17 hours ago, Oldschool61 said:

No ILS approaches get input that I have ever seen.  They get you to the area of the area of the airport then you have to do visual  the rest of the way.

 

47 minutes ago, Noel said:

but the $50 Aerosoft CRJ doesn't.  Bizarre....

Actually, it can and it does. If you tick "Load SID and STAR with flightplan"  on the second OPTION page of the EFB it will even load the departure runway and the approach into the FMS. If you tick "Load performance data with flightplan" it will do so as well. Just tried, as I am normally entering my Simbrief generated flightplans by hand and was curious. No idea about the MSFS Flightplanner though...

And @Oldschool61: Even if it fails to load the approach, you can always enter it via the DEP/ARR key of the FMS, which will get you to the DEPARTURE page, where you then can use LSK6L to get to the DEP/ARR INDEX page, where LSK2R will get you to the ARRIVAL page. Select your ILS and STAR, Transition if appropriate - and you have no need to fly visual.

Edited October 5, 20214 yr by Tom_L

22 minutes ago, Tom_L said:

No idea about the MSFS Flightplanner though...

That is what I was pointing out from other comments here:  the CRJ does not load plans from the MSFS planner, whereas the freeware HD 787-10 mod does both the MSFS planner and Simbrief, which is bizarre to me. 

No need to use SimBrief if you can use Little Navmap 😉 I highly recommend this free software, and the developer is really responsive and open to suggestions. He's around here occasionally, and also on the official forums. I don't use it all the time, but it's definitely easier than the MSFS flight planner when a route is a bit more complicated. Also useful to look up ILS frequencies during flight...

Anyway, yes, I agree the CRJ should be able to read/import the MSFS flight plan by default, but tbh since I started to use Little Navmap I don't really care anymore.

51 minutes ago, RobJC said:

I guess the answer in your case is just not to buy it. 

You're right--not interested ;o)

Just now, pstrub said:

No need to use SimBrief if you can use Little Navmap 😉 I highly recommend this free software, and the developer is really responsive and open to suggestions. He's around here occasionally, and also on the official forums. I don't use it all the time, but it's definitely easier than the MSFS flight planner when a route is a bit more complicated. Also useful to look up ILS frequencies during flight...

Anyway, yes, I agree the CRJ should be able to read/import the MSFS flight plan by default, but tbh since I started to use Little Navmap I don't really care anymore.

I use LNM all the time and have donated to the awesome developer.

Just now, Noel said:

I use LNM all the time and have donated to the awesome developer.

Then I don't understand why you insist so much on using the MSFS flight planner 😉 

But I'm not going to argue, to each their own, we have different expectations, and we prefer different workflows, 

Anyway, I bought the CRJ in the sale. It's not perfect, but I've been really enjoying it so far.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

You're right--not interested ;o)

So if you have no interest in this aircraft why word not allowed on it? You don't own it, so you don't have first hand knowledge, right? 

I really don't think people should be commenting about an add-on they have not purchased or tried. I read a lot of negative comments about Aerosoft and that made me pause in getting the CRJ. In reality it is an excellent add-on (IMO) but too many people who didn't even bother to get it started posting negative comments based on other people's opinions. It really does a disservice to the community. Personally, if I don't own an add-on I try not to make any comments about the creator, or the add-on. Because I really have no idea. I have made comments about the DC-6 (great add-on), the Mooney (totally regret getting it), and the CRJ, which I think is the best add-on to date in MSFS. 

25 minutes ago, RobJC said:

I really don't think people should be commenting about an add-on they have not purchased or tried. I read a lot of negative comments about Aerosoft and that made me pause in getting the CRJ. In reality it is an excellent add-on (IMO) but too many people who didn't even bother to get it started posting negative comments based on other people's opinions. It really does a disservice to the community. Personally, if I don't own an add-on I try not to make any comments about the creator, or the add-on. Because I really have no idea. I have made comments about the DC-6 (great add-on), the Mooney (totally regret getting it), and the CRJ, which I think is the best add-on to date in MSFS. 

