Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MatzeH84

  1. So the core message is..  The bugs are being fixed, which is great and what users can expect from a reputable company like AS. The speed for the first patch is amazing and highly respectable though.

    But - the core message is as well that simple products sell good enough that there is no need to put in the effort to create more advanced addons.

    And at this point I'm giving up. I'll choose my addons more wisely in the future.

    Thank you for your efforts.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  2. vor 28 Minuten, Mathijs Kok sagte:


    But dear friends, the people that work at Aerosoft do not do these things as a hobby. So off course money talks. If I do a few products that do not make money I will have a problem. So it could very well be that the aircraft product we do are simply not your taste. That can be and is no problem.  But do note that we said the Twin Otter was aimed at the Xbox platform from the very start. We can only hope that Microsoft is able to release it soon on that platform. Just like our friends at PMDG we simply have to be patient on that. 


    As this is the first aircraft we release with Xbox compatibility in mind, we simply do not know yet how well it would sell. If we listen to our market research and the comments we get via social media, that demand is considerably. Personally I think for aircraft like this one, that are not very difficult to use, the market is massive. But we have to see and that is what we do with this product. 


    I fully understand that there are simmers that prefer things to be more complex and less 'gamy' and for those people P3D still stays the best platform at this moment. Microsoft Flight Simulator simply has a very different average customer so the products made for them will be different. The companies that work on complex aircraft for the MSFS do so by using the sim only as the display engine and use external code that does the simulation. That method makes a release via the Marketplace (and thus Xbox, if they would care) impossible. For us that is not an option because the Marketplace is by far the biggest distribution channel.  Sure we want Terrain Display and an accurate weather radar (not the default one) in our CRJ, but not when that removes the Marketplace as sales option. 

    In this case you are correct, and the products AS makes are not attractive to me anymore.

    'Known from the very start' might be true for someone who follows the forums regularly, but it was not made clear in the public announcements before release, that it was considerably dumbed down in this regard to keep it compatible to Xbox.

    I know Aerosoft as a company aiming for the middle of the market since the beginning of my simming career 20 years ago. The products were not the most complex, but complex enough to be fun and challenging.

    The FSX/ P3D Twotter is a great example. Easy enough to make a quick flight, complex enough to cover most systems and engine limitations.

    With the Kodiak in mind and AS's reputation, plus the official presentation on social media, it was clear to me that the Twotter would be on par with the Kodiak or even better.

    The price tag, same as the P3D version, suggests that as well from a long term customer's perspective.


    Now that it is buggy is one thing, and it's sad enough it was released in this state. But bugs are fixable.

    Not fixable are limitations which come from some fancy gaming console, mostly used by people who buy it, fly it, but don't seriously sim with it (and stop using the product after a few weeks because it got boring). If that's the market where the money is, be it. But if in consequence this means dumbed down flight models, limited animations, awful sound and less complexity (to not scare the gamer boys), then this isn't for me anymore.

    I would gladly request my money back, but I already know the answer.

    • Like 6
    • Upvote 3
  3. Another thing I found regarding the trim knobs.. turn the slowly notch by notch with the mouse wheel. Each notch will generate a sound.

    Now do it quickly. The same sound will play at the start of each new notch, but the sound of the notch of even notches before still hasn't ended playing.

    You you have the same sound overlapping and being played at multiple instances when trimming fast. It just sounds rediculous.

  4. Hi there,


    thanks for bringing us the Twotter. However it's a big letdown for me, at least in its current state. It flys absolutely great though!


    Biggest issue: Engine sound. Not only I observe the 'steps' already discussed in the other thread, but right in the transition from forward to reverse (so exactly where the beta range should be) the sound- stops. I have reverse and forward (whole range) on the axis, so I can transition smoothly through the whole range. The usual 'swirling' sound in the beta range is completely missing. Besides that, the whole soundpack for the engine just doesn't live up to the overall quality.


    Beta range: It is non-existent. Although it might be a current sim limitation, the 'feel' and especially the sound when taxiing is easily surpassed by the Kodiak.


    Prop modeling: The props are flat when looked at from the side. Even when feathered, it is shows as a thin strip when viewed from the side. No volumetric prop modeling at all.  Stopping the engine, it should stop feathered (except for the water based versions, if startlocks applied). However it stops flat. Correct me if I'm wrong, but usually in the PT6 the hydraulic pump for the props sits in the prop hub and only provides pressure when the the prop is turning, and the blades are spring loaded to feather. So..


    Hydraulic pump: With brake pedals contantly applied, the hydraulic pressure is bleeding constantly and the pump runs in short intervals. The hydraulic pressure should drop only once per application, not constantly during one application.


    Visual quality: Especially when looking out of the window at the engines, it feels like FSX (not even P3D). While the model and textures are generally good (but not close to the other single engine turbine recently released), this view in particular is not state of the art, mainly because of texuring and materials. The spinner has a strange layer of.. dirt..? The exhaust is pretty unsharp, it seems it is overly glossy. The intake isn't round, but you can see edges. The prop blade textures are particularly unsharp.


    That's what I have seen within 10 minutes. The 5 minutes of flying were fine, the flight model feels great.


    For me those points are already big immersion killers, especially the sound. Therefore I'll shelf it and see what future updates bring. It really has great potential to become a great addon, however it's not there yet (for me).



    Microsoft Flight Simulator 19.01.2022 20_21_41.png

    Microsoft Flight Simulator 19.01.2022 20_29_24.png

    Microsoft Flight Simulator 19.01.2022 20_56_37.png

    • Upvote 3
  5. vor 36 Minuten, Mathijs Kok sagte:

    It could be we simply do not use a default variable for this to make the system more like it is in the real aircraft.

    Well, in that case it renders the whole system inop for people like me who only fly online. 

    Online traffic also isn't shown on the ND. 

  6. Interestingly I run a 3700x with 32GB RAM @3200 with the old 1070 from my previous system (upgrade on hold because of the insane prices), and in full HD the CRJ performs just like the good old 172 even in complex scenery.

    This with a second screen for browser etc and a 3rd touchmonitor for the FMC.

    I don't look at any FPS numbers, when it's smooth, it's smooth. Settings are all on the high side.

    I feel very sorry for the guys with killer systems, and personally I would be deeply unsatisfied as well, but it's not the addon itself I guess. Drivers, anti-virus, resolution or G-Sync might come into play here.

  7. Second flight yesterday went to Florence, ILS-Z 05.

    I approached using the AP in FMS NAV mode. The ILS was pre-configured and the indications were already shown in blue on the PFD.

    I selected the APR mode when turning to the final approach course.

    The FMA in my eyes then should have announced LOC and GS in white, which did not happen. Instead, I got a green VGP  announcement, so the aircraft prepared for a GPS approach, which I didn't program in the first place. The expected Nav-to-Nav switching didn't occur, so I manually switched from FMS to NAV, but the indications remained the same with APR mode still being active. Only when I selected NAV mode, the FMA changed to LOC1, but the vertical mode just remained at VGP instead of showing GS. The GS deviation indicator meanwhile was in the perfect position to intercept.

    After all I had to fly the approach manually on raw data, because the GS was never recognized even though all modes seemed to be correct.

    On the flight before (landing ENCN) I had a similar issue, so I payed more attention in doing things right.

    Using the WT CJ4 with the quite similar PL21 suite, I didn't have these issues once.

    Did I something wrong, or is the ILS part rather borked right now? The indications are there and correct, but the FD/AP system doesn't seem to interpret them correctly.




  8. vor 27 Minuten, renatodmc sagte:

    I’m not sure if it’s related, but does anyone know how to make my VRinsight MPanel work with this CRJ? It somewhat works with default aircraft (except for autopilot mode selection).


    Partially. You may set frequencies and use the gear and flaps, but anything AP/FD related is not working at all.

  9. vor 9 Minuten, SimWare sagte:

    We will issue tomorrow a tutorial on the AP.
    Please note few functions are available for key bindings from within the Simulator.

    We are working an a Simmconnect interface allowing for more available function.

    As for the throttle axis, do not use FSUIPC, sipmu use direct simulator assignment indeed.


    Many thanks for your answer, really looking forward to it.


    As for the throttle, using the sim instead of FSUIPC is the last thing I want to do as I have manually keep switching several profiles. But if this is the way it is, I'll have to live with it I guess.

  10. I have all addons configured via FSUIPC, so I don't have to bother switching profiles.. However the throttle axis is not recognized by the CRJ neither as direct axis through FSUIPC nor by the option send to FS as normal axis. Only if I set up the axis directly in the sim it works.

    Plus, many other hardware inputs won't work, especially on the AP panel, which is a real pain when you have all the hardware and cannot use it properly. Any advice on the throttle? Any planned development on extended hardware support?




  11. Some alternative destinations, such as african airports, really would be nice. Flying european and american hubs and airports over and over again gets boring time to time, and Africa could be a nice continent to discover. But I admit that it wouldn't sell as good as 'traditional' products..

  12. Moin,

    Ich habe noch das Problem, dass jedesmal wenn ich GSX aktiviere Gebäude verschwinden (nicht alle).

    Wenn ich dann über den AS Addon Manager neu Initialisiere werden die Gebäude wieder neu aufgebaut.

    Nicht dramatisch, nervt aber ein wenig, ist evtl. aber auch eine Frechheit von mir GSX auf einem AS Airport zu benutzen..



    Selbes Problem habe ich auch. Habe zwar auch AES freigeschaltet, aber da unrealistischerweise immer der Pax-Bus ankommt, würde ich doch lieber GSX nutzen..

  13. Hi,

    ich weiß nicht ob es hier schonmal aufkam: an manchen Airports kommt ein Paxbus angefahren, obwohl die Passagiere hier per Pedes zum Flieger kommen würden (aktuelles Beispiel: Hahn). Kann man das irgendwie unterbinden, eine Option einfügen oder das gleich realistisch, Flughafenabhängig gestalten?



  • Create New...