14 minutes ago, AJZip said:

"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.

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

This makes perfect sense thanks and that is what I surmised might be the case from reading the various comments.  Just input my arrival procedure and all seems fine so far... 😳.  This regional jet seems a wee bit like the Majestic 'Crash 8' Q400 in that its flight envelope is less forgiving than say a 737NG3 😬. 

4 minutes ago, Noel said:

This regional jet seems a wee bit like the Majestic 'Crash 8' Q400 in that its flight envelope is less forgiving than say a 737NG3

I flew twice-weekly in one of those for about 2 years and, 7 years later, still have twinges of 'Q400 vertebral compression syndrome' 😃   From a passenger's point of view, the real thing doesn't land as much as perform a controlled crash every time  😄 

Well, despite my complete inexperience in this plane, somehow we managed to get to here in one piece.  There are subtleties to learn absolutely I saw that in practice, but I'm sure I'll get there and hopefully in short order.  And when I want to relax and fly, we use the B78X HD and Citation L which almost fly themselves.  This is a nice change, especially for me since in P3D I fully depended on FSCaptain to keep long distance boredom in check, and don't have it yet for MSFS, and I get the distinct sense it will be awhile before we experience boredom getting this to go where it's supposed to:

 

24 minutes ago, Noel said:

Well, despite my complete inexperience in this plane, somehow we managed to get to here in one piece.  There are subtleties to learn absolutely I saw that in practice, but I'm sure I'll get there and hopefully in short order.  And when I want to relax and fly, we use the B78X HD and Citation L which almost fly themselves.  This is a nice change, especially for me since in P3D I fully depended on FSCaptain to keep long distance boredom in check, and don't have it yet for MSFS, and I get the distinct sense it will be awhile before we experience boredom getting this to go where it's supposed to:

 

I am happy your experiences are positive 🙂 . As I mentioned, depending on your level of knowledge of the CRJ you may absolutely be completely happy with the add on.

11 hours ago, Prpn said:

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.

 

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 🤣.

Thanks for the explanations, I think you have some valid points, and you seem to know what you are talking about.

I don't disagree those are items that need fixed. Been that way since its release for FSX and P3D! But, on the other hand, unless you have clapboards on your shoulder and a Captains hat, it is just fine and still by far the best RJ for MSFS which isn't saying much.

Is it perfect? God no. Does it have some annoying bugs? Yup. Does it work “correctly” most of the time? Usually if you stay within it’s limitations. If you can catch it on sell, it’s worth it. Full price? If you have a chubby for CRJ’s sure.

Edited March 26, 20224 yr by CaptainNick

We are still waiting for some great airplanes to come out for FS2020.  It may be a while.  I could count on one hand the number of planes I thought were great on P3D.  This one didn't make the list because of the navigation bugs.  To me, it's amazing and fun to fly, otherwise.  Handling all the stuff single pilot can really hone your skills.

Ah, but, the LNAV is buggy...and the VNAV has some issues too.  I agree with Ryan that editing a route in flight is iffy.  The fact that it's still iffy makes me think that they don't have a developer that knows the code enough to fix it or it's spaghetti code..  As someone said, if you stick to the simpler STARs you'll be less likely to run into problems.  Also, I always make a copy of my flight plan into Secondary after I'm done entering it...just in case.

3 hours ago, Gregg_Seipp said:

and the VNAV has some issues too.  I agree with Ryan that editing a route in flight is iffy.

Near as I can tell it doesn't support any VNAV, or does it?  I'm only using VS for descents, and SPEED for ascents is the best I can do for now.  I have input my own route way points off of the World Map flight plan, NAVLOG, input and it all seems intutive even for someone mostly familiar w/ Boeing FMS navigation, and have edited the route in flight.

I am perplexed by the fact the thing is really sluggish on climb after you get to about FL250 it's ascent rate is really weak, so instead of going to its stated cruise altitude I'm staying under FL300.   Is this normal for this plane?  Of course I checked that gear, flaps and speed brakes.

5 minutes ago, Noel said:

Near as I can tell it doesn't support any VNAV, or does it?  I'm only using VS for descents, and SPEED for ascents is the best I can do for now.  I have input my own route way points off of the World Map flight plan, NAVLOG, input and it all seems intutive even for someone mostly familiar w/ Boeing FMS navigation, and have edited the route in flight.

I am perplexed by the fact the thing is really sluggish on climb after you get to about FL250 it's ascent rate is really weak, so instead of going to its stated cruise altitude I'm staying under FL300.   Is this normal for this plane?  Of course I checked that gear, flaps and speed brakes.

It does get rather weak in the end, but it will make it. Unless you have anti-ice on... this makes it impossible to climb.

As for VNAV - there is an option to toggle VNAV in the EFB, but IRL it's only available for the CRJ 1000 (and almost no operator uses it). No idea if/how it works. What IS helpful is advisory VNAV - on the "DIR INT" page you can see the exact V/S you need for the next waypoint (assuming you set an alt restriction).

