5 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

As soon as I read that MSFS would be releasing an ATR in MSFS 2020, my credit card came out with fond memories of the Flight1 version in FS9.

As soon as I read that Hans Hartmann was involved, my credit card went back into hibernation. 

Hans Hartmann did the Flight1 version, too…

10 minutes ago, Farlis said:

You do realize that you owe your fond memories of the ATR in FS9 to Hans as well? It was his baby.

Well, it all went downhill from there. No more Hans Hartmann for me.

10 hours ago, Maelmoor said:

I'm sure he is a fine pilot, I'm not one to judge that, but what I do know is that unfortunately his attitude is really bad, he is notorious for that 😕

It seems that he is quite happy with that.
It would not be my first choice for a Discord user name.
Of course, it might be his real name. 

Edited April 26, 20233 yr by Reader

9 hours ago, Fielder said:

In the UK colour is correct. 

New Zealand and Australia too. 🙂 

25 minutes ago, Reader said:

It seems that he is quite happy with that.
It would not be my first choice for a Discord user name.
Of course, it might be his real name. 

"Joined 1 day ago", yeah and let me guess: all of his posts are about the ATR.

What did they do to the sounds on this thing?

The pitch trim whooler sounds very odd. I looked up a video from the 8 years ago on the Flight1 ATR and is sounds like the actual ATR and they couldn't get this one right in MSFS2020? 

The engines sound like they've been taken from a kingair PT6 instead of the ATR. When you select climb/cruise on power management the engines don't spool back either?

The GPWS callouts are a voice that I've never heard on any aircraft before.

It feels like they've cut and paste a lots of things from just random aircraft and throw it together

 

 

 

You can argue what you want about the pilot being a troll, the fact is that bugs are there anyway 🙂

 

10 hours ago, Fielder said:

In the UK colour is correct. 

And most of the civilised world as well😉

Having read their post on the official forums, I don't see anything wrong with the bug list they posted. Yes the product is well priced but bugs, errors and omissions are still exactly that. Some things I can forgive or overlook (e.g. minor external visual items missing), others I cannot (e.g. sounds), but it's nice to have the information available for me to decide that without having to purchase it. Plus as others has said it gives the developer a list of things to work on

Im confused with some of the responses here. I’m a -600 pilot as well and can confirm that entire list is 100% valid. Now will most simmers care or recognise 60% with what’s on that list unless you’re rated on it? No. But the fact is it was labeled as an expert series aircraft and these are actual valid inaccuracies. My personal opinion having flown a quick pattern is that is was quite disappointing, and some very basics that I think like the prop speed on climb and approach is totally wrong ( the  after takeoff checklist requires you to visually and aurally confirm the actual speed of the prop is 82% but it was 100% for me) and the engine sounds including the low quality trim whooler sound are absolutely nothing like the real aircraft. The aircraft felt very twitchy on ground and in flight but I have that problem with all aircraft in MSFS and the cockpit is honestly shocking, I couldn’t believe the color of the cockpit alone made it past QA without going into the other things like the displays.

In the quick 15 minute test I was very impressed with the electronic checklist but that was a quick skim, and the cabin modeling seems decent. 

I know making aircraft is incredibly difficult and I can only respect these guys for the work they put in despite being disappointed etc. I think for non rated simmers that wont know what is to be expected or what the real plane does and feels like, I think $13 is great value for what you’re getting, but the Flight1 is still superior. 

Edited April 26, 20233 yr by johnnycaptain

From this feedback it seems we have the usual: "It flies reasonable at this point so lets release together with our Word Update 13 no matter what. Most people except the real ATR Pilots won't notice anyway, so we can iron out discrepancies later."

For that price this is a reasonable approach. But calling this "expert" level at this point seems a bit of a stretch. It certainly can do more than the default Airbus can do, but getting performance right and sounds is also a must.

I thought they worked so closely with ATR, so why are the sounds supposedly so bad?

