Virtualcol Embaer 170/175/190/195

[jarmstro 2,404]

Yes, they have now released the 190/195 variant. On first release I found the 175 to be practically unflyable and absolute rubbish. But I have to say that they've continued to work on it. The sounds and autopilot are now much much better and I managed a complete flight yesterday without any issues. I have no doubt it's nothing remotely close to the real thing but for fifteen quid, well, it's OK. 

[Chock 17,769]

42 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

I have no doubt it's nothing remotely close to the real thing but for fifteen quid, well, it's OK. 

Not being like the real thing would be a bonus; I don't know anyone who works on those things who doesn't hate everything about them. 🤣

Edited April 25, 2022 by Chock

[Victoroos 205]

3 hours ago, Chock said:

Not being like the real thing would be a bonus; I don't know anyone who works on those things who doesn't hate everything about them. 🤣

REally? Are they that bad? 😮

[regis9 4,014]

I’ve heard that Air Canada was quite happy to ditch their E190s…apparently dispatch reliability was not great.  

[jarmstro 2,404]

1 hour ago, regis9 said:

…apparently dispatch reliability was not great.  

Maybe the Virtualcol Embraer is better modelled than I thought. The dispatch reliability isn't great with it either.😀

[Fiorentoni 4,248]

5 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Yes, they have now released the 190/195 variant. On first release I found the 175 to be practically unflyable and absolute rubbish. But I have to say that they've continued to work on it. The sounds and autopilot are now much much better and I managed a complete flight yesterday without any issues. I have no doubt it's nothing remotely close to the real thing but for fifteen quid, well, it's OK. 

Why did you buy the 190/195 if you thought the 175 was unflyable and absolute rubbish?

[DMullert 216]

I did fall for the initial 170/175 package but I quickly discovered that is another CaptainSim.  Fantastic exterior model but horrible flight dynamics, ground handling characteristics, and cockpit design....not to mention, horrible sounds.  Maybe the folks that did Salty or the 787XH may give this addon some love?  I quickly de-install it as I found it to be unflyable.

Edited April 25, 2022 by DMullert

[jarmstro 2,404]

16 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Why did you buy the 190/195 if you thought the 175 was unflyable and absolute rubbish?

Because the updates to the 170/175 have made it OK. I said it was rubbish on release but now, following the work that has been done, it's acceptable given the price imo. And I was desperate for a Flybe 195. 

[Dillon 2,197]

5 hours ago, Chock said:

Not being like the real thing would be a bonus; I don't know anyone who works on those things who doesn't hate everything about them. 🤣

You've got to tell us more about this.  What was the issue with these birds?  I've often heard rumblings but never had a straight answer on the issues with these aircraft.😶

Edited April 25, 2022 by Dillon

[Chock 17,769]

22 minutes ago, Dillon said:

You've got to tell us more about this.  What was the issue with these birds?  I've often heard rumblings but never had a straight answer on the issues with these aircraft.😶

There's nothing too wrong with how they operate in terms of the flight deck - the steering bypass system is a bit weird, but other than that, the problems and general dislike for the type are more to do with maintenance and loading/unloading. Their dispatch reliability was fairly questionable. In fairness I think it might be improved now on later models but it did used to be not that great. As far as ramp handling is concerned, they are horrible to work on; everyone hates them. They have a weird cargo door operating mechanism which involves getting a special pole out of a recess in the fuselage so you can use this to push the door up and open, then turn a latch with it. You do the reverse of that to shut the door, but to lock it, the door mechanism is hard to reach and the handles are not easy to operate either. It's almost like Embraer went out of their way to design an awkward system for the cargo hold doors instead of just copying those on the 737 or something similar. Then you have the cargo holds themselves, which were clearly designed with midgets in mind, so you smack your head on the cages which guard the halon outlets all the time when loading cargo, the floors have carpet on them which inhibits the easy movement of baggage and cargo. If you ever have to do a bag offload, the small size of the hold and that carpet, makes this a very tedious and time consuming exercise when you are looking for a specific luggage tag. The cargo nets are annoying too.

In addition to this, they aren't really that economical to operate. FlyBe were keen to get rid of theirs because they found that, being jets, even though theoretically they could be faster en-route than a turboprop, in practice they were not flying long enough routes to make that speed difference noticeable and not tending to fill up to capacity either, which meant their smaller and slightly slower Dash-8 Q400s were a much more economical proposition for the kind of routes they operated, particularly since they did their own maintenance on the Dash 8. This is a common theme with airlines; it is why things like the 747 and the A380 are getting scrapped; airlines want aeroplanes with range, not capacity, because they can make the seat sales on smaller airliners more easily, and longer ranges generally make for a more economical operation since it's the climb and the landing where those engines are running at full tilt, which represents a larger percentage of the flight on a shorter route.

