JRBarrett

Members
  • Content count

    172
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

78 Excellent

About JRBarrett

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Solo

Recent Profile Visitors

1139 profile views
  1. Besides, virtual pilots would probably be disappointed with the basic performance of an accurately emulated 200 - especially if they were exposed to the 700/900 first. With no leading edge slats, and engines with about 4000 to 5000 pounds less thrust than those on the 700/900, the 200 is bit of a "dog" - especially on warm days with full loads. Though it's not as fuel efficient to do so, the 700/900 can achieve Mach .78 pretty easily in cruise - the 200 won't do .78 unless it's going downhill![emoji2] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  2. The ergonomic design of the CRJ cockpit definitely isn't the best. As you said, lighting controls are spread all over the place. Each pair of displays (pilot, center and copilot) have their own master dimming control, but then each individual display also has a separate dimmer (in the upper left corner). The switch to test all annunciator lights has two positions. Some annunciators illuminate in either position, but some do not. The pilot's "stall" annunciator only illuminates in position 1, and the copilot's only illuminates in position 2. Bombardier did make big improvements in two areas in the 700/900 vs. the 200: bleed air management and fire/overheat tests. In the 200, doing the fire warning tests involve six two-position switches on the overhead panel. First they are all moved up to the "warning" position, and the pilots have to look for a specific combination of annunciator lights, CAS messages and aural alerts when hitting the "test" switch. Then, they are all moved to the "fail" position, and a different combination of alerts happens when the test switch is activated. One big problem with this system: If the APU fire detection system does not pass the "warning" test, (and the pilots do not notice the failure), there is a very good chance the APU fire bottle will discharge when doing the "fail" test! On the 700/900 there is a single "FIREX TEST" button, that automatically tests everything when pressed, and gives a simple pass or fail message on the system display. On the 200, pilots have to manually sequence the opening and closing of engine 10th stage bleed air valves, isolation valve and APU load control valve. The switches have to be activated in one specific sequence when bringing APU bleed air online, and a different sequence when taking APU bleed air offline after engines are running. In the 700/900 it is normally all done automatically. The screen shots of the Aerosoft CRJ cockpit are gorgeous! If anything, they look better than the real aircraft[emoji2] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  3. I believe there is an upgrade path from Proline 4 to Proline 21 for the CRJ series, but I am not sure how many airline operators have done it. I think this is more commonly done in the smaller corporate Challenger 604/605 series which have cockpits almost identical to the CRJ. The Proline 21 is a relatively easy upgrade where Proline 4 is already installed. The displays are updated to LCD from CRT, newer more powerful FMS computers are installed with more functionality, and a new flight guidance panel is installed. But the basic look and feel are similar to the Proline 4, and pilots familiar with the older system can learn the newer 21 pretty quickly. At least for the Challengers, I believe there is even an upgrade path to the very latest and greatest Collins flight deck, the Proline Fusion. This is a major cockpit renovation, where the entire instrument panel is replaced with 4 large HD displays. A similar concept to the Honeywell Primus Epic. Not sure airlines would go that route - the expense and downtime would be significant compared to going from Proline 4 to Proline 21 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  4. The Collins Proline 4 avionics package found in all CRJs is a very old design - developed in the late 1980s. It is actually quite reliable in terms of its basic functions, but it shows its age in many ways. The real FMS CDU is quite slow when entering a route. When adding a new waypoint, there is a lonngggg pause while the FMS "thinks" before it appears on the LEGS page. When the Proline 4 was developed, GPS was just becoming available. There were almost no RNAV SIDS or STARS or RNAV approaches. The real FMS can indeed become confused and draw some rather unusual patterns on the MFD when confronted with a modern STAR with multiple legs for different runways. The BIG problem I encounter as an avionics tech with older FMS systems is the size of the available hardware NVRAM for holding the current NAV database. Originally the Proline 4 could hold NAV data for the entire world, but those days are long gone. There are so many new RNAV approach procedures (and more and more coming out all the time) that the FMS has nowhere near enough memory to hold them all. Database vendors like Jeppesen or Lufthansa have had to scale back the geographic coverage areas of their Proline 4 databases many times, as well as eliminating airports entirely with runway lengths below certain criteria. Newer systems like the Proline21 have the option to upgrade FMS hardware to add more NVRAM, but the older FMS systems do not. At least FSX or P3D does not have any database size restrictions!
