45 minutes ago, cmorg said:

Also, if you're using the in-game ATC...thoughts and prayers...

I have literally never done a flight without ingame ATC. To be sure, it leaves much to be desired, but if the ATC starts acting weird, I just turn it off, i.e., "cancel IFR".

I consider all the other option available to be sub-par in terms of UI, ease of use, realism of voices, etc. 

2 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

I consider all the other option available to be sub-par in terms of UI, ease of use, realism of voices, etc. 

I absolutely understand that.  The trade-offs are quality of life and functionality/reliability.  I love Pilot2ATC, but it does suffer in all the areas you mentioned, but it's reliable, flexible, and functional.  I also love VATSIM, but again, it suffers in other areas too.  Everyone has different priorities which affect which areas they are willing to make compromises.  If there was a perfect solution, we'd all be using it.

My initial thoughts are very positive, seemingly more so than the general consensus. First off, whoever created the documentation for this aircraft deserves a standing ovation. The CRJ is one of the few aircraft where the manuals are genuinely helpful, logically organized, and don't feel like an afterthought. The only documentation I've seen that surpasses this belongs to aircraft costing three times as much. I had a fantastic flight from Munich to Cologne while referencing the tutorial flight document. It has been a while since I've used an aircraft with rear-mounted engines, so my approach to runway 32R at Cologne was slightly off vertical profile while I became accustomed to how much trim is needed when adjusting the throttle. You should pass on this aircraft if you enjoy setting a cruising altitude and leaving your sim on a cross-country flight; this is an aircraft that demands attention at all stages of flight and is supremely rewarding to fly. The overall framerate is similar to the Fly By Wire A320, though the CRJ subjectively seems to have a lower overall frame time variation. I didn't notice any oddities during the flight, but I haven't tested approach mode on autopilot yet since I tried to hand fly as much as possible to familiarize myself with the flight characteristics of the CRJ.

P.S. I got a chuckle from the Easter egg contained in the SkyCam.

This can be used for help to enter the inbuilt flightplanners flightplan into the FMS. Flight Plan Display • Microsoft Flight Simulator

13 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

I have literally never done a flight without ingame ATC. To be sure, it leaves much to be desired, but if the ATC starts acting weird, I just turn it off, i.e., "cancel IFR".

I consider all the other option available to be sub-par in terms of UI, ease of use, realism of voices, etc. 

I totally agree. I really wanted to like Pilot2ATC and PF3. But both have horrible Uis, and when using VR this is pretty important. I already have a Navigraph Window hovering, I really don't want to plaster the whole Cockpit with multiple windows. PF3 has the best features but the usability with about 50 hotkeys is simply a joke. You cannot even change any of the options while flying and always have to file a FP first. This is like going back to the 90s. P2ATC is a bit better but the UI also sucks. Way too big and ugly. Speaking with the ATC is nice, but it also costs 60€ without even supporting emergencies. 

I have no idea why they don't support a similar UI as the default ATC, since X-Plane 11 did the same so it is not even a new idea. 

Vatsim also has drawbacks. I really don't want the hassle of dealing with controllers until the AP and nav problems on MSFS are fixed and I don't have to fight the planes all the time. Also coverage is much lower then for the default ATC, which is logical. 

So I realized that the default ATC is not THAT bad compared to the alternatives. I really hope they improve it in the future. 

 

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

To me, not being able to load an MSFS generated flightplan, without having to engage in some cumbersome work around, is a 100% deal breaker. 

Not sure why Aerosoft can't what the WT group can do. 

In addition, I always use default ATC, so I need to be able to at least - the WT CJ4 mod does this without any problems - to "sync back" the flightplan to MSFS.

Because they can't access MSFS flightplan nor the native AIRAC data of MSFS from WASM as they mentioned in that mega large preview thread. Nevertheless, they mentioned that it will be added as soon the SDK allows that, same goes for weather radar, traffic radar and the rain effect.

2 hours ago, regis9 said:

If you build a flight plan in Simbrief and import it into both MSFS and the CRJ you should have matching plans without having to manually enter it.  

Does Simbrief use the most recent navdata (as MSFS does) or do you need to pay for that? 

4 minutes ago, tyrodes said:

Does Simbrief use the most recent navdata (as MSFS does) or do you need to pay for that? 

