Jump to content

Recommended Posts

this one is timestamped. Flaps 20 in the ILS and then extending flaps with AP on and speed slowing down significantly. My apologies for the links but I think this is video proof that an autopilot can handle config changes

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My friends (and I mean that).... I am closing this topic because it is counterproductive and toxic. Most people just seem to add without reading. Even more just start to click up and down votes withou

Aerosoft advertises "first complex third-party airliner" and it cannot even take a normal ILS approach. I don't know why something like that is sold if it can't even handle the most basic of things. S

This issue is not something that we are going to ignore and we do hear your feedback. With the update we tried different approach to implement the ILS in order to prevent the notorious death dive. But

Posted Images

vor 12 Minuten, Abriael sagte:

 

I mean that the tone of some of the posts here is not exactly nice and friendly (or respectful), and they're receiving a similar response. 

I agree, but this is true for free open source projects as well. Although I see the hard work the team does, the tone often is condescending! If the support in the software company I work for would do this I would have a serious discussion with them.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Cdr Maverick said:

I agree, but this is true for free open source projects as well. I see the hard work the team does the tone often is condescending! If the support in the software company I work for would do this I would have a serious discussion with them.

 

Good. This isn't the software company you work for. 

 

If the company I work for received so many complaints to which the proper response is "RTFM," I'd give my people a medal for managing to retain their sanity.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Abriael said:

I'm fairly sure even the real aircraft won't follow the glideslope, because doing so would lead to a stall. 

You can fly Vref from 10nm final and the real plane will do just fine on glideslope... You'd have an interesting talk with ATC probably, but the plane has no problems. In fact, keeping Vref+10-15kts until flare would likely get you a couple of speed calls from the pilot not flying, as you should be Vref over the threshold and being 10-15kts fast significantly increases your landing distance required.

 

For now, this real CRJ pilot is simply not flying this virtual CRJ, just like I would not fly a real CRJ that takes me below the glide on autopilot :P. But hey, that's just my personal decision. I do feel this known issue should be listed on your sales page, as I feel a bit like a paying beta tester playing with an unfinished product, and that is not the feeling I am looking for after spending €50+.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Abriael said:

 

Good. This isn't the software company you work for. 

 

If the company I work for received so many complaints to which the proper response is "RTFM," I'd give my people a medal for managing to retain their sanity.  

There is definitely some truth to that. But some people don't want to read a manual. Or they simply don't have the time. Some people prefer asking in a forum because they enjoy the interaction with other users and they can ask follow up questions if they don't quite understanding something.

 

In fairness the vast majority of the posts from the administrators here have been quite helpful. The one that I took exception to may have simply been a misunderstanding on my part. I've only seen one person consistently telling people to RTFM and it wasn't an admin. 

 

Overall this forum is very helpful and I believe Aerosoft is doing their best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, CRJay said:

For now, this real CRJ pilot is simply not flying this virtual CRJ

 

Good for you mr. alleged "real CRJ pilot". For now, this virtual CRJ pilot is enjoying flying this virtual CRJ a lot, and it's doing exactly what I'm telling it to do. Incidentally, if this kind of issue a couple of weeks from release of a complex airliner add-on is so big for you that you think it should clutter the sales page, then this may be your first rodeo on a flight simulator.

 

If you plan on continuing to fly virtually on anything more complex than a Cessna, I suggest you get used to it, or don't buy any complex airliner add-on before at least 6 months from their release, because I haven't seen a single release of this complexity since the time of FS2004 (just because previous sims weren't as complex) that didn't come with problems aplenty to be solved with time. In comparison to most, this works remarkably well. 

 

Perhaps when you'll pay $33 million for an aircraft, it'll work flawlessly from the get go. Or perhaps not.

 

9 minutes ago, Chaxterium said:

There is definitely some truth to that. But some people don't want to read a manual.

 

Then the issue is on their side, isn't it?

 

  • Downvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, flyingguitaristsam said:

if you keep even VREF+5 in the AS CRJ on landing, it'll float to the other end of the runway I find

 

Yes. Absolutely. The CRJ is meant to be flown at VREF+0. It was something that actually took a bit of getting used to. Up until I got on the RJ every plane I flew was flown at VREF+5. We even do it in the 757. But in the CRJ we don't.

 

A gust factor may be added if required but aside from that if VREF is 129, then we fly 129.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Abriael said:

 

Good for you. For now, this virtual CRJ pilot is enjoying flying this virtual CRJ a lot, and it's doing exactly what I'm telling it to do. Incidentally, if this kind of issue a couple of weeks from release of a complex airliner add-on is so big for you that you think it should clutter the sales page, then this may be your first rodeo on a flight simulator.

 

If you plan on continuing to fly virtually on anything more complex than a Cessna, I suggest you get used to it, or don't buy any complex airliner add-on before at least 6 months from their release, because I haven't seen a single release of this complexity since the time of FS2004 (just because previous sims weren't as complex) that didn't come with problems aplenty to be solved with time. In comparison to most, this works remarkably well. 

 

 

Then the issue is on their side, isn't it?

 

I agree with what you're saying and I'm glad you're enjoying it. But maybe you shouldn't be telling people that the flap design of the CRJ means the AP can't do certain things, especially with multiple real CRJ pilots commenting in this thread. Just my .02, I'm not a real CRJ pilot but I listen to what they say about the airplane.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Abriael said:

Then the issue is on their side, isn't it?

 

Perhaps. But I feel like you may have missed my point. Or I didn't relay it very well.

 

I get what you're saying. The information is out there. It's readily available. Still, some would prefer to ask questions instead of reading. I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that. Even in the real word we don't tell people in their initial type rating course to RTFM. We encourage questions. It helps to develop a deeper and more well-rounded understanding of things. 

 

I will certainly admit that some of the questions that get asked here are pretty basic and would literally take two seconds of reading to find the answer to, and I could see how answering questions like that all day would get annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, flyingguitaristsam said:

I agree with what you're saying and I'm glad you're enjoying it. But maybe you shouldn't be telling people that the flap design of the CRJ means the AP can't do certain things, especially with multiple real CRJ pilots commenting in this thread. Just my .02

 

If I had a dollar for any "real pilot" waving an alleged resume around in flight simulator forums over the past 30 years or so, I'd be able to purchase every add-on on the market and likely would have money left for a fancy dinner.

 

2 minutes ago, Chaxterium said:

I get what you're saying. The information is out there. It's readily available. Still, some would prefer to ask questions instead of reading. I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that. Even in the real word we don't tell people in their initial type rating course to RTFM. We encourage questions. It helps to develop a deeper and more well-rounded understanding of things. 

 

I'm fairly positive that type rating courses are a bit more expensive than an aircraft add-on for a flight simulator. Manuals are provided for a reason, and this one has more exhaustive manuals than most. 

  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Abriael said:

 

Good for you. For now, this virtual CRJ pilot is enjoying flying this virtual CRJ a lot, and it's doing