I give--what doesn't work w/ LNAV?  For some to speak quite highly of this plane and others describe it as what sounds like just unreliable, broken, prone to breaking.  Does it follow a flight plan if you understand its idiosyncracies?  

5 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

Sure - but I should be able to do this right in the FMS, while in flight.

Ryan, can you make an in-flight entry into the FMS for an arrival procedure?

4 minutes ago, Noel said:

I give--what doesn't work w/ LNAV?  For some to speak quite highly of this plane and others describe it as what sounds like just unreliable, broken, prone to breaking.  Does it follow a flight plan if you understand its idiosyncracies?  

Turns - usually turns greater than 45 degrees....and especially with a crosswind.  I'm talking enroute cruise here...where you need a turn in your flight plan - and especially with a crosswind...  plane will overshoot a few times and S turn a lot to get back on course.  My best friend flew these things for over a decade.  He came to my house and started the sim version from cold and dark (after being off the type for over 7 years), and was able to work every switch from memory (even sent a few bugs to Aerosoft)!  He said visually, it looked really really good.  But then he was also noticing basic things like - "It's not tracking this ILS well" or "wow that totally overshot our turn" or "the FMS doesn't load this correctly"

Basics like that...

5 minutes ago, Noel said:

Does it follow a flight plan if you understand its idiosyncracies?  

"Most of the time". That's really the problem with this plane, I have not found it to be reliable. Sometimes it'll hit the ILS perfectly and then the next time I visit the airport it has no clue what is going on. Sometimes it'll take a sharp turn without issue, other times it's like you're doing a slalom.

16 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

Turns - usually turns greater than 45 degrees....and especially with a crosswind.  I'm talking enroute cruise here...where you need a turn in your flight plan - and especially with a crosswind...  plane will overshoot a few times and S turn a lot to get back on course.  My best friend flew these things for over a decade.  He came to my house and started the sim version from cold and dark (after being off the type for over 7 years), and was able to work every switch from memory (even sent a few bugs to Aerosoft)!  He said visually, it looked really really good.  But then he was also noticing basic things like - "It's not tracking this ILS well" or "wow that totally overshot our turn" or "the FMS doesn't load this correctly"

Basics like that...

I see.  That's weird and doesn't seem like something out of reach of the developer.  So is the best practice to avoid >45 degree turns  as able?  Will it realign w/ the white line disconnecting the AP and manually turning back on course, or is it over once you lose connection?  And no access by the usual cadre of modders to fix this?

Edited March 26, 20224 yr by Noel

I expect what many are saying that own it and have flown it makes a $ value judgement.  Beautiful aircraft that flies okay.  Not well.  There are more bugs than belong and it appears Aerosoft sold it and has moved on without making an investment in improvements.  Same thing they did for the P3D model which was also a hanger queen for me.  Just did not like the way it functioned.  Buyers choice.  Just remember, it will probably never become a widely acclaimed favorite of most simmers.

35 minutes ago, Kyuss said:

Wait, are you saying the $51 add-on for a $60 game on my home computer isn't quite as refined as a ~$35,000,000 airplane? Say it ain't so! Next you'll tell me the $60 game doesn't recreate the entire planet, flight dynamics, ATC, and current real weather as well as reality!

I dont think he is saying that. This product has been having issues (from day 1) that have still not been addressed to this day. The FD cannot command appropriate guidance when shooting a precision approach. Today I tried shooting an ILS with slight wind, the FD kept commanding pitch up even though I was established on the glide profile (passed the FAF). Vertical navigation isn't much better, at this stage the best way to stay on profile is to turn off the FD and shoot the approach by hand. Basic navigation has major flaws.

Some minor things that are considered "day to day operations" as Aerosoft clains this product is modelled after (I am not talking about complex systems here), such are when applying reverse thrust, the icon on the N1 gauge should turn yellow while the reverse cowls are in transition, then go green when they are deployed, that's not even modelled. I can go on and on. Honnestly I would not recommend purchasing this product, the CJ4 is more advanced than this payware product that's been out for so long. 

