Opinions on the CRJ and Aerosoft

[FS++ 707]

 

In case MCE users missed that.

It's certainly one of the planes worth multi-crewing. And we did just that with this plane. Initially in FSX, then P3D and now MSFS.

<media> 

</media>

[MarkW 1,490]

1 hour ago, Vlad747 said:

Mark,

Do you have a FLIGHT_MODEL.CFG?

Not sure. Everything default and I calibrate with FSUIPC. 

[Vlad747 4]

See if you have flight_model.cfg file here:
SimObjects\Airplanes\ and look for the CRJ

If you have it we can adjust trim sensitivity. The FSUPIC cannot do it, we need to change some values to reduce that high sensitivity inside flight_model.cfg file. If is hidden we are out of luck.

Let me know.

[Prpn 366]

It is not study level and it is also not realistic for normal day to day operations. I say this as a rated and current pilot on them.

Looks like a CRJ from the outside. Most of the inside as well. The displays are wrong and often hard to read. They have been shown what is wrong with different text sizes, placing, scaling with the help of side by side pictures but are not interested in improving that. Engine start sequence is wrong, performance is wrong, many many issues with internal calculations like fuel remaining, estimated times over waypoints or at arrival, incorrect VNAV calculations, missing VNAV info in the MFD VNAV window, same problems with direct to creating ghost waypoints that have been in the addon since the first FSX CRJ X version, LNAV still questionable, you can open reverse thrust in flight...

The list goes on. If you have no clue of what a real CRJ should look and function like, it is a passable addon. But it definitely is not what they claim it to be.

As for support, I am not a fan. They shut down a lot of topics before the question is answered, often their moderators do not know what they are talking about so they don't understand what is being asked and just tell people to read the manual and close the topic. They are often unwilling to acknowledge any issues exist because it must be your setup as "tens of thousands of others don't report this issue" and BAM, topic closed. They don't think support right after a major update is important enough to sacrifice one or two hours over the weekend for. So they will drop an update with a massive addon breaking issue on a Friday and then just ignore the forums for the weekend and get angry about paying customers expecting support during this time (often with some note about how expensive 24/7 support is, despite claiming tens of thousands of sales at €50 a piece).

Overall, the balance for me swings to not buying anything from them in future and I would recommend others the same.

[Flying-Hare 218]

33 minutes ago, Prpn said:

Engine start sequence is wrong, performance is wrong, many many issues with internal calculations like fuel remaining, estimated times over waypoints or at arrival, incorrect VNAV calculations, missing VNAV info in the MFD VNAV window, same problems with direct to creating ghost waypoints that have been in the addon since the first FSX CRJ X version, LNAV still questionable, you can open reverse thrust in flight...

 

It is interesting!  Where is wrong Engine start sequence?

Edited June 23, 2021 by Ray Proudfoot
Changed from white on black.

[Prpn 366]

2 hours ago, Flying-Hare said:

It is interesting!  Where is wrong Engine start sequence?

Basically the whole thing. The spool up is too slow, fuel gets introduced but ITT stays zero/ambient temp for way too long, starter cuts out too late. All things that would result in an aborted start in realistic day to day operations. 
 

That is one other thing I that sometimes rubs me the wrong way about Aerosoft. On the one hand they will claim they have one of the most complex add-ons and use that in support topics to say people just don’t understand the systems and other times they will say it is just a simple add-on meant to replicate only normal ops and the user I complaining about something too complex *facepalm*.  For example, first it was too complex to create a lockout for the reversers in flight even though default planes get this right. And if you point that out the defense turns in to “yeah but you would never do that in a real flight”…

Edited June 23, 2021 by Prpn

[Ilari Kousa 116]

25 minutes ago, Prpn said:

Basically the whole thing. The spool up is too slow, fuel gets introduced but ITT stays zero/ambient temp for way too long, starter cuts out too late. All things that would result in an aborted start in realistic day to day operations. 
 

That is one other thing I that sometimes rubs me the wrong way about Aerosoft. On the one hand they will claim they have one of the most complex add-ons and use that in support topics to say people just don’t understand the systems and other times they will say it is just a simple add-on meant to replicate only normal ops and the user I complaining about something too complex *facepalm*.  For example, first it was too complex to create a lockout for the reversers in flight even though default planes get this right. And if you point that out the defense turns in to “yeah but you would never do that in a real flight”…

Exactly this is why I will stick to proven study level devs only.

[bumpywindshear 43]

outch... but to be fair, i still like it !

 

edit: ...maybe the day is coming (with the SDK) and it have shared cockpit like (maybe better) their bus`es had... how realistic would that be then ?

Edited June 23, 2021 by bumpywindshear

[MarkW 1,490]

11 hours ago, Vlad747 said:

See if you have flight_model.cfg file here:
SimObjects\Airplanes\ and look for the CRJ

If you have it we can adjust trim sensitivity. The FSUPIC cannot do it, we need to change some values to reduce that high sensitivity inside flight_model.cfg file. If is hidden we are out of luck.

Let me know.

I don't think that is necessary, I think I just need to slow down on the repeated trim input.  I have FSUIPC setup to repeat the trim input when I press the button on my yoke.  If I press once and wait then things are better.  I need to figure out if FSUIPC can do an half input.

[DAD 2,649]

Coming back to the original topic, AS and Asobo are narrowing things down wrt CTDs of the marketplace CRJ. All those effected, please chime in here to submit your system configuration:

https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/164658-crash-after-update/&do=findComment&comment=1046903

[JRBarrett 3,034]

2 hours ago, Prpn said:

 For example, first it was too complex to create a lockout for the reversers in flight even though default planes get this right. And if you point that out the defense turns in to “yeah but you would never do that in a real flight”…

Are you speaking of the current MSFS version? The reversers most definitely do not deploy in flight even if you pull the powers levers into the reverse range with the switches armed. That bug existed in the P3D version (briefly) three years ago, but was fixed long ago.

 

[Pilot53 543]

The biggest problem I had with the crj is the flight dynamics.  I have a thread on their forum regarding climb performance.  The sim aircraft is way overpowered, it climbs much faster than the real aircraft.  They say they are hoping to fix it with the release of the -900.

[bendead 1,085]

One of the issue I have is the HUD, It was sold to me on the preview forum by Mathijs as a fully working one, but it's useless outside getting your speed and altitude

Edited June 23, 2021 by bendead

[united001 126]

It doesn't capture the glideslope at all easily and if it does, it loses it on final or just before. No fun that. Pretty is as pretty does and that's not pretty.

United001

 

[hansb57 492]

This was posted on Aerosoft forum by Hans Hartmann

 

 

So, after checking five files, I have to tell you something that you probably don't want to hear at all. Please don't shoot the messenger, because it's not his fault!

 

All five systems use Intel Core i3/5/7-2000 or -3000 series CPU. However, according to the Flight Simulator product pages in Steam and the Microsoft Store, the minimum system requirement is a Core i5-4660 aka Haswell core. This is not because the pre-Haswell CPUs are too slow, it is because the Haswell core comes with an extended instruction set (BMI 2) that Flight Simulator uses when loading WASM modules. All crash dumps that we received, point to an error caused when the assembly instruction "shrx" (shift right without affecting flags), simply because this instruction doesn't exist on your CPUs.

 

So much for the technical part. We're now waiting for a response from Asobo with some information on what's going to happen next. I hope to have more information for you within the next hour.

Edited June 23, 2021 by hansb57