Thoughts on Aerosoft CRJ series?

[sd_flyer 6,108]

In early days it was ok, but I haven’t flown it for a while. Did CRJ get  with WX radar yet?

[ryanbatc 13,102]

The biggest issue I have with the crj is it's handling of LNAV during a turn greater than 30 degrees AND the fact that it can't even fly an ils without being all over the localizer.

 

I initially purchased because my good friend was captain on the -200/900 for quite a while. He was impressed with how it looked, and was able to start up from cold and dark with ease.  

 

Neither of us were impressed with the avionics though - especially the two items I listed above. The aircraft frequently blew through the localizer (and S turned) and massively overshot enroute turns beyond 30 degrees. If an addon can't follow a VOR radial or GPS/FMS track it's not worth my time.

 

The plane does look pretty decent though and my friend thought the sounds were decent as well.

I flew it a few times and that's about it. Thankfully I got it on sale.

[vonmar 125]

1 hour ago, ryanbatc said:

The biggest issue I have with the crj is it's handling of LNAV during a turn greater than 30 degrees AND the fact that it can't even fly an ils without being all over the localizer.

 

I initially purchased because my good friend was captain on the -200/900 for quite a while. He was impressed with how it looked, and was able to start up from cold and dark with ease.  

 

Neither of us were impressed with the avionics though - especially the two items I listed above. The aircraft frequently blew through the localizer (and S turned) and massively overshot enroute turns beyond 30 degrees. If an addon can't follow a VOR radial or GPS/FMS track it's not worth my time.

 

The plane does look pretty decent though and my friend thought the sounds were decent as well.

I flew it a few times and that's about it. Thankfully I got it on sale.

Just to verify, were you using the current version of the CRJ in FSX, P3D4 or MSFS?

 

[ryanbatc 13,102]

3 minutes ago, vonmar said:

Just to verify, were you using the current version of the CRJ in FSX, P3D4 or MSFS?

 

MSFS.  If I recall the p3d version had the same issues.

[Daytona125 225]

3 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

In early days it was ok, but I haven’t flown it for a while. Did CRJ get  with WX radar yet?

No weather yet. It's too bad this plane has all but been abandoned, it has a LOT of potential. Typical Aerosoft, sell it and forget about it, after they took our money. I'm pretty sure this and the twin otter are the last Aerosoft things I buy.

[aniiran 435]

I fly it quite often, no real issues for me.  Occasionally, I get the L NAV hunting issue but rarely the ILS hunting issue, ILS has worked for me 99% of  time.  I also never fly it above 35,000 feet. I usually use it on KDEN-KASE or KPHX-KFLG/TUS/NYL or a similar route for Skywest. I did a -900 route between KIND and KDTW with no issues.

I highly doubt there will ever be another CRJ developed for MSFS since the CRJ is going to phased out heavily in the next few years.  I can already see them stacking up in the Bombardier/Mitsubishi graveyard here in Tucson.

[Prpn 366]

If you have even the slightest idea of how it works and looks like in the real world, than the AS CRJ is a disappointment. If you know nothing about the CRJ and its systems at all, it may be a fun plane to fly for variety. 

The small displays/fonts that were mentioned by another user earlier can definitely be attributed to the developer, as the size of fonts and placement of items on the displays is off by quite a bit. And refusal to correct it from the dev. Long standing lateral navigation issues, inability to fly holds properly, missing FMS features as mentioned by others, skin deep system simulations for some items. If I'd apply our real world procedures I'd never get off the ground as the engines overshoot target thrust settings on takeoff, which would normally be a rejected takeoff etc. 

I'm being a bit pedantic for sure, but it is not a great addon, and has never been. Not in FSX, not in P3D and not in MSFS. It was the ONLY option at some point, which is why it got a lot of traction. But it carried over bugs and issues from all the versions before. And updates have been slow and unimpressive. There is supposedly still a big update coming, but that is what they have been claiming for the past 12-18 months or so? No info on what the update will fix, no info on when it will appear (like this year or next year or maybe only in 2030). 

So, since you already have it, enjoy it if you can 🙂. For others that might see this thread thinking about getting the plane, I would spend my money elsewhere.

[DAD 2,664]

this discussion let me  take the CRJ out of the hangar and do a rather short flight from LSZH to LFMN. Have to say I was amazed  to see that it handled all segments perfectly including capturing the ILS. yes, it overshoots in steep turns, see below when turning onto final approach 04R. but besides that all fine. I just realized again that the CRJ requires too much interaction 🙂 due to missing auto throttle. for me flying this while doing home office is distracting 🤪. sort of ...

 

 

Edited October 24, 2023 by DAD

[vonmar 125]

1 hour ago, DAD said:

this discussion let me  take the CRJ out of the hangar and do a rather short flight from LSZH to LFMN. Have to say I was amazed  to see that it handled all segments perfectly including capturing the ILS. yes, it overshoots in steep turns, see below when turning onto final approach 04R. but besides that all fine. I just realized again that the CRJ requires too much interaction 🙂 due to missing auto throttle. for me flying while doing home office this is distracting 🤪. sort of ...

Nice write up, nice flight / screenshots.

Question:

That turn to final is really many many degrees.

Is that a published procedure you were following?

Edited October 24, 2023 by Ray Proudfoot
Multiple images in quoted post removed.

[DAD 2,664]

20 minutes ago, vonmar said:

published procedure you were following?

per simbrief yes, a specific STAR for ILS04R, already back flying from LFMN to LSZH in the BAE146 so cannot verify but guess it was BORD7R

PS maybe edit your post when quoting me and delete all pics, we don't need them twice

Edited October 24, 2023 by DAD

[Car147 2,290]

It has the potential to be great, but as mentioned above the issues around Lnav etc, which i doubt would  be that difficult to fix now there is a better understanding of  MSFS> just detract from the beautiful modelling of the aircraft.

[Treetops45 1,083]

18 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Yeah that's Aerosoft (or Hans Hartmann...?) in a nutshell. The ATR is just the same, even worse.
The CRJ is visually solidly modelled and performance-wise I think pretty realistic, but you can't do a single procedural flight without noticing something that does not work correctly and having to work around. E.g. on the FBW, which has much less features / functions for now, what is simulated does work almost perfectly. I think that's less immersion-killing, you just know what works and what isn't even modelled, while on the Aerosoft planes the systems themselves are all modelled but also guaranteed to have many glitches.

EDIT: And for a personal review - I never feel like I *want* to fly the CRJ or ATR. I do fly them every once in a while for the sake of variety, but I never look forward to it, unlike the Fenix, PMDG, Maddog, WT 787 etc.

Agree that the ATR is "off". I find it too sensitive to control inputs, not a pleasure to fly. Parked.

T45

[F737MAX 5,760]

Just now, Treetops45 said:

Agree that the ATR is "off". I find it too sensitive to control inputs, not a pleasure to fly. Parked.

Have you tweaked the sensitivities on all your flight control axes in the MSFS controller settings?
That could help you.

Otherwise, I agree. I find intricate throttle control to be impossible, landing in anything other than calm weather is unnecessarily difficult and plenty of issues that have been left unresolved or have returned as regression bugs post-SU13.
I know Carenado is good at visuals only, but at least I had fun in their ATR in P3D, no matter the conditions.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,052]

When quoting a post please do not include images especially multiple ones. At best it's lazy, at worst it's very uncaring to those accessing the site on mobile devices where bandwidth is limited.

[Snuffleupagus 328]

I thought it worked well enough and is enjoyable. May not be perfect but I rarely ran into issues!