Carenado to address older bugs/issues

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

17 hours ago, fakeflyer737 said:

I wanted to get the 182 but everyone says its trash. 

It is not trash... just boring.. 😉

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

17 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

I read on Carenado's facebook page something which surprised me quite a bit.  They mentioned they are addressing older msfs products and bugs and will fix them hopefully come January.

I will withhold judgement until I see the updates... they are aware of a lot of reported bugs in their previously released airplanes.. but are they actually going to fix them?  😉

[Sky_Pilot071 580]

6 hours ago, Zangoose said:

It's a new variant of the HondaJet - Comes with some nice features like auto-throttle: https://www.hondajet.com/en/Products/HondaJet-Elite-II

Also more speed and range.

sp

[Gordon Hutchison 76]

You can't polish a word not allowed..... but Carenado sure do try to!

[bobcat999 8,484]

56 minutes ago, Gordon Hutchison said:

You can't polish a word not allowed..... but Carenado sure do try to!

Now this is strange.
Do you own some the excellent Carenado aircraft in MSFS, such as the Mooney, Seneca, C377, or C195?  Have you tried them?  Or are you just another one jumping on the 'bash Carenado' bandwagon for no reason other than to try to look like a serious simmer?  
So now they are trying to improve their other products, as people have requested, and this is what you say about them.  How about if they don't try.  what do you say then?

Some of their aircraft have issues to be fixed, I agree, but I know developers who seem to get a lot of accolades and are far worse. 
I took my Airplane Heaven Chipmunk out for a fly last night after an update, and ditched it withing minutes. Awful to fly, poor modelling and texturing, and a sound loop that I thought people had stopped producing since about 2005.  Dreadful.  Now that was a waste of money.

I have never felt like this about a Carenado aircraft, which are not marketed as 'study level' aircraft by the way, maybe to allow the sim snobs to steer clear in the first place, but they are generally pretty good for the price, and have a big market.

Or course, some simmers who consider themselves to be in the 'upper echelon' don't like the mass market, or the simmers who aren't always into deep systems or 'study level' aircraft.  Almost like uneducated minions who are infecting their sim.

Well tough.  Those simmers are in the mainstream, here to stay, help drive revenue for the sim.  They also tend to buy Carenado products, enjoy them, and don't complain too much if you don't need to lean the mixture exactly to the book as you gain altitude.
Horses for courses.  I am appreciative that Carenado are at least trying to update and upgrade ALL of their back catalogue at least, and I can't see why anyone would want to criticise it unless out of some kind of unfounded malice.

Edited December 15, 2022 by bobcat999

[Waldo Pepper 1,953]

Did not know Carenado could speak.

[Gordon Hutchison 76]

25 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

Now this is strange.
Do you own some the excellent Carenado aircraft in MSFS, such as the Mooney, Seneca, C377, or C195?  Have you tried them?  Or are you just another one jumping on the 'bash Carenado' bandwagon for no reason other than to try to look like a serious simmer?  
So now they are trying to improve their other products, as people have requested, and this is what you say about them.  How about if they don't try.  what do you say then?

Some of their aircraft have issues to be fixed, I agree, but I know developers who seem to get a lot of accolades and are far worse. 
I took my Airplane Heaven Chipmunk out for a fly last night after an update, and ditched it withing minutes. Awful to fly, poor modelling and texturing, and a sound loop that I thought people had stopped producing since about 2005.  Dreadful.  Now that was a waste of money.

I have never felt like this about a Carenado aircraft, which are not marketed as 'study level' aircraft by the way, maybe to allow the sim snobs to steer clear in the first place, but they are generally pretty good for the price, and have a big market.

Or course, some simmers who consider themselves to be in the 'upper echelon' don't like the mass market, or the simmers who aren't always into deep systems or 'study level' aircraft.  Almost like uneducated minions who are infecting their sim.

Well tough.  Those simmers are in the mainstream, here to stay, help drive revenue for the sim.  They also tend to buy Carenado products, enjoy them, and don't complain too much if you don't need to lean the mixture exactly to the book as you gain altitude.
Horses for courses.  I am appreciative that Carenado are at least trying to update and upgrade ALL of their back catalogue at least, and I can't see why anyone would want to criticise it unless out of some kind of unfounded malice.

I've been an avid "simmer" since around 2010 from the FSX era, through the P3D v2-v4 then onto MSFS. Also dabbled in XP11.

