Aerosoft CRJ current thoughts

[jarmstro 2,405]

On 7/22/2022 at 11:01 PM, fakeflyer737 said:

Junk. 

Errr.. Well I'm  flying it as I type and I can't see any reason to call it junk? Seems OK to me. Compared, say, to the Virtualcol Embraer's which are the only other option for a regional jetliner as far as I know. Maybe some one can point out to me what the unforgivable show stopping faults are with it?

Edited July 24, 2022 by jarmstro

[FrankR409 514]

 

17 minutes ago, Noel said:

The naysayers love you for supporting their view of the plane and deeming it "horrendous".  Would it help if I recorded a high quality video to demonstrate exactly how the CJR....follows LNAV waypoints as expected, how one can alter the route in midflight by inputting new waypoints etc, how the plane perfectly follows IAS mode (does not have autothrottle capabilities)?  I bought the plane to fulfill needs for a regional jet in APLv2 and it functions very well in this role.  I love the fact it doesn't fly itself and keeps me focused when I need to be.  I've flown all the major birds in simulations for going on 30y now and while AS CRJ isn't perfect it does what it's supposed to and if and when it doesn't (likely because the user did not clean up the FMS route correctly) it's very easy to fix in mid flight.

I have many hours in this plane and also many trips as a passenger, I’m not seeing the issues that have been stated here.  I also don’t frequent their website for support, as there enough resources available to teach you how to actually fly the plane, program the fmc correctly, etc.  
 

It’s a pity that the OP allowed himself to be swayed by opinions largely based on how much they hate the developers.   

[Noel 4,517]

11 minutes ago, FrankR409 said:

I have many hours in this plane and also many trips as a passenger, I’m not seeing the issues that have been stated here.  I also don’t frequent their website for support, as there enough resources available to teach you how to actually fly the plane, program the fmc correctly, etc.  It’s a pity that the OP allowed himself to be swayed by opinions largely based on how much they hate the developers.   

It's remarkable isn't it.  I honestly believe the serious naysayers here don't know how to fly the plane or get fooled by its lack of auto-throttle when the AP disconnects and they didn't notice, then the plane doesn't follow its route, and the plane is blamed.  You have a bunch of folks emphatically reporting the plane behaves as it should and everything largely works as it should, and yet because of serious sour grapes w/ the developer the product is deemed by sour grapes as junk.  For 'junk', it works shockingly well--I'd absolutely buy it again, and I paid the full fare for it. And not only does it work as it's supposed to in very large part it's very satisfying to fly.

From JRBarrett, I am a beta tester for the CRJ and a r/w CRJ mechanic and avionics specialist:

I would point out that the LNAV functionality of the autopilot of the real CRJ is rather “primitive” compared to a Boeing or Airbus. The latter two aircraft can (and do) use a dynamically varying bank angle during turns while the CRJ cannot. The CRJ autopilot can only do two things: it can fly level, or it can turn at one of two fixed bank angles - either 25 or 12.5 degrees. Above 31,500 feet it is limited to only turning at a bank angle of 12.5 degrees. For this reason, the real CRJ will often use an extremely long turn anticipation distance compared to more advanced airliners. At high altitude, the real CRJ may have to begin a course change up to 11 miles before reaching a waypoint if the course change is significant.

[The Flight Level 2,115]

Good morning from the Eastern Time Zone in North America! Wow, this thread is packing some gusto! The management at Aerosoft were kind enough to let a GA guy preview the CRJ just before release back in March of 2021. I did not fly the CRJ in depth using the avionics as the flight deck was way over my head at the time. Now being very comfortable with flying the FENIX Airbus and programming a flight, how would the transition be to the CRJ using the FMS?

 

[MrBitstFlyer 3,882]

53 minutes ago, FrankR409 said:

It’s a pity that the OP allowed himself to be swayed by opinions largely based on how much they hate the developers

The majority of the initial replies were negative, but you and others are now putting a very different positive view of the aircraft.  My favorite aircraft by far is the Just Flight BAe146 because I prefer regional flight distances, and I like it because it doesn't have auto throttle so much more hands on.

I initially looked at the CRJ because FS2Crew is available for it - FS2Crew for the Maddog was my first try with this virtual co-pilot and I was very impressed with it. 

It sounds like the CRJ is a little more hands on just Like the 146 and that appeals to me.  So much negativity though and that makes me nervous about the purchase!

[btacon 1,818]

7 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

It sounds like the CRJ is a little more hands on just Like the 146 and that appeals to me.  So much negativity though and that makes me nervous about the purchase!

