I'm not familiar with ATR systems, so I can't comment on depth and accuracy. I started from cold & dark, manually plugged weight fuel and route. To me ATR flies ok. Autopilot follow FMC route, climbs in speed and VS modes. I mean basic seems works fine.

 

And we won't see the Milviz ... for this half-finished plane

I watched a video of a German YouTuber and he hardly had any of the fore mentioned problems, LNAV and VNAV worked fine, performance was spot on and the flight controls felt great to him (he’s a real pilot, forgot what he flies though). He was even working off a ATR FCOM. I have a feeling there’s quite a bit of user error going on here. Google ATR FCOM and you’ll find some awesome materials from 1999, 2011 and others 😉

Cheers,

Pete

PeterZ

This product was released like 4-5 hours ago. How can there be some much negativity when everyone being negative is here posting rather than flying? It was sold here in the USA for $12.99. Don't know what people are expecting at this price point. Reading this thread without flying it yet leaves me to believe it is absolute garbage.

Have to wonder.

Yep watched 737NGDrivers stream and this seems like a legit aircraft, apart from the already acknowledged issues with VNAV approaches. I'm quite sure many problems derive from people having no idea how procedures are in the ATR, I remember it was the same when the A310 released (remember the thousands of complains about ILS not working? It was because the [real] A310 has to be on level altitude before capturing the glideslope). Watch 737NGDrivers stream, it's very educative and works as kind of a tutorial.
It's not study level but my first impression is that this has quite higher fidelity than the CRJ, so considering it costs 13 € while the CRJ costs 60€, that's definitely a steal. I'm a bit suprised many experienced - also real life - pilots here make a judgement only by reading some AVSIM posts from people that - like me - have absolutely no experience on the ATR and interpret many likely user errors as bugs. This aircraft is nowhere near as bad as people make it sound here, but as I said, just watch some streams from experienced pilots and reserve your final judgement for after that.

5 minutes ago, Peter Z KCLE_EDDN said:

I watched a video of a German YouTuber and he hardly had any of the fore mentioned problems, LNAV and VNAV worked fine, performance was spot on and the flight controls felt great to him (he’s a real pilot, forgot what he flies though). He was even working off a ATR FCOM. I have a feeling there’s quite a bit of user error going on here. Google ATR FCOM and you’ll find some awesome materials from 1999, 2011 and others 😉

Cheers,

Pete

Thanks for coming over! Once again, the entire spectrum from good to bad for an aircraft becomes visible. I just wish that people would do their homework and learn the aircraft to make sure something is wrong before posting.

3 minutes ago, tpete61 said:

PeterZ

This product was released like 4-5 hours ago. How can there be some much negativity when everyone being negative is here posting rather than flying? It was sold here in the USA for $12.99. Don't know what people are expecting at this price point. Reading this thread without flying it yet leaves me to believe it is absolute garbage.

Have to wonder.

It's definitely not. Considering there are people that paid 30€ (or 40?) for that actual garbage of an E-Jet, this one right here must be the steal of the century!

21 minutes ago, ricka47 said:

Right - some basic instructions would have been handy!

I have made some progress but it isn't working properly yet - I created an ATR flight in then used SimBrief Downloader app to get the Aerosoft CRJ format file but changed the output directory from
C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalState\packages\aerosoft-crj\work
to 
C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalState\packages\microsoft-aircraft-atr\work
I was then able to load the file into teb ATR FMC by entering the filename (EGHHEHAM in this case) into the IDENT field on the Route Sel and get the system to pick up the route, but it doesn't actually to be including the destination airport so you can set the runway and approach etc. So there's clearly something built but I can't get it to actually work yet.

11 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

It's definitely not. Considering there are people that paid 30€ (or 40?) for that actual garbage of an E-Jet, this one right here must be the steal of the century!

The E-jet is coming along reasonably well. Not as fast as I might like but progress is clearly happening.

Honestly for $12 it's an instant buy...I can confirm that the ATR is still going to get worked on a bit for new features and enhancements. 

I really don't get some people...TWELVE DOLLARS AND NINETY NINE CENTS!!!

