Comparing a £100 game with a £7m aircraft and arguing about it is nuts. 

16 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

No. In fact I've no idea what a check airman is? Do I need to know to enjoy MSFS? What's it got to do with how realistic the Asobo ATR is? The ATR suits me just fine.

But you literally started…. Ah Nevermind.

Anyway as I said in my opinion I only flew it for 15mins for my case usage it was quite disappointing based on what was said during the dev interviews. For anyone that’s clueless about the plane like me for another type it’s pretty good value for money in my limited try 

@johnnycaptain a second "Thank you" for adding your experience and observations to our discussion. Please don't stop participating because of interactions with AVSIM trolls. There are more of us who quietly appreciate than those who obnoxiously troll.

Edited April 26, 20233 yr by hs118

23 minutes ago, johnnycaptain said:

But you literally started…. Ah Nevermind.

Anyway as I said in my opinion I only flew it for 15mins for my case usage it was quite disappointing based on what was said during the dev interviews. For anyone that’s clueless about the plane like me for another type it’s pretty good value for money in my limited try 

Understood. For my part I've got my thirteen quids worth. The pilot in the first post, however, trashed it on the official forum because it does not precisely replicate the plane he flies at work. For thirteen quid! 😂

It wasn't "trashed", it's a list of legitimate and verifiable discrepancies from reality for a product loudly marketed as "expert". Interviews with Hans Hartman, Asobo and Microsoft indicated the simulation would be quite deep and the accuracy quite high. Yes, DeceivedJaguar5 is obviously annoyed and some of the wording around their list indicates that, but fundamentally it remains legitimate criticism and informative to those of us who care about accuracy. Some of the items on the list are nitpicky and I may be happy to overlook (carpet in the cabin), but others are important to me as they affect regular operation of the aircraft (behaviour of the prop brake, prop feathering, automatically hydraulic axillary pump activation, red IAS tape not moving with AoA,  NH and ITT behaviour during start, ACW behaviour during GI operations).

I'm overjoyed you are happy with the £13 you spent, but that doesn't mean right for you is right for everyone (or even the majority of the userbase here). I am glad we have accurate information from DercievedJaguar5 to make our own assessments with.

Edited April 26, 20233 yr by ckyliu

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

I hope I'm not pouring fuel on a fire when I say, as a frequent passenger, that the idea that my pilot has practiced the flight on his home sim absolutely terrifying.

I know several pilots that use the sim. Even a senior CRJ captain that uses the Aerosoft CRJ (which is apparently not even that good according to most accounts on Avsim) to practice ahead of real life sim training. It is way more common than you might think.
 

Absolutely no reason to be terrified.

2 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

"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"?

If I remember correctly, the CRJ holds the speed in climb and descent by automatically adjusting the climb/descent rate. I expected the ATR to do the same. Thanks for the explanation.

And another one bites the dust...... this doesn't seem to be going anywhere so it's time tom shut it down.