Since I have no clue about the real ATR, I could enjoy my first flight from KPDX to KSEA (this is my go-to with every new aircraft) very much without bothering about details. Knowing the A320 and the 737, programming the FMC was easy enough, the plane reacted to inputs as I would expect, LNAV and VNAV worked fine. I have no clue what the VNAV-APP bug is, so I just pressed APP, turned one of the dials to IFR and everything worked very well. I had to put in the IFR frequency manually and had to play with all those buttons for a while until I had the FMC route on the second display. I was not able to use the "speed hold" function yet, because I don't have the slightest clue how to use it (I assume it works similar to the CRJ?). 🙂

Luckily I am not super enthusiastic about carpet colors and stuff like that. So I could live with most of the errors, the rude Jaguar described. I am sure I will run into some bugs after learning more of the details of using this plane. But I will use the ATR instead of the Fenix A320 for the next few dozen legs of my world tour.

57 minutes ago, johnnycaptain said:

Im confused with some of the responses here. I’m a -600 pilot as well and can confirm that entire list is 100% valid. Now will most simmers care or recognise 60% with what’s on that list unless you’re rated on it? No. But the fact is it was labeled as an expert series aircraft and these are actual valid inaccuracies. My personal opinion having flown a quick pattern is that is was quite disappointing, and some very basics that I think like the prop speed on climb and approach is totally wrong ( the  after takeoff checklist requires you to visually and aurally confirm the actual speed of the prop is 82% but it was 100% for me) and the engine sounds including the low quality trim whooler sound are absolutely nothing like the real aircraft. The aircraft felt very twitchy on ground and in flight but I have that problem with all aircraft in MSFS and the cockpit is honestly shocking, I couldn’t believe the color of the cockpit alone made it past QA without going into the other things like the displays.

In the quick 15 minute test I was very impressed with the electronic checklist but that was a quick skim, and the cabin modeling seems decent. 

I know making aircraft is incredibly difficult and I can only respect these guys for the work they put in despite being disappointed etc. I think for non rated simmers that wont know what is to be expected or what the real plane does and feels like, I think $13 is great value for what you’re getting, but the Flight1 is still superior. 

For the life of me I can't understand why a commercial pilot would want to come home from work and play at being back at work on his/her home PC? And then complain because it's not exactly and precisely like being back at work. If I was a pilot I would at least want to try a different plane to the one I worked with if I just couldn't switch off? There seems to some kind of psychological obsession at play? Do professional footballers come home and fire up FIFA then moan because it's not realistic? Maybe they do? The ATR seems fit for purpose to me.

Edited April 26, 20233 yr by jarmstro

2 minutes ago, crimplene said:

Since I have no clue about the real ATR, I could enjoy my first flight from KPDX to KSEA (this is my go-to with every new aircraft) very much without bothering about details. Knowing the A320 and the 737, programming the FMC was easy enough, the plane reacted to inputs as I would expect, LNAV and VNAV worked fine. I have no clue what the VNAV-APP bug is, so I just pressed APP, turned one of the dials to IFR and everything worked very well. I had to put in the IFR frequency manually and had to play with all those buttons for a while until I had the FMC route on the second display. I was not able to use the "speed hold" function yet, because I don't have the slightest clue how to use it (I assume it works similar to the CRJ?). 🙂

Luckily I am not super enthusiastic about carpet colors and stuff like that. So I could live with most of the errors, the rude Jaguar described. I am sure I will run into some bugs after learning more of the details of using this plane. But I will use the ATR instead of the Fenix A320 for the next few dozen legs of my world tour.

"Speed hold" has no function. It was a button introduced in the development of the (real) ATR for use with an auto-throttle... only that it ended up having no auto-throttle. So the button stayed there but AFAIK has no function.
Also not sure what you mean "similar to the CRJ"?

having now done some flights in the ATR I conclude that the 12 bucks are well invested as it looks and flies decent, yes a little wobbly on the ground (like the JF146 and CRJ) but once airborn nice, autopilot is also working nice incl. LNAV and VNAV. I don't care about the color - civilized colour - of the cockpit as I have never seen a real ATR cockpit from the inside. My only major concerns right now are indeed the a) the clickspots and b) the flightplan import.

Ad a) not much to say, probably some more learning required on my end, sometimes clicks are seemingly not recognized, may be a pilot's error though

Ad b) reminds me for obvious reasons to the CRJ and that I do not like FP import there either, I am just too spoiled by simbrief imports with the likes like FBW or Fenix. Putting files somewhere, geeze... and yes, count PMDG in. Anyway, I added C:\Users\Phil\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalState\packages\microsoft-aircraft-atr\work to the simbrief export tool and still no luck. Files are there but do not show up in the airplane. lacking a manual this may also be pilot's error though