I have it. A lot of the criticism is valid but at the end of the day the plane flies and functions mostly like a CRJ would. Yes it has quirks, some more quirky than others but if the thought of flying a CRJ appeals and if it won’t break the bank, buy it. You might just find that you enjoy it immensely.

-B

Edited July 24, 2022 by btacon

[garlicbread11 335]

Have a look at 

British AVgeek has several crj videos that may help you decide.

I have it and enjoy flying it, yes it has a few quirks but it’s great fun.

There is also some other videos on YouTube from real crj pilots that give a fair review rather than the standard aerosoft bashing found here.

Paul

Edited July 24, 2022 by garlicbread11

[Prpn 366]

36 minutes ago, btacon said:

I have it. A lot of the criticism is valid but at the end of the day the plane flies and functions mostly like a CRJ would. 

It does not. 

I have a few thousand hours on the real plane(s), and I do not hate Aerosoft either. But they just can not seem to get this plane right in all the different versions of it they have gone through now. And this will be blunt and rude, but most people/simmers that do not see any issues generally do not know enough about how it is supposed to function. Or they have adapted some custom procedure to work around certain issues.

That is absolutely fine, just don't go around telling other people their issues do not exist, or that the product itself is great and without issues. Negativity is not automatically without grounds, but that seems to be the assumption of some people on here. They will happily write it off as hate against a dev instead of the product, but then also happily join in the hate whenever a topic about Captain Sim comes up, lol.

[rka 916]

17 minutes ago, garlicbread11 said:

Have a look at 

British AVgeek has several crj videos that may help you decide.

I have it and enjoy flying it, yes it has a few quirks but it’s great fun.

There is also some other videos on YouTube from real crj pilots that give a fair review rather than the standard aerosoft bashing found here.

Paul

A commercial video that displays the "reviewed" products manufacturers logo is where you expect more fair opinion than here from people that actually paid for the product? Seriously?

[btacon 1,818]

5 minutes ago, Prpn said:

That is absolutely fine, just don't go around telling other people their issues do not exist, or that the product itself is great and without issues. Negativity is not automatically w

You sir make a lot of assumptions about what I said and none of it comes from my post. I suggest you reread it and then you might see the error of your initial assumption.

-B

 

[Prpn 366]

16 minutes ago, btacon said:

You sir make a lot of assumptions about what I said and none of it comes from my post. I suggest you reread it and then you might see the error of your initial assumption.

-B

 

And you make the assumption my entire post is a reaction to yours while only the first line is.

[garlicbread11 335]

33 minutes ago, rka said:

A commercial video that displays the "reviewed" products manufacturers logo is where you expect more fair opinion than here from people that actually paid for the product? Seriously?

Where did I say it was that video that offered a fair review? Where did I say appoint payment of product?

Jog on

[rka 916]

20 minutes ago, garlicbread11 said:

Where did I say it was that video that offered a fair review? Where did I say appoint payment of product?

Jog on

In the quoted comment you were saying there is avgeeks video and also others that offer a fair opinion. I didn't think you were implying avgeeks video did not offer fair opinion in contrast to the other ones, but let's not get too linguistic here 😉 Jogging on!

[Noel 4,517]

1 hour ago, Prpn said:

And this will be blunt and rude, but most people/simmers that do not see any issues generally do not know enough about how it is supposed to function.

Well of course if you're the RW pilot your perspective is vastly different than mere mortals like myself.  This being said the plane absolutely fits in the envelope of what a decent, reasonably complex MSFS plane will conform to.  It's a range, it's not either/or.   Just curious because honestly I can't tell:   can YOU make the plan follow a flight plan, edit the plan in mid-flight, and have it follow the route you've input, then come in an add a STAR or ILS/RNAV approach or what have you, and have it lock onto the GS and land the plan beautifully, like I do day in an day out?  I'm trying to get a feel for why the abject distain.  I'd really find it unfortunate, and therefore worth contesting, if someone based a decision on depictions like yours because most mere mortal simmers used to high level planeware will find the plane quite capable and a joy to fly albeit with it a few idiosyncrasies as JRBarrett described.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,882]

1 hour ago, Prpn said:

2 hours ago, btacon said:

I have it. A lot of the criticism is valid but at the end of the day the plane flies and functions mostly like a CRJ would. 

It does not. 

I have a few thousand hours on the real plane(s), and I do not hate Aerosoft either. But they just can not seem to get this plane right in all the different versions of it they have gone through now

I consider myself a serious simmer, but I don't need an MSFS aircraft to be exactly like the real thing - I am not interested dealing with complex failures for example. I want to operate and fly the plane close to how the real aircraft behaves. If it is a little off in performance for example, it wouldn't be a show stopper for me. 

What in the Aerosoft CRJ causes you to say they can't get the plane right?