20 minutes ago, Noel said:

Near as I can tell it doesn't support any VNAV, or does it?

The Collins FMS computes a VNAV advisory path, which is visible to the pilot by "the white snowflake" on the PFD

Also make sure to select "VNAV" as MFD display mode, to get TOD info and time/distance to VNAV targets + you have the purple energy arc where you will cross FCP altitude.

After a few flights, you realize you do not even need a true FCP VNAV mode.

5 hours ago, Noel said:

Near as I can tell it doesn't support any VNAV, or does it?  I'm only using VS for descents, and SPEED for ascents is the best I can do for now.  I have input my own route way points off of the World Map flight plan, NAVLOG, input and it all seems intutive even for someone mostly familiar w/ Boeing FMS navigation, and have edited the route in flight.

I am perplexed by the fact the thing is really sluggish on climb after you get to about FL250 it's ascent rate is really weak, so instead of going to its stated cruise altitude I'm staying under FL300.   Is this normal for this plane?  Of course I checked that gear, flaps and speed brakes.

To add to what @Fiorentoni said, Yes, there is a VNAV option.  Go to the EFB->Options Page...select page two and turn on the option on the left side.  This will add a VNAV button to the right end of your autopilot controls.  A few 700s and the 900s and 1000s have the button.  Make sure you get rid of ALL discontinuities in your LEGS page before turning it on and make sure to set your bottom altitude, then click it on.  Also, while you're on that page, take a look at the throttle calibration which really helps you adjust your throttle axis.

What he said about icing during the climb is also true.  Engine Cowl icing will absolutely kill your rate of climb.  If you turn it on on the ground it will make your N1 go up by 10.  I don't know what real pilots do but I'm guessing they turn it on on the ground only if they have to, shut it off for takeoff and turn it back on once airborne when in icing conditions ONLY.  Also, the airplane will tell you on the EICAS if ice is accumulating in case you forget.  

5 hours ago, SAS443 said:

The Collins FMS computes a VNAV advisory path, which is visible to the pilot by "the white snowflake" on the PFD

Also make sure to select "VNAV" as MFD display mode, to get TOD info and time/distance to VNAV targets + you have the purple energy arc where you will cross FCP altitude.

After a few flights, you realize you do not even need a true FCP VNAV mode.

You can also use the value on DIR INTC (beware, it's a straight line value), or on VNAV -> 3rd page -> descent to show the current descent point

Just now, Gregg_Seipp said:

What he said about icing during the climb is also true.  Engine Cowl icing will absolutely kill your rate of climb.  If you turn it on on the ground it will make your N1 go up by 10.  I don't know what real pilots do but I'm guessing they turn it on on the ground only if they have to, shut it off for takeoff and turn it back on once airborne when in icing conditions ONLY.  Also, the airplane will tell you on the EICAS if ice is accumulating in case you forget.  

The loss of thrust and climb rate due to anti-icing is IMHO more than a bit overdone in the Aerosoft CRJ. Cowl anti ice should really not take that much, in real life it is wing anti ice that can mess your plans up a bit but not as much as the sim version might show.

It is also standard procedure to have anti ice on for takeoff quite often, usually when you need cowl anti ice, the conditions generally also require the wing anti ice to be on. And on the real plane it is a bit of a non-issue. Just checked a 36.000kg takeoff with and without full anti ice on. It is a difference of one knot higher V-speeds for the anti-ice on takeoff, and maybe 60 meters more distance required, and a very slightly lower climb gradient. That is it.

I have never struggled to get above FL300 in the real plane, icing or no icing. Just make sure you fly the correct speed profile. That means 250 below 10.000ft, 290 until the point where it matches anywhere between M.74-M.77 and then fly that mach number up to cruise. We usually go M.74 until FL360 and then M.77 from there. M.77 should get you up to your performance ceiling for the weight.

5 minutes ago, Prpn said:

The loss of thrust and climb rate due to anti-icing is IMHO more than a bit overdone in the Aerosoft CRJ. Cowl anti ice should really not take that much, in real life it is wing anti ice that can mess your plans up a bit but not as much as the sim version might show.

It is also standard procedure to have anti ice on for takeoff quite often, usually when you need cowl anti ice, the conditions generally also require the wing anti ice to be on. And on the real plane it is a bit of a non-issue. Just checked a 36.000kg takeoff with and without full anti ice on. It is a difference of one knot higher V-speeds for the anti-ice on takeoff, and maybe 60 meters more distance required, and a very slightly lower climb gradient. That is it.

I have never struggled to get above FL300 in the real plane, icing or no icing. Just make sure you fly the correct speed profile. That means 250 below 10.000ft, 290 until the point where it matches anywhere between M.74-M.77 and then fly that mach number up to cruise. We usually go M.74 until FL360 and then M.77 from there. M.77 should get you up to your performance ceiling for the weight.

I wonder if someone can fix that by modifying a file.