I've seen Carenado consistently release subpar (at their price point) addon aircraft for every sim platform they've developed for, the sheer rate that they pump out addons speak volumes. Their 3D modelling and texture work is top notch, I'll give them that. Buying a Carenado addon always been a lottery, some are not too bad whereas others release with frankly mind boggling bugs that make one question if they test addons at all before pushing them out the door. Compound this with their legendary lack of customer communication, buyers have always been left wondering if Carenado will ever release fixes for their products. I remember when it was largely left to Bert Pieke to release mods in his spare time to fix show stopping bugs in Carenado planes for FSX and P3D.

During the FSX/P3D era flight simming was far more niche than it is now, primarily thanks to the popularity of MSFS. With new developers showing what is possible at the $20-$30 price point (SWS Kodiak, FlightFX Hjet and Vision Jet etc) it leaves Carenado looking like a third-class developer, they have nowhere to hide now.

I'm not a flight sim snob in the slightest, your post seemed to insinuate that was my agenda - I'm simply tired to seeing simmers parted from their cash for sub-par products (however visually striking) and left wondering by Carenados radio silence if fixes and updates will ever come.

Perhaps in this new MSFS era they'll up their game as the competition for flight simmers hard earned cash witn be much stiffer than in FSX times....but I'm not holding my breath.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Gordon Hutchison

[Sky_Pilot071 580]

10 hours ago, Zangoose said:

It's a new variant of the HondaJet - Comes with some nice features like auto-throttle: 

The Seneca is my second favorit plane in MSFS.

sp

[Fielder 3,681]

The market will determine whether Carenado changes their airplane design philosophy. Evidence shows their sales volume high and money rolling in.

[Matchstick 1,886]

3 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

Now this is strange.
Do you own some the excellent Carenado aircraft in MSFS, such as the Mooney, Seneca, C377, or C195? 

I own all 4 of those but I don't think any of the Carenado planes rise to the level of excellent.

There's are excellent aspects of at least sone of those but that gets offset with with a lack of care and attention and particularly support which keeps them from rising much above average

Carenado can, of course, start working to fix that and maybe they will but until they actually do, while they are very far from the worst GA Dev in MSFS they are nowhere near the best either.

(At times it feels like Carenado need a Thranda for their MSFS designs - a top notch dev who can take their beautiful models and properly flesh them out as full aircraft)

Edited December 15, 2022 by Matchstick

[Mace 1,929]

Those of you who are critical of Carenado -- if their planes work with the 3rd-party avionics, what is not to like?   Maybe something in the flight model possibly?

[Matchstick 1,886]

12 minutes ago, Mace said:

Those of you who are critical of Carenado -- if their planes work with the 3rd-party avionics, what is not to like?   Maybe something in the flight model possibly?

The classic example (which is really getting to be a bit of a cliche now) is Carenado planes exploding if you dare to open a storm window in flight no matter what speed or altitude.

It was understandable when MSFS was new but the Dev community worked out how to stop that happening a long time ago, that is still an issuev with Carenado planes is (to me at least) indicative of a company that isn't really putting in much effort.

Edited December 16, 2022 by Matchstick

[mikegrr 109]

I think the Mooney is an excellent aircraft, and as stated above, with 3rd-part avionics, they behave fine. I can't get too worked up about circuit breakers working or not for example.🤣 Looks realistic, flight model "feels" good and gets close to the numbers. I guess the lack of realistic failures is a negative. It's an old model and who knows what the real characteristics really are at this point of any individual plane. 

Everyone migrates to the newest, fashionable plane (me too), as I really like trying out new stuff. But really some of the earlier planes are still fine. I happen to really like the V35 for example...I think its sexy! But i still want to try the newer planes coming out. I have stayed away from the PC-12 however...too many complaints.

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

38 minutes ago, Mace said:

Those of you who are critical of Carenado -- if their planes work with the 3rd-party avionics, what is not to like?   Maybe something in the flight model possibly?

The avionics are typically incomplete..  Example:  Seminole.. HSI GS indicator does not work with the GPS on an LPV approach..  Autopilot switch is not synched with the autopilot modes..  ALT mode shows TRIM continuously.. etc.  Just numerous small, and easily fixed bugs..  But the files are encrypted, so that the user community cannot go in and fix these things, as we could in P3D.

I was able to fix the autopilot switch by reusing some P3D code, but the HSI code for example is not accessible.

These are lovely airplanes that were released with bugs, and never really finished.

[The Flight Level 2,114]

My 2 cents. For the life of me, I just don’t understand why or how a product from Carenado can be so bad for some and gold for others. I personally have not had any issues with the PC-12. The textures are top notch inside and out and the plane follows flight plans with the integrated GTN530 to perfection. Would still love a beta range between flight idle and max reverse for taxing. Other than this it is a smooth beauty in the air that is very predictable with inputs to power and trim adjustments. No surprises on and off the autopilot and just love the overall feel of the model from departure to landing. For me, really an exceptional purchase.