I read the same negative comments about Aerosoft, but it didn’t dissuade me from making my first Aerosoft purchase, I.e. the CRJ 550/700.  The plane has been fantastic for me. It is a pity what the internet has become, it allows people to sit behind a desk and a keyboard and throw away their personal credibility without any due regard.

1 minute ago, FrankR409 said:

I read the same negative comments about Aerosoft, but it didn’t dissuade me from making my first Aerosoft purchase, I.e. the CRJ 550/700.  The plane has been fantastic for me. It is a pity what the internet has become, it allows people to sit behind a desk and a keyboard and throw away their personal credibility without any due regard.

I hear you. Sadly, the world we live in. But I just think that people should disclose when making negative comments about a vendor whether they actually own the product in question or not. 

33 minutes ago, RobJC said:

I really don't think people should be commenting about an add-on they have not purchased or tried. I read a lot of negative comments about Aerosoft and that made me pause in getting the CRJ. In reality it is an excellent add-on (IMO) but too many people who didn't even bother to get it started posting negative comments based on other people's opinions. It really does a disservice to the community. Personally, if I don't own an add-on I try not to make any comments about the creator, or the add-on. Because I really have no idea. I have made comments about the DC-6 (great add-on), the Mooney (totally regret getting it), and the CRJ, which I think is the best add-on to date in MSFS. 

The CRJ isn't really an Aerosoft product, well, it's published by Aerosoft, but it really has been Hans Hartmann's development and was originally the Digital Design CRJ.

Because of the above, I prefer to separate the CRJ as not really being Aerosoft.  Any sort of angst you might see regarding Aerosoft stems from Aerosoft's own Aerosoft/self-inflicted doings over the years -- they made their nest now let them sit in it.  I own the CRJ for P3D, and I *can* certainly speak to Hans design work which is outstanding, despite the slow gestation of that aircraft (2014-2019) -- by 2019 it was very good and fun to fly.

The built in flight plan database is so awful that Working Title apparently custom built a bespoke new one to use with the NXi .  

That said one of the main attractions of the CRJ that makes the high purchase price justified is the bespoke FMS and realistic flight plan entry as part of the pre-flight.  If you just want to just load a MS flight plan and go - I cannot see what you are getting for all that money to be honest.

Basically if fiddling with the FMS is not fun for you, reconsider buying this, as it is a good part of what makes this aircraft worth the high-ish cost.  It is a pretty enough aircraft yes- but it is the full functional FMS that makes it worth the cost.

 

Edited October 6, 20214 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

10 hours ago, RobJC said:

So if you have no interest in this aircraft why word not allowed on it? You don't own it, so you don't have first hand knowledge, right? 

Good lord I just said I'm not interested in a plane that can't use the built-in planner that's all.  I DID have interest in it until I learned about this issue is that too hard to follow?  If so, I give up.

Missed the A$ sale, but Simmarket have 25% off till the 10th.

19 hours ago, Noel said:

Good lord I just said I'm not interested in a plane that can't use the built-in planner that's all.  I DID have interest in it until I learned about this issue is that too hard to follow?  If so, I give up.

Until the Working Title devs at Asobo do a complete overhaul of the default MSFS flight planner, (which is slated to happen sometime in 2022), I doubt very much that upcoming high-end realistic add-ons like the PMDG 737 or Fenix A320 will be able to directly import plans from the default flight planner either - and probably for the same reason that the CRJ cannot (at present).

These aircraft all have FMS systems which are designed to work as much like the real FMS as possible in every regard, and the output of the default planner (as it currently exists), simply lacks too many things to be compatible.

Things like SIDS, STARS, and (especially) approach transitions are not formatted correctly, the planner does not generate several ARINC-424 leg types that a realistic FMS emulation would expect, speed/altitude constraints are not properly coded within arrival procedures, the planner generates pseudo “USR” waypoints that do not correspond to actual waypoints etc.

This situation should greatly improve once the WT revamp of the default planner is complete, at which time I would think that all complex add-ons (including the CRJ) should be able to directly import plans directly from MSFS.