Jump to content

Pilot53

Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Pilot53

  1. The climb performance has always been too good on this aircraft, they said they will work on it with the -900 release. ive parked it until then.
  2. Understood, I am glad that the issue has been acknowledged and is being worked on.
  3. Ok so doing the flight again manually entering weights in the UI, no EFB, the airplane still climbs too fast. ISA was around +10 most of the way, and we had an increasing tailwind this time which should have actually made it climb slower bit its still a rocket ship. As you can see, 16 mins 50 seconds to fl 360 at mtow. Please try again to replicate and tune this behavior, what I am seeing matches what I can see in every youtube video of this addon as well, including the tutorial flights. I'm not the only one who has this issue I just suspect there are a lot of newbies using this aircraft o
  4. I'll try this again with the UI only and not the efb. Because if I use the efb first then manually edit the UI to match, the climb performance is even less realistic.
  5. Oh ok, thanks for the info. Do they really spool that fast even in the lower n1 range, say from idle to around 40% during taxi? Right now they seem to hit 40% almost instantly from idle.
  6. The MSFS UI? The weights in the MSFS UI do not match the efb, but as you can see the efb shows the airplane right at MTOW. If i manually edit the MSFS payload menu to match the efb the aircraft climbs even faster. In another post JRBarrett confirmed to me that I should never enter weights manually into the msfs menu, just use the efb and then click the set payload in simulator button. I always click that button twice as it seems to be incomplete after one click. Im surprised to hear that you dont get this kind of performance though, even if you watch "the dude's" tutorials on youtube yo
  7. Sure, also I just learned that the weight in the fs payload manager are to be ignored, previously I was setting them to match the efb. Using only the efb did help the issue slightly but climb rates were still too high below FL 200. You will notice that the mach number is set at .77 but the aircraft is maintaining .745, that's because for some reason spd mode doesn't work properly with mach on this aircraft so if I want .74 I need to set .77. 18.5 minutes to FL 360 from sea level at ISA +10 to +5 is much too fast at MTOW. Hopefully this is something that can be fixed soon.
  8. oh ok, I get it now. I was assuming the MSFS manager total weight was correct. I noticed that the aircraft climbs way too easily so I thought it might have been because the aircraft was getting underloaded but I guess that not the reason.
  9. Either way, theya re not accurate, there should be more lag when the engines spool up in the lower N1 range.
  10. The problem is, you never get the weights that you set in the efb. So you cant "just use the efb", because you will have an underweight aircraft as it does not load enough cargo or pax weight, when you check the TOW in the sim it is always much lower than the EFB value even after you send it to the sim. Im not sure why this is considered a low priority, its a pretty big issue unless you edit the weights manually.
  11. Just did another flight this time at MTOW set in both the load manager and the FS menu (the load manager basically doesn't work), from sea level to 360 took 17 mins and 40 seconds at ISA +5. Climb rates were insane, 4500 fpm below 10000, around 3000-4000 fpm all the way until FL200. Above FL 200 I was seeing 2500-3000 FPM, then above FL 320 climb rates were around 1100 fpm. C'mon guys, this is in no way realistic and yes I have the flight model set correctly in the sim.
  12. You must have ice on the aircraft, or are using too low a speed. If you dont have ice and fly it at the correct climb speeds it has way too much performance. Ive been checking several real world crj7 flights on flightaware around the 2 hour total flgiht time mark they all climb around 1000-2000 fpm through the teens and 20's, then 1000 fpm or less until they hit cruise at around 360-370. Total time takes around 20-25 mins depending on weight and conditions, but the aerosoft crj climbs much much faster than this.
  13. There has to be something very wrong with this aircrafts flight performance, I just did another flight and it took 15 minutes to get to 360, ISA+2 and winds steady around 25 kts through the climb. The real flight took 25 mins. I used 320/.80 for my speeds. I saw getting climb rates upwards of 4000 fps through FL 180 where the real aircraft should be about half that. Climb rates were 3000 dropping to around 2500 fps through the 20's. This aircraft needs some tweaking with its performance.
  14. Thats a pretty big difference, I hope they can fix this soon.
  15. Oh I didnt know that, thanks for educating me.
  16. its completely broken, I've been reporting this from day one.
  17. The winds and temps were actually spot on in the sim, and yet the flight was done in the climb detent. I just did another flight from kden to kslc an hour after the real world flight. i verified the temps and winds in the sim matched the real world, and my aircraft was able to reach fl 360 in 15 mins, the real aircraft took 21 mins. I used a full pax load and enough baggage for 50# per passenger, and a reasonable fuel load for the length of the flight.
  18. You can put the flaps down with no hydraulic pressure too. its too bad aerosoft didnt custom code their systems, based on the marketing hype I was led to believe this aircraft would have custom coded systems. Even the working title CJ4 models this behavior properly and its free! Half the switches in the crj cockpit are just dummy switches and dont actually do anything behind the scenes.
  19. At 70000lbs tow using the standard 290/.74 climb schedule the aircraft reached fl370 in 18 mins, that seems a bit fast doesn't it? The real aircraft on that route took 25 mins which would seem more what I would expect. It feels like the crj just wants to keep climbing even at high weights.
  20. Even with glass cockpit refresh rate on high the two inboard EFIS screens seem to have a very low refresh rate after the update, the mfd and pfd are fine.
  21. With the new update the engines spool up too fast from idle thrust, there is no lag like there was before the update.
  22. with the new version the load manager will still not change the cargo weights resulting in an aircraft that is always lighter than what the efb says. It only changes the fuel weights just like before.
  23. You dont hear any wind drag noise from the cockpit from the gear? That seems hard to believe
×
×
  • Create New...