Simbrief by default uses an older AIRAC, but you can unlock the up-to-date AIRACs in SimBrief with a Navigraph subscription.

I am curious, how many copies did Aerosoft sell? Any guesses? 😄

9 minutes ago, tyrodes said:

Does Simbrief use the most recent navdata (as MSFS does) or do you need to pay for that? 

Nope, it currently uses AIRAC cycle 1903 which is from a couple of years ago, unless you have a Navigraph subscription in which case it can use whatever one you've got. This is why I said it needs to be able to use the default flight planner, because selling something for a sim which cannot use that sim's default systems, but even worse, is reliant on an unrelated external website's goodwill, and potentially also reliant on a subscription from a fourth party in order to work, is simply not on, it's really shoddy in fact.

Don't get me wrong here, the product itself is great; it flies well, looks great and there is nothing stopping you from manually keying in a flight plan if you know what you are doing, but to have it reliant on two external resources, one of which you have to pay additional money for to be able to use in an up to date form, is outrageously poor behaviour by a business.

1 hour ago, kakihara123 said:

 PF3 has the best features but the usability with about 50 hotkeys is simply a joke. You cannot even change any of the options while flying and always have to file a FP first. This is like going back to the 90s. P2ATC is a bit better but the UI also sucks. Way too big and ugly. Speaking with the ATC is nice, but it also costs 60€ without even supporting emergencies. 

 

 

I use at the most 3 or 4 hotkeys, two of which are assigned to my Joystick. You can skip waypoints while flying, do a direct to, ask for higher or lower altitudes, etc. I never fly without PF3 and I have tried all the ATC programs and even been a beta tester on 2 of them. 

Has anyone been able to do an RNAV, or ILS approach down to the runway yet?

I am surprised this thing can not use the basic flight planning of world page,  which you can set up prior to flight, but does not make it into the jet.

The VFR flight map does not carry their NAV either, which is nice to use...

Lastly I am bummed out, they were serving sandwiches in the back yesterday during my flight, and nobody brought me one to the cockpit. 🙂 

5 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I use at the most 3 or 4 hotkeys, two of which are assigned to my Joystick. You can skip waypoints while flying, do a direct to, ask for higher or lower altitudes, etc. I never fly without PF3 and I have tried all the ATC programs and even been a beta tester on 2 of them. 

Do you use that VCP Feature? I don't like to automate everything. How do you declare and emergency (I do fly with random failures) if you don't use the hotkey? And do you fly in VR?

Requesting altitudes alone needs 18 hotkeys since you always have to use a modifier + numbers. I mean that is close to what MSFS does, but still more convoluted without any advantage. 

PF3 didn't even recognize my Warthog. Maybe there is a way to assign buttons via a config file or something but it  I don't want to assign button on it anyway because of the heading bug. And those button that do not cause the bug are already used in the sim. 

1 hour ago, omarsmak30 said:

Because they can't access MSFS flightplan nor the native AIRAC data of MSFS from WASM as they mentioned in that mega large preview thread. Nevertheless, they mentioned that it will be added as soon the SDK allows that, same goes for weather radar, traffic radar and the rain effect.

I am pretty sure an aircraft can incorporate both the new JS/HTML code and WASM and pass data between the two.

If Aerosoft wants to prioritize protecting IP over providing useful features to their customers (by incorporating a small % of the new code to do very specific things like load the flight plan or interact with terrain and weather data) that is a choice they are free to make, but I think their characterization of things as "not possible" is a bit of a stretch.

5 minutes ago, kakihara123 said:

Do you use that VCP Feature? I don't like to automate everything. How do you declare and emergency (I do fly with random failures) if you don't use the hotkey? And do you fly in VR?

Requesting altitudes alone needs 18 hotkeys since you always have to use a modifier + numbers. I mean that is close to what MSFS does, but still more convoluted without any advantage. 

PF3 didn't even recognize my Warthog. Maybe there is a way to assign buttons via a config file or something but it  I don't want to assign button on it anyway because of the heading bug. And those button that do not cause the bug are already used in the sim. 

I don't declare emergencies, but but there is a key that brings up all the hotkeys that are working in the frequency you are tuned to. So you just look up the one that you want like, 4 for emergency ( just making that up cuase I never use it) and you have declared an emergency. I use FSUIPC to assign the keypresses I use all the time to my joystick. I never use VR, tried it twice and hated it.