Edited March 26, 20224 yr by 757FO

1 hour ago, 757FO said:

I dont think he is saying that. This product has been having issues (from day 1) that have still not been addressed to this day. The FD cannot command appropriate guidance when shooting a precision approach. Today I tried shooting an ILS with slight wind, the FD kept commanding pitch up even though I was established on the glide profile (passed the FAF). Vertical navigation isn't much better, at this stage the best way to stay on profile is to turn off the FD and shoot the approach by hand. Basic navigation has major flaws.

Some minor things that are considered "day to day operations" as Aerosoft clains this product is modelled after (I am not talking about complex systems here), such are when applying reverse thrust, the icon on the N1 gauge should turn yellow while the reverse cowls are in transition, then go green when they are deployed, that's not even modelled. I can go on and on. Honnestly I would not recommend purchasing this product, the CJ4 is more advanced than this payware product that's been out for so long. 

Those are the same issues it has had since released for FSX 5 or more yrs ago!

7 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

What's wrong with takeoff thrust settings? And "minimum callouts" (whatever problem you have with them [or their absence?]) justify calling this a s*** show? The day to day operations work fine, lateral navigation is not "beautiful" but it works, no idea what you consider as "failed". But then again I know little about the CRJ in real life; anyway she works for me without having to scratch my head and without losing immersion.
I thin you are being harsh, I've seen a lot worse from other developers (e.g. the QW787 has a pitch black cockpit for two years counting, the E-Jets from Feelthere at times feel like an alpha version of a possibly great product).

That said I do agree with your opinion of their customer support, it's blatantly condescending and simply openly disinterested.

It completely overshoots the FADEC takeoff thrust value, then rolls back the thrust during the takeoff roll hunting for the right value. If I hear my engines spooling down or decreasing RPM significantly in ANY plane in real life, I'd abort the takeoff because something ain't right.

The audio callout MINIMUMS does not work when you have an MDA set. One of the most basic things to get right, pretty big part of day to day operations, known issue for a long long time, no fix. 

LNAV is a mess. Direct to commands that generate ghost waypoints after which it flies neither to the direct to point or to the ghost waypoint. Can not fly a hold to save its life. Can not fly a smooth enroute turn. Can not set an intercept course. Can not fly an offset track.

Anything time or fuel related in the FMS is buggy, like ETAs or fuel remaining over a certain point or at the destination. As in, it predicts you to have more fuel at your destination than you currently have in cruise...  

So yes, you probably belong in the first group I described. Which is fine and I am happy that you are able to enjoy the product. And yes, I clearly admitted I have a negative bias. I do know a fair bit about the CRJ as I fly them for a living, and as such I'd love to see a good version in the sim. I have participated in the initial FSX version beta that was released with known bugs and where feedback from real pilots was ignored, I have watched them struggle to fix anything in the subsequent P3D version and then port over that buggy version to MSFS. I think they deserve to be judged a bit harsh after having so many chance to get things right, and a lot of input from real pilots (see also their forum, one pilot has been documenting issues very professionally, including ways to reproduce them and how it should work in real life, but is for the most part just ignored by Aerosoft). They seem to have gotten their money, pointed the finger at Asobo for many issues that they could have worked around themselves, and now seem to have abandoned the product and the customers that paid for it.

 

3 hours ago, Kyuss said:

Wait, are you saying the $51 add-on for a $60 game on my home computer isn't quite as refined as a ~$35,000,000 airplane? Say it ain't so! Next you'll tell me the $60 game doesn't recreate the entire planet, flight dynamics, ATC, and current real weather as well as reality!

Could you point me to where I am claiming any such thing? I was comparing to other sim products that have released at similar prices with much higher fidelity, and also clearly stated I do not expect Aerosoft to reach that fidelity. But just for fun, remember PMDGs Jetstream 41? That was $45 and way, way more refined and higher quality than the AS CRJ 🤣.

I have since long given up on the CRJ. For the very reasons @Prpn is listing in his excellent post. I was also on the betateam some years ago.

If you have been with the AS CRJ since its original release in 2017(?). You can easily detect plenty "odd ball" behaviours made its way onto MSFS release. For whatever reasons. Fuel calcs, LNAV, thrust values oscillating when moving the levers just a fraction.