Of course none of this matters in a flight sim, and as jarmstro says, the Virtualcol one is quite good fun to operate now, especially for the price.

Edited April 25, 2022 by Chock

[jarmstro 2,404]

42 minutes ago, Chock said:

FlyBe were keen to get rid of theirs because they found that, being jets, even though theoretically they could be faster en-route than a turboprop, in practice they were not flying long enough routes to make that speed difference noticeable and not tending to fill up to capacity either, which meant their smaller and slightly slower Dash-8 Q400s were a much more economical proposition for the kind of routes they operated,

I could never understand why Flybe used a 195 for Exeter to Norwich when on many of these flights I was on there were rarely more than 40 passengers and yet they used a Dash-8 (or was it an ATR?) for Exeter to Amsterdam which were usually packed to the gunnels?  Loganair, who have taken over the EGTE/EGSH route use a 145 but its a LOT dearer than Flybe was and it's only Mondays and Fridays. Boo!

Edited April 25, 2022 by jarmstro

[Fiorentoni 4,248]

As far as I understand the Embraer E-Jets are the most popular regional jet among airlines. They beat the CRJ in regards to costs and the Q400 in regards to the passenger experience. Here in Germany all Q400s (Eurowings e.g.) were replaced by jets, because passengers avoided flying with them (noise, comfort etc.). Also Lufthansa added the Embraer to their regional fleet, which until then consisted mostly of CRJs. As far as I know Embraer is at least on par with the CRJ in regards to regional jet coverage in Europe. (The A220 could be the next contender, though). Also in the USA there are more E-Jets than CRJs by now.
Sure if they can't fill out capacity, they'll be useless, but that extends to any airplane in the world. So there might be specific situations where the Q400 is superior, or the ATR for that matter.

Anyway Embraer is leading in the regional jet market, as far as I know, so I don't know why people here think it was a bad purchase for airlines...?

Whatever, none of this is a reason to buy this abonimation of Virtualcol...

[Steve Dra 7,588]

One thing I can say for a fact that as far as passenger comfort (as comfortable as you can get in a regional jet), they are the best out there.

If I recall, Embraer designed the fuse cross section to be an extended oval (taller in the middle), which greatly increases headroom when walking down the isle, and the sides are less rounded so more shoulder room at the windows (which is where every single person reading this sits, LOL).  Being over 6 feet, and having to take a regional route, you want to be on this airplane!  Your worst nightmare is the airline changing equipment at the last minute and instead of an ERJ, a CRJ-200 shows up! 😲  I wouldn't wish a CRJ-200 seat on my worst enemy! 

Never designed as a regional jet (as we all know), and they are just simply horrible to fly in. In a -200, you like to look out the window? Be ready for a sore back and neck from leaning over, as the top of the window is about shoulder level (for me at least).  Not to mention any -200 you'll fly in is older than just about any other plane you'll fly on, and they are generally in horrible shape.

Heard the stories about how rampees hate them so much, and much deserved based on accounts, but this passenger hopes they stay in service for the cabin design.  Oh one more thing...on a CRJs, you have to gate-check your large carry-on as most don't fit into the overheads...on the ERJs....just like on a mainline cabin. 🙂 

[jarmstro 2,404]

55 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

One thing I can say for a fact that as far as passenger comfort (as comfortable as you can get in a regional jet), they are the best out there.

If I recall, Embraer designed the fuse cross section to be an extended oval (taller in the middle), which greatly increases headroom when walking down the isle, and the sides are less rounded so more shoulder room at the windows (which is where every single person reading this sits, LOL).  Being over 6 feet, and having to take a regional route, you want to be on this airplane!  Your worst nightmare is the airline changing equipment at the last minute and instead of an ERJ, a CRJ-200 shows up! 😲  I wouldn't wish a CRJ-200 seat on my worst enemy! 

Never designed as a regional jet (as we all know), and they are just simply horrible to fly in. In a -200, you like to look out the window? Be ready for a sore back and neck from leaning over, as the top of the window is about shoulder level (for me at least).  Not to mention any -200 you'll fly in is older than just about any other plane you'll fly on, and they are generally in horrible shape.

Heard the stories about how rampees hate them so much, and much deserved based on accounts, but this passenger hopes they stay in service for the cabin design.  Oh one more thing...on a CRJs, you have to gate-check your large carry-on as most don't fit into the overheads...on the ERJs....just like on a mainline cabin. 🙂 

Agreed. I've always found the 195 a far more pleasant experience as a passenger compared to, say, a Ryanair 737.

[regis9 4,014]

As a passenger, the AC E190s (and AC Express E175s) were/are a pleasure to fly on. Roomy for a smaller aircraft and no middle seat.