Edited April 25, 20233 yr by iFlySimX

16 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Yep watched 737NGDrivers stream and this seems like a legit aircraft, apart from the already acknowledged issues with VNAV approaches. I'm quite sure many problems derive from people having no idea how procedures are in the ATR, I remember it was the same when the A310 released (remember the thousands of complains about ILS not working? It was because the [real] A310 has to be on level altitude before capturing the glideslope). Watch 737NGDrivers stream, it's very educative and works as kind of a tutorial.
It's not study level but my first impression is that this has quite higher fidelity than the CRJ, so considering it costs 13 € while the CRJ costs 60€, that's definitely a steal. I'm a bit suprised many experienced - also real life - pilots here make a judgement only by reading some AVSIM posts from people that - like me - have absolutely no experience on the ATR and interpret many likely user errors as bugs. This aircraft is nowhere near as bad as people make it sound here, but as I said, just watch some streams from experienced pilots and reserve your final judgement for after that.

I agree with all your sentiments and at 12.99 quite the bargain!  That said, I think I can understand the bitter outrage at this “Asobo Expert” class plane. It has bugs that are so obvious it should have never gotten past first line testing. 
 

Get in the cockpit and using your hats switch make a “quick view” left and right. Guess what happens, at least for me and it DOES NOT HAPPEN in any other plane.  Snap your hat to left view and you glance right. Snap right and you view left. 

How did beta team MSFS that?

-B

Edited April 25, 20233 yr by btacon

1 minute ago, btacon said:

How did beta team MSFS that?

My guess is (like usual) they didn't miss it, it just wasn't fixed before the release date - written in stone months ago - arrived.

I purchased the ATR and flew it a couple of times. It needs work in the graphics department concerning the cockpit. I thought the labeling was difficult to read and the instruments likewise. Thin lines, not enough contrast with the labels, small fonts made the experience generally poor for me. The external graphics were very good and flight handling seemed ok. The price was low and should attract buyers. I hope it gets some love and brings a positive experience to simmers.

2 hours ago, bigifooti said:

What do you mean with "No VNAV" coupling? 

From the official bug thread.  For an FMS driven aircraft (the advanced capacity of this technology was one of the main selling points of the new models of the aircraft), the ability to fly an RNAV approach is kind of fundamental.

I flew Brasilia's for years. We didn't have this capability but the ATR guys did and surely wouldn't let us forget it.  That's ok, we were much faster and didn't look like a pig.  😂

Update 2:
Please find a list below of known issues. These will be addressed in a future update to the ATR 42-600 / 72-600.

Autopilot

While on an approach, selecting VNAV will not cause it to arm and trigger a descent.

VNAV cannot be coupled with approach mode (APP) to engage autopilot to fly a GPS glide slope. For example, while on a GPS approach flying on VPATH and then selecting APP mode, the aircraft will not descend via the GPS glidepath to minimums.

Approach holds (i.e. hold in lieu of turns) are departed after a full circuit. For example, when entering an approach via a hold the aircraft will enter the hold; however, upon turning inbound and crossing the fix the aircraft will continue for one lap in the hold instead of exiting the approach after crossing the fix...

 

13 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

From the official bug thread.  For an FMS driven aircraft (the advanced capacity of this technology was one of the main selling points of the new models of the aircraft), the ability to fly an RNAV approach is kind of fundamental.

I flew Brasilia's for years. We didn't have this capability but the ATR guys did and surely wouldn't let us forget it.  That's ok, we were much faster and didn't look like a pig.  😂

Update 2:
Please find a list below of known issues. These will be addressed in a future update to the ATR 42-600 / 72-600.

Autopilot

While on an approach, selecting VNAV will not cause it to arm and trigger a descent.

VNAV cannot be coupled with approach mode (APP) to engage autopilot to fly a GPS glide slope. For example, while on a GPS approach flying on VPATH and then selecting APP mode, the aircraft will not descend via the GPS glidepath to minimums.

Approach holds (i.e. hold in lieu of turns) are departed after a full circuit. For example, when entering an approach via a hold the aircraft will enter the hold; however, upon turning inbound and crossing the fix the aircraft will continue for one lap in the hold instead of exiting the approach after crossing the fix...

 

I agree that RNAV approaches are a must for regional jets (and turboprops).
But to be fair they say that this "will be addressed". It's obvious this was released a bit too early, but that's probably all on Asobo/MS and their fixed release dates.

With those issues fixed this is easily the best and most high-fidelity regional airliner (with the 146 maybe), this is quite something for 13€. Also the ATR fills SO many gaps if you fly real life routes, like there are many smaller airports that have only ATRs as regular traffic (talking to you, Carribean!). This makes me think that I will actually fly this thing for a long time and not put it back into the hangar because there are "better" aircraft that fly the same routes.
Meanwhile I can't see myself ever touching the A310 again when the 777 releases, for example.

Edited April 25, 20233 yr by Fiorentoni