For a simmer in MSFS who have no history with the CRJ, I'd say it is an OK addon. You will probably enjoy it.

But those of us that have been with the CRJ in FSX/P3D are probably wondering why the bugs are still there. In its third(!) Reincarnation.

Edited March 26, 20224 yr by SAS443

5 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

Turns - usually turns greater than 45 degrees....and especially with a crosswind.  I'm talking enroute cruise here...where you need a turn in your flight plan - and especially with a crosswind...  plane will overshoot a few times and S turn a lot to get back on course.  My best friend flew these things for over a decade.  

 

I agree with that; the cruise LNAV 'S-turn's' can sometimes be a bit odd.  ILS tracking 25% of the time will need some help.

8 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

 

For a simmer in MSFS who have no history with the CRJ, I'd say it is an OK addon. You will probably enjoy it.

Which would fit me.  For people wanting something that is not an Airbus, with more functionality than the default planes.  I enjoy the 'annoyance' of not having auto throttle; makes final approaches more challenging.   Have to get used to scanning speed regularly.  The fs sim sound package helps immersion. Rear-fuselage mounted engines and their vibrations can be felt with the add-on sounds better.

Simon

I bought a lot of planes from Aerosoft "back in the days."

The day I'll buy another plane from them will be the day I grow a second head. 

If there's one thing that I've learned from 20 years as a "professional simmer" is that I do not own any of it and that, most of the time. there are no refunds, so choose wisely!

I bought this plane to get a regional jet w/ this type of PAX load which puts it in a completely other class than the CJ4 for my fledgling use of AirHauler 2.  Amazing all the accolades came from the first visitors to this thread, followed by a barage of almost completely negative comments.  Presumably from the barage it seems the accolades must have come from the misery loves company crowd 😅.  

So far, learning how to start from cold and dark, setting up for a successful takeoff, it's been fine, followed the route (haha Direct Only input manually in the FMC), and all seems okay so far, heading for KLAS right now having just left KBJC.  Nothing weird so far, but their shouldn't be thus far.  I won't know where it falls short technically unless it falls completely on its face (can't track a route, can't grab a glide slope, despite taking care to make it as possible as able, or those types of things, which apparently is about to happen 🙃).  It 'flies' as good as what I'm used to or better (3 default planes I use all the time).  I'm pretty amazed at the level of detail in it, compared to default, and even compared to PMDGware.  So far, I'm liking what I'm seeing but that is because the horror has not yet commenced, apparently.  Fortunately, 'study-level' is lost completely on me as I'm anything but a dedicated 'student'.

Thanks all for your comments, slurs, innuendos, both positive and negative.  I'll let you know how the first landing attempt goes in a hour or so and near as I can tell even though the destination airport is KLAS I fully expect it might end up at KRNO if this navigation gets its way 🤪.

31 minutes ago, Noel said:

I won't know where it falls short technically unless it falls completely on its face (can't track a route, can't grab a glide slope, despite taking care to make it as possible as able, or those types of things, which apparently is about to happen 🙃).

A reminder of my comment in the opening page:

"Having found it challenging at first, and now those difficulties have 'mysteriously' drifted away, I realise that it was my flying and not Aerosoft's modelling."

Exactly the same as the excellent X-plane Just Flight BAe146 (best city hopper on the sim market in my opinion and on its way to MSFS soon!) if you aren't at the right speed flaps and trim, it is entirely possible that you will fly right through the ILS beam.  Grabbing the glide slope is a skill, and the more accurate the modelling, the more skill is going to be required. 

Ref some of the comments above of other more detailed stuff relating to the FMS, it would be easy to assume that everything that doesn't result in a perfect landing is the fault of rubbish simulation modelling... 😉   

Sure, you couldn't use this to learn to fly the real thing and the FMS modelling has limitations but, as a decent progress step from a General Aviation to the more sophisticated world of regional jets - and with the present limited choice of such aircraft in MSFS - it is, in my view, not bad.

I remain very happy with flying the Aerosoft CRJ and it sounds like you are too, so far  🙂