  5. The real CRJ series is by no means bug free! I got to ride in the jump seat today on our company Challenger 850 (a CRJ200 with a 19 seat corporate interior). We were troubleshooting issues with our new SafeFlight autothrottles. (Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing for the non-FADEC CRJ series... for a price.) It works well in climb - until the pilots do something to change the bleed air load - (line turning on wing and cowl anti-ice) - which causes the AT to disconnect. In descent, when the pilots bring the APU online at 10,000 feet and close the 10th stage bleed air valves. Then the AT disconnects again - and fails. It stays failed until landing. Fun fun fun. I'm sure the simulated (and real) CRJ 700/900 are more reliable due to more powerful engines, and simpler system controls - especially for bleed air and fire detection. The 200 appears to be a bit of a pig. The temperature aloft was ISA +12. The crew had flight planned for 30,000 feet, but after having to keep reducing vertical speed to maintain a Mach .70 climb, they finally gave up and settled for FL 280 for a final cruise altitude. I'll bet the 700/900 would have been a bit more "enthusiastic" about getting up to altitude! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  6. I have not had a significant impact in V4 with DL, using a 1080Ti. Admittedly, that's a powerful GPU with a lot of VRAM - but the biggest advantage of it is the ability to use it with a 4K monitor. With the higher resolution, I am able to get very acceptable AA performance using only 2xMSAA. Indeed, if I try using any kind of SSAA, dynamic lighting does drop frame rates significantly at night. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  7. I'd say airline, since the guys in Spain still seem to be fying it with similar or even higher OAT's...though they might be shifting schedules to morning hours. The maximum temperature for takeoff is ISA +35°C as per my reference source. Which equals to 50°C at sea level. Most regionals seem to have that limit as standard. I guess there may be exceptions in some cases when it's needed. ISA + 35 would be 46C at the 2000 foot field elevation at KLAS, which is just under 115 degrees F I don't know if the ISA +35 limitation is primarily based on engine performance or airframe limitations
  8. And there we have it! Once Hans has his balls properly aligned, we shall see the release of the aircraft! [emoji16]
  9. With all due respect but if you ever saw/heard professional airline CBT's with a german narrating in english you never want to be remembered of that time again. [emoji6] For those who did not have this "pleasure" just search for 'german coastguard, we are sinking' in YT to get my drift. [emoji4] So, if a German pilot gets a "Don't Sink" EGPWS warning, he simply shuts his brain down! [emoji16] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  10. - 1.0 N1? Oops! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  11. So when it is finally released, you will refuse to purchase it? Suit yourself, but it seems rather self-defeating.
  12. It's similar to the famous "barking dog" hydraulic PTU in the Airbus A32x series, that briefly activates when the second engine is started. Quite inaudible on the flight deck, but the sound is so familiar to those who have flown as Airbus passengers, that the sound was included in the Aerosoft Airbus cockpit by "popular demand", even if not really true-to-life insofar as realistic cockpit sounds are concerned. I like that the idea of a later post in this thread of perhaps including two user-selectable sound sets - one very realistic, (from the pilots' perspective), and one that includes sounds that passengers are used to typically hearing.
  13. And a lot of other stuff. For those pilots who flew/fly both the landing gear is the first item that comes to mind. [emoji4] I will soon be maintaining a Challenger 850, which is, for all intents and purposes, a CRJ-200 with a corporate interior. In fact, I will be attending a 3-week maintenance initial at Flightpath beginning November 28th. That is why I am looking forward very much to the upcoming release. Though there are definite differences in performance and handling between the 200 and 700/900, there are certainly many similarities in systems, cockpit layout, avionics etc, that my r/w training will be coming at the perfect time to help in learning the ins and outs of operating the new sim! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  14. Well, the 700-1000 are based on the 100-200. [emoji6] Main difference is the bleed panel and fire detection panel on the overhead, FADEC and the EICAS software. Apart from that it is more or less the same. But probably aint gonna happen. The whole current project did start as an -200 back in the day. There even was a modeled VC...... That, plus the 100/200 have no leading edge slats.
  15. The CRJ is not yet fully diaper trained, but as soon as it can stay dry all night, it will be released! [emoji1] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk