ATR is out

[Bad_T 581]

Tried my beloved RNP02 approach at SKPS that i usually use as benchmark to see how much i can trust the autopilot (who cares apart from me i guess 🙊).

and wooops looks like it shares a bit of code with CRJ 😁 ... i like flying a large variety of planes from very small ones to airliners but these 2 aircraft could easily be my 2 favourite planes (just between the huge airliners and the GA/BusinessJet) but, imho, their autopilot is just not up to par with what I usually consider as 'study/expert/whatever' level 😱 so i have a bit of mixed feeling for now (well ok not much, i still like it because i so much want an ATR 😜).

And yeah for the price it's absolutely great, some other payware cost 2-3 times the price and don't offer half of the functionalities of the current ATR but that's not really the point. If the plane has mixed reviews i think it's because some people expected a bit more due the the 'expert level marketing thing' (no matter the price) and not because it's bad for the price (no one can honestly pretend that). Now sure basic functions work well, but well, you know, it's just when you want that little bit more that actually makes the difference for some people while other just don't care about 😉.

I'm not sure if the AP will ever be up to par with the absolutely amazing AP that we are now so lucky to get even on default planes thanks to the great AAU1 updates and the WTT driven autopilot or PMS WTT addons planes. I think they have aknowledged the issues with the VNAV and, if they can fix that properly, this plane will certainly be one of my favourite aircraft. For my beloved SKPS approach i guess it's a lost cause because the CRJ has those kind of issues since release and i'm not really sure they really care to fix that kind of stuff that probably happens only on a few specific airports.

oh well just my 2 useless cents based on this first released version, the best is probably to come with future updates 🙊😍, have a great weekend all 🍻

Edited April 29, 2023 by Bad_T

[Fiorentoni 4,217]

18 minutes ago, Bad_T said:

Tried my beloved RNP02 approach at SKPS that i usually use as benchmark to see how much i can trust the autopilot (who cares apart from me i guess 🙊).

and wooops looks like it shares a bit of code with CRJ 😁 ... i like flying a large variety of planes from very small ones to airliners but these 2 aircraft could easily be my 2 favourite planes (just between the huge airliners and the GA/BusinessJet) but, imho, their autopilot is just not up to par with what I usually consider as 'study/expert/whatever' level 😱 so i have a bit of mixed feeling for now (well ok not much, i still like it because i so much want an ATR 😜).

And yeah for the price it's absolutely great, some other payware cost 2-3 times the price and don't offer half of the functionalities of the current ATR but that's not really the point. If the plane has mixed reviews i think it's because some people expected a bit more due the the 'expert level marketing thing' (no matter the price) and not because it's bad for the price (no one can honestly pretend that). Now sure basic functions work well, but well, you know, it's just when you want that little bit more that actually makes the difference for some people while other just don't care about 😉.

I'm not sure if the AP will ever be up to par with the absolutely amazing AP that we are now so lucky to get even on default planes thanks to the great AAU1 updates and the WTT driven autopilot or PMS WTT addons planes. I think they have aknowledged the issues with the VNAV and, if they can fix that properly, this plane will certainly be one of my favourite aircraft. For my beloved SKPS approach i guess it's a lost cause as the CRJ has those kind of issues since release and i'm not really sure they really care to fix that kind of stuff that probably happens only on a few specific airports.

oh well just my 2 useless cents based on this first released version, the best is probably to come with future updates 🙊😍, have a great weekend all 🍻

So did it actually FLY the approach correctly? Because in the images the plane is on short final, so it must have worked, right? Then it would only be a matter of incorrect drawing on the ND.

[Bad_T 581]

no no the flight went bad, when i saw the AP path drawn, i disconnected autopilot, tried manually and pretty much crashed short of runway but my life was saved by the ESC key 😁 (that approach is really something)

The screenshot were made on the runway after a reset just for illustrative purposes 🙊, Note also that on the ATR the MER transition is not available for some reason, probably some little DB issues, CRJ has it.

Edited April 29, 2023 by Bad_T

[Vel 294]

A new video from 737NG Driver showing how to program the FMC without locking it up and his opinon on (part of) the reason its locking up in the first place...

 

 

[Matchstick 1,886]

8 hours ago, regis9 said:

What is the name?  I'm not seeing anything in the downloader.

It's in the list as

Microsoft ATR 42/72

[micstatic 4,319]

The only weird thing I haven't been able to figure out yet is this strange echo I get with the altitude callouts.  Anybody else?

[ricka47 611]

53 minutes ago, micstatic said:

The only weird thing I haven't been able to figure out yet is this strange echo I get with the altitude callouts.  Anybody else?

Funny - I don't think I had the echo during my first flights. But, it was there yesterday. No idea why though.

[regis9 4,013]

1 hour ago, Matchstick said:

It's in the list as

Microsoft ATR 42/72

 

9 hours ago, pete_auau said:

have  you update  simbrief  i  just  checked  and  its  there in the  downloader  even  though   i  havnt  got  the  addon  myself

Thanks I didn’t realize it needed a manual update, I’ll poke around and figure that piece out.

[regis9 4,013]

2 hours ago, Vel said:

A new video from 737NG Driver showing how to program the FMC without locking it up and his opinon on (part of) the reason its locking up in the first place...

Interesting, I’ve imported all of my flight plans so far from Simbrief without lockups but none of them had airways.  Has anyone imported a Simbrief flightplan with airways?  I’m curious if that causes a freeze or is it a safe way to go.

If that is indeed an issue it should be a relatively easy bug fix to deal with this exception.

[Fiorentoni 4,217]

1 hour ago, regis9 said:

Interesting, I’ve imported all of my flight plans so far from Simbrief without lockups but none of them had airways.  Has anyone imported a Simbrief flightplan with airways?  I’m curious if that causes a freeze or is it a safe way to go.

If that is indeed an issue it should be a relatively easy bug fix to deal with this exception.

I did and no it did not lock up. I think it's really only happening when you try to enter the airway into the brackets instead of clicking the LSK, as shown in the video.

[JRBarrett 3,070]

6 hours ago, Bad_T said:

Tried my beloved RNP02 approach at SKPS that i usually use as benchmark to see how much i can trust the autopilot (who cares apart from me i guess 🙊).

and wooops looks like it shares a bit of code with CRJ 😁 ... i like flying a large variety of planes from very small ones to airliners but these 2 aircraft could easily be my 2 favourite planes (just between the huge airliners and the GA/BusinessJet) but, imho, their autopilot is just not up to par with what I usually consider as 'study/expert/whatever' level 😱 so i have a bit of mixed feeling for now (well ok not much, i still like it because i so much want an ATR 😜).

And yeah for the price it's absolutely great, some other payware cost 2-3 times the price and don't offer half of the functionalities of the current ATR but that's not really the point. If the plane has mixed reviews i think it's because some people expected a bit more due the the 'expert level marketing thing' (no matter the price) and not because it's bad for the price (no one can honestly pretend that). Now sure basic functions work well, but well, you know, it's just when you want that little bit more that actually makes the difference for some people while other just don't care about 😉.

I'm not sure if the AP will ever be up to par with the absolutely amazing AP that we are now so lucky to get even on default planes thanks to the great AAU1 updates and the WTT driven autopilot or PMS WTT addons planes. I think they have aknowledged the issues with the VNAV and, if they can fix that properly, this plane will certainly be one of my favourite aircraft. For my beloved SKPS approach i guess it's a lost cause because the CRJ has those kind of issues since release and i'm not really sure they really care to fix that kind of stuff that probably happens only on a few specific airports.

oh well just my 2 useless cents based on this first released version, the best is probably to come with future updates 🙊😍, have a great weekend all 🍻

The reversed turn between PS964 and PS963 is probably a bug in both aircraft using a common code base “under the hood”.

However, at least in the case of the CRJ, no r/w CRJ is authorized or capable of flying any approach marked “RNP AR” such as the runway 02 at SKPS. The reason is that the Proline 4 autopilot is only capable of using one of two fixed bank angles: 12.5 or 25 degrees, and cannot follow an RF leg with the precision required for RNP AR. RNP AR approaches will not appear in the nav database of the real CRJ for airports that have such an approach. They do appear in the sim version database.

I am not sure of the RNP capabilities of the r/w ATR - it might well be capable/authorized of doing an RNP AR approach, but in the case of SKPS runway 02, there does appear to be a bug in the way the approach is depicted.

[webstef68 52]

3 hours ago, micstatic said:

The only weird thing I haven't been able to figure out yet is this strange echo I get with the altitude callouts.  Anybody else?

Do you have the spacial audio option turned on? Could be the problem…

[micstatic 4,319]

will check.  

[Maxis 1,861]

2 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

The reversed turn between PS964 and PS963 is probably a bug in both aircraft using a common code base “under the hood”.

However, at least in the case of the CRJ, no r/w CRJ is authorized or capable of flying any approach marked “RNP AR” such as the runway 02 at SKPS. The reason is that the Proline 4 autopilot is only capable of using one of two fixed bank angles: 12.5 or 25 degrees, and cannot follow an RF leg with the precision required for RNP AR. RNP AR approaches will not appear in the nav database of the real CRJ for airports that have such an approach. They do appear in the sim version database.

I am not sure of the RNP capabilities of the r/w ATR - it might well be capable/authorized of doing an RNP AR approach, but in the case of SKPS runway 02, there does appear to be a bug in the way the approach is depicted.

It is approved in the R/W ATR and the feelings of the poster who pointed out the lack of RNP functionality is exactly the way i feel about this plane. For most people the plane is excellent but i much prefer to be using an RNAV approach when possible. So this AC isnt quite doing it for me. But i clearly understand that am in a super minority here and can accept that. Hopefully this gets addressed.

https://www.atr-aircraft.com/presspost/atr-obtains-easa-certification-for-the-new-developments-in-the-atr-600-avionics-suite/

[Prpn 366]

3 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

However, at least in the case of the CRJ, no r/w CRJ is authorized or capable of flying any approach marked “RNP AR” such as the runway 02 at SKPS. The reason is that the Proline 4 autopilot is only capable of using one of two fixed bank angles: 12.5 or 25 degrees, and cannot follow an RF leg with the precision required for RNP AR. RNP AR approaches will not appear in the nav database of the real CRJ for airports that have such an approach. They do appear in the sim version database.

Hey JR! I think part of your information is outdated. The CRJ (or at least the ones I fly) has demonstrated the capability to fly RF Legs and is able to do so when coupled to GNSS as navigation source with AP on or FDs on. It also needs FMC *-28 software or later, and it should show such approaches in the FMS. Still not authorized for RNP-AR, I think this may also have something to do with the required commanded bank angle below 400' AGL. But if/when you find RF legs outside of such -AR procedures, the CRJ should able to fly them if you meet these requirements.

I can not find those bank limits in any of our FCOMs or AFM on the CRJ9, it just mentions things like "1/2 bank limits to 15 degrees of roll" and "1/2 bank limits to half the normal bank limit for the selected lateral mode" which would logically lead me to 15 and 30 degrees. Just curious and wanting to find out more about it.