I would really love a good regionaljet. But as long as I am not 100% sure that Aerosoft was NOT involved in the development (or will be in the product support) i will hold of my money. 

On 12/16/2022 at 12:11 PM, TomCYYZ said:

I really like it! But I wonder if Aerosoft has a hand in development, marketing of, or both?

Aerosoft and their logo appear at the beginning and end of the short video so they are involved in some way. Hopefully it's nothing more than publishing.

The xcrafts ERJs in XP are rather shallow, I'll pass on this one knowing the XP counterparts. They look great but systems wise there isn't much and just thinking about the FMC gives me a headache.

Not to derail but several people have expressed concern with Aerosoft’s involvement. Why is that a concern?

I just purchased their CRJ to get a little familiarity ahead of my real training early next year. Seems pretty solid. 

Edited December 22, 20223 yr by snglecoil

1 hour ago, snglecoil said:

Not to derail but several people have expressed concern with Aerosoft’s involvement. Why is that a concern?

I just purchased their CRJ to get a little familiarity ahead of my real training early next year. Seems pretty solid. 

It's not always the product (CRJ), but their reputation with customer service leaves a lot to be desired.

eg.

 

2 hours ago, snglecoil said:

Not to derail but several people have expressed concern with Aerosoft’s involvement. Why is that a concern?

I just purchased their CRJ to get a little familiarity ahead of my real training early next year. Seems pretty solid. 

The Aerosoft CRJ is good enough for you to start practicing your flows/tasks and program the FMS. Flight model is so so and there are a few discrepancies compared to the real thing (I am CL65 type rated, although not current). Which airline are you going to? 

John

Edited December 22, 20223 yr by 757FO

32 minutes ago, 757FO said:

The Aerosoft CRJ is good enough for you to start practicing your flows/tasks and program the FMS. Flight model is so so and there are a few discrepancies compared to the real thing (I am CL65 type rated, although not current). Which airline are you going to? 

John

Thanks, John. Good to hear. I’ve flown all over the eastern United States in pistons behind Garmin glass, so I was hoping to show up with some general familiarity of CRJ flows and FMS.

Airline is still to be determined. I have one CJO but have interviews upcoming. 

New video released.

 

Edited December 23, 20223 yr by Nixoq

On 12/22/2022 at 1:38 AM, rka said:

The xcrafts ERJs in XP are rather shallow, I'll pass on this one knowing the XP counterparts. They look great but systems wise there isn't much and just thinking about the FMC gives me a headache.

What makes you think it's the counterpart? The dev is called Flightsim Studio AG.

Actually the MCDU looks fairly accurate...looks like there have been a couple of software updates to it since I last flew it almost a decade ago. The thing that's got me concerned is the Vertical Profile is greyed out on the MFD.

During our preflight flow, it was mandatory that we selected the "Vert Prof" box...so much so that it was defaulted to "ON" after an update. No idea how far into development this plane is, but without the vertical profile display, I wonder how VNAV is modeled. It's not completely necessary to have the vertical profile displayed in order for VNAV to work, but it's an integral part of the display presentation, and increases situational awareness significantly.

11 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

What makes you think it's the counterpart? The dev is called Flightsim Studio AG.

Yeah, maybe they just used their 3d model or something. The video looks pretty nice systems wise.

13 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

What makes you think it's the counterpart? The dev is called Flightsim Studio AG.

Not who you were responding to, but X-Craft is listed as a partner on their website and the YouTube video previews all say "FlightSim Studio AG in cooperation with X-Crafts" in the description.

I have a bit of an Aerosoft CRJ feeling, model and texture will be great, but system depth and accuracy won't follow. 

Edited December 23, 20223 yr by bendead

9 hours ago, V1ROTA7E said:

Actually the MCDU looks fairly accurate...looks like there have been a couple of software updates to it since I last flew it almost a decade ago. The thing that's got me concerned is the Vertical Profile is greyed out on the MFD.

During our preflight flow, it was mandatory that we selected the "Vert Prof" box...so much so that it was defaulted to "ON" after an update. No idea how far into development this plane is, but without the vertical profile display, I wonder how VNAV is modeled. It's not completely necessary to have the vertical profile displayed in order for VNAV to work, but it's an integral part of the display presentation, and increases situational awareness significantly.

I'm going to make a real cynical and hopefully wrong prediction - Vert Prof is greyed out because the airplane completely lacks VNAV. At least from the very brief glimpse at the MCDU, no indications it is doing performance calculations.

Genuinely if I were a dev I'd look at these four videos and probably not hire AviationLads to do a trailer. They did a phenomenal job on the QW 787 video before it launched for P3D, but these are short, not focused on the content they're trying to promote, and just model shots. Of course, if you're going for model shots to show off your beautiful model, and the systems aren't there at all, then this is a perfect presentation.

Just now, mspencer said:

...these are short, not focused on the content they're trying to promote, and just model shots...

This is exactly how I felt! These videos didn't at all cover what I thought they would which was very unfortunate. I also suspect (unfortunately) that the vnav will be missing from this.