FSS Embrear 175

[threexgreen 3,139]

28 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

As did HPG before well before them with the H145.

But as was pointed out i this is getting very off topic...

I never claimed TFDi did it first.

[threexgreen 3,139]

27 minutes ago, mspencer said:

Because depending on how the flight plan works in the sim, it's basically trying to read data from that stupid flight planner, and working with the flight plan becomes clunky at best based on other implementations I've seen.

The G3000 from the AAU was the first flight plan I've seen that seems to use the engine's default flight plan, but still gives you less rigidness in the way the FP is structured (you can go to nowhere, for example, whereas before, it always had to end at the airport listed as the destination).

If they use extensively the default flight plan mechanic, I'm out.

So basically, this would mean the aircraft couldn't load a flight plan in the MCDU without a flight plan being loaded in MSFS? Like simbrief integration but instead using MSFS?

[Fiorentoni 4,234]

I swear if that is only a prettier VirtualCol, I‘ll riot! Can‘t be that hard to do a decent representation of the most poupular regional jet after almost 10 years!

[simon747 185]

40 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I swear if that is only a prettier VirtualCol, I‘ll riot! Can‘t be that hard to do a decent representation of the most poupular regional jet after almost 10 years!

I doubt that will be the case.  Even as it stands now it looks to be on a different planet to the VirtualCol offering.  It looks like  they could be releasing an early adopter one to gain funds as well as gain the wider MSFS audience and then add system depth with updates and or on final or subsequent version to target those who want that.  Might as well be positive about it; looks like a win-win scenario for all simmers.

[bigifooti 156]

8 hours ago, Nixoq said:

So basically, this would mean the aircraft couldn't load a flight plan in the MCDU without a flight plan being loaded in MSFS? Like simbrief integration but instead using MSFS?

But in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKBTQuep9rk you see them program a flightplan.

Also i saw a comment about missing VNAV. In this video they first load in the route and look at the map. Afterwards they start to load in performance data. 

[regis9 4,014]

I don’t need it to be so high level that it simulates systems and things that most of us will never notice, but I definitely need to it to do things like work with Simbrief flight plans, have LNAV/VNAV etc.

[threexgreen 3,139]

5 hours ago, bigifooti said:

But in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKBTQuep9rk you see them program a flightplan.

Also i saw a comment about missing VNAV. In this video they first load in the route and look at the map. Afterwards they start to load in performance data. 

I don't know how the MSFS flight plan module would work in a third-party aircraft, therefore my question.

I'm rather confident it'll have VNAV because I don't know what kind of addon it would be if they just leave out one of the most basic systems. That would be pretty bizarre.

[simon747 185]

1 hour ago, regis9 said:

I don’t need it to be so high level that it simulates systems and things that most of us will never notice, but I definitely need to it to do things like work with Simbrief flight plans, have LNAV/VNAV etc.

Well you may not be an early adopter if VNAV is added later, but I am sure it will have a working VNAV in subsequent releases.  So I suspect all users will end up happy in the different stages of developemet 🙂

[Fiorentoni 4,234]

So watching the video and seeing multiple comments by real life E-Jet pilots, this has MSFS default NAV systems and a totally wrong MCDU and MFD, and is basically just a default plane with a nice looking model. Sounds like CaptainSim according to some comments.
So just what I expected, we're obviously cursed to never get a study level E-Jet in our simming life.

[Fiorentoni 4,234]

1 minute ago, simon747 said:

Well you may not be an early adopter if VNAV is added later, but I am sure it will have a working VNAV in subsequent releases.  So I suspect all users will end up happy in the different stages of developemet 🙂

Or - what is more likely and the only reason they'd ever release an airliner without basic navigation functions - they'll take the early adopter money and run. Please tell me one (1) single example of where a 3rd party plane was released without basic functions like VNAV and ended up on study level or at least on an acceptable level of depth (let's say like the CRJ). This never happens.

[simon747 185]

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

Or - what is more likely and the only reason they'd ever release an airliner without basic navigation functions - they'll take the early adopter money and run. Please tell me one (1) single example of where a 3rd party plane was released without basic functions like VNAV and ended up on study level or at least on an acceptable level of depth (let's say like the CRJ). This never happens.

There is no point in speculating about how they decide to add system depth in their development cycle.  I am sure it will have LNAV and some sort of VNAV in the early adopter release and will be tweaked and other features added, nav databases, in the future possibly.  Ppl will get it when it has the features they want, some initially and some later on.

Edited December 25, 2022 by simon747

[threexgreen 3,139]

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

So watching the video and seeing multiple comments by real life E-Jet pilots,

Where can I find these comments? YT?

[Fiorentoni 4,234]

2 hours ago, Nixoq said:

Where can I find these comments? YT?

Mostly on the MCDU video on youtube, yes, also a couple in the MSFS forums. To be honest you can literally recognize the MSFS default ND screen in the video yourself, it's the same from the default Boeings I think.

[mspencer 425]

4 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Or - what is more likely and the only reason they'd ever release an airliner without basic navigation functions - they'll take the early adopter money and run. Please tell me one (1) single example of where a 3rd party plane was released without basic functions like VNAV and ended up on study level or at least on an acceptable level of depth (let's say like the CRJ). This never happens.

That is correct. I've never seen it happen in FS - anyone comparing these models to Steam Early Access is being catastrophically naïve and clearly does not remember the Air Simmer.

[mspencer 425]

10 hours ago, bigifooti said:

But in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKBTQuep9rk you see them program a flightplan.

Also i saw a comment about missing VNAV. In this video they first load in the route and look at the map. Afterwards they start to load in performance data. 

That's not what the video shows. The flightplan entries could honestly be any sort of flight plan module. 

They also load in performance data into a display that looks wrong, and it's not outputting any path or prediction whatsoever. Ergo, there's no VNAV. 

Along with the missing vertical profile, the default nav display, etc., it looks like you're getting stock re-skinned gauges and a nice 3d model, but it will probably struggle going from point A to point B.