilot.

Yes that was my point, sub to ACARS and even then you need to enter the right SID/STAR and for that you need charts and to know how to input them. FMS are not there as a decoration or somthing thats magicaly filled in for you. SID and STAR can be longer than a route on short hopes.

I was under the impression that all the flightplan were done by the airline company for each the of the flight. The pilot then review the FP with the crew . 

9 minutes ago, Paul_Yorks said:

Nice video.  I am wondering how this improves on the WT version of the CJ4 - a quick view suggests that the existing mod might be at least as good as this for a small jet.  But it does look very nice.

The Proline 21 FMS and autopilot is more advanced than the Proline 4 in the CRJ. Full VNAV in the CJ, and the ability to display charts on the MFD. The CJ4 can do RNP and WAAS RNAV approaches, while the CRJ cannot.  

Some characteristics are very similar however, such as the requirement to manually control thrust and airspeed in cruise and descent. The FMS and flight displays have a similar “look and feel” in both aircraft because they are both Rockwell Collins designs.

26 minutes ago, EGLD said:

it has a hypnotic nose bobbing up and down thing going on in the climb

Just watched it! Definite rhythmic up and down! 

11 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

I was under the impression that all the flightplan were done by the airline company for each the of the flight. The pilot then review the FP with the crew . 

Flight plans typically are done by the airline’s dispatch department. The pilots will have either a paper or electronic copy of the full flight plan for review. In the CRJ, the company flight plan can be downloaded into the FMS via ACARS, but the pilot will still have to manually enter the departure and arrival. Takeoff runway may not be known until the pilots are in the aircraft and call for clearance, and there is always the possibility that ATC may give an amended clearance changing the SID or the enroute portion. Landing runway and approach usually won’t be known until the pilots are in contact with ATC at the destination airport.

Edited March 3, 20215 yr by JRBarrett

12 hours ago, WestAir said:

IMHO it's impossible to simulate a complex aircraft system without simulating failures. An example on the PMDG 737 series is when you sit on the ramp with the doors open in the hot Phoenix AZ sun. By the time you're ready to take off you'll get a MASTER CAUTION and a ZONE TEMP light in one of the cabins. This little warning caused havoc with new simmers who didn't know why they were getting alerts, but if you simulate the entire bleed air system, the ambient temps and open doors MUST give you this failure. Period.

I'm a little amazed when I notice that the PMDG marketing talk manages to convince customers that incorrect system behavior is supposedly a consequence of the 'high degree of fidelity' of their simulated systems...
PMDG is just really, really good at selling stories on top of their detailed, beautifully modelled, expensive and (mostly) accurate aircraft.
Stories = emotions = sales

Hot outside temperatures and open doors alone should not cause the air in the supply ducts to exceed 90°C.
In fact, it's often the opposite - where cold weather require lots of warm air to heat up the cabin the first few moments you turn on the packs. If the temp selectors are set too high, the air temp in the supply ducts will surge and exceed the 90° threshold triggering the ZONE TEMP light.
 

My post is absolutely not targeted at you personally as I know you were simply looking for an example to illustrate your point but simply wanted to mention that even PMDG is not always right, even when their big boss himself told you so.
I do agree with your opinion that a detailed system simulation should get influenced by elements outside the purely scripted programming.

Regards,
Sylvain

1 hour ago, Sylle said:

I'm a little amazed when I notice that the PMDG marketing talk manages to convince customers that incorrect system behavior is supposedly a consequence of the 'high degree of fidelity' of their simulated systems...
PMDG is just really, really good at selling stories on top of their detailed, beautifully modelled, expensive and (mostly) accurate aircraft.
Stories = emotions = sales

Hot outside temperatures and open doors alone should not cause the air in the supply ducts to exceed 90°C.
In fact, it's often the opposite - where cold weather require lots of warm air to heat up the cabin the first few moments you turn on the packs. If the temp selectors are set too high, the air temp in the supply ducts will surge and exceed the 90° threshold triggering the ZONE TEMP light.
 

My post is absolutely not targeted at you personally as I know you were simply looking for an example to illustrate your point but simply wanted to mention that even PMDG is not always right, even when their big boss himself told you so.
I do agree with your opinion that a detailed system simulation should get influenced by elements outside the purely scripted programming.

Regards,
Sylvain

Oh absolutely! I imagine they've sold me on several lies, and I probably havent bought the last. 😂

Excellent marketing for sure. FSLabs and FlyTheMaddog too.

Edited March 3, 20215 yr by WestAir

I am thankful for PMDG rather than a couple of people posting here. 

Not about being thankful or not Manny but rather about setting expectations right... 😉

S.

35 minutes ago, Sylle said:

Not about being thankful or not Manny but rather about setting expectations right... 😉

S.

Yup. It would be incorrect and even churlish to suggest that PMDG etc have not made some impressive products, but there's no denying there's definitely a bit of Emperor's New Clothes going on from a lot of people who praise everything they do.