Captain Snowflake

Members
  • Content count

    4422
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Captain Snowflake last won the day on June 12 2014

Captain Snowflake had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

802 Excellent

About Captain Snowflake

  • Rank
    DA/AS CRJ - Bueren, we have a problem!

Recent Profile Visitors

18892 profile views
  1. What Meese suggests is how, for example, PMDG and Quality Wings handle it. I second his suggestion.
  2. CRJ and the GTN750

    LOL, Jerry! I actually had the same rotten idea but never really tested it. Maybe Hans should get a bulk licence from Flight1 and integrate the GTN750 in the next build, so he could concentrate on fixing the pressurization system.
  3. Have to agree with Meese. Hotfix section still states v1.0.1: http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/829-hotfixes/ Pinned in General Discussion is v1.0.1.1, not 1.0.2: http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/748-general-discussion-and-support/
  4. Does this one fit the bill?
  5. V1.0.1: FD going berserk

    Still an eye-catching issue in v1.0.2. Not in the changelog, though:
  6. Confirmed. Looks like the changelog for v1.0.2 again promises too much:
  7. How am I supposed to test (L)NAV, when waypoint sequencing works like this??? https://flightx.net/index.php?thread/94132-aerosoft-crj-700-900x-veröffentlicht-fsx/&postID=981950#post981950
  8. Lack of pinned information

    Aerosoft have a CRJ hotfix forum section here: http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/829-hotfixes/ Wondering why it still reads that version 1.0.1 is current? They do not even use the tools they created exactly for this purpose.
  9. New Update ?

    To me it looks like Bernhard is a box owner ... Buying a new box wouldn't help, I reckon. ;-)
  10. Update pending

    My guess is yes: No other new full installer has been announced. No offence intended, but the CRJ simply cannot yet be a version 2.x So probably just a typo in the announcement.
  11. Probably not quite correct, I would think. Product defects should be eliminated in due course, but still business trips are business trips and holidays are holidays and have to be respected/factored in. I would support the notion, though, that bug fixing and creating service packs for the CRJ have been taking longer than anyone expected around the time of release, including Hans, Aerosoft and ... me. If there were a refund opportunity (AFAIK there isn't one), I'd probably request one myself and buy the CRJ again in a couple of months. (Just did exactly that - requesting a refund - on a certain Boeing 787 title, not related to Aerosoft in any kind or form.)
  12. Speed limitation

    A320: Full speedbrakes with autopilot on (less effective; system logic prevents them from deploying fully with the A/P engaged). Full speedbrakes with autopilot off (more effective, as now system logic allows them to deploy fully). A321: Not really a difference between A/P on and A/P off as far as speedbrake efficiency is concerned.
  13. autoland with CRJ 700

    The autoland of the CRJ currently is very much on the rough side. Hans Hartmann has to correct it ASAP. I have no idea how that could possibly have slipped past beta testing and Aerosoft quality assurance! Seriously: The CRJ does not have autoland capability.
  14. A318 engines air starter ?

    After a long time not flying the current A318 version 1.31 I had to go back into the sim and actually test it. To me it seems that neither ground air start nor cross bleed start are currently simulated. (Haven't checked, though, whether the upcoming 4th Aerosoft Airbus generation - the Airbus 2018 series - will have them.)
  15. ATC Software Recommendation

    "When to use them" doesn't make much sense to me: I fly when I have the time to, I cannot pause my real life in order to make flights when online ATC is present. To add to this, Aerosoft sells a lot of airport addons where online ATC is hardly available, if at all. Thirdly, I wouldn't want to fly the same airports time after time, just because they are the ones that are mostly covered online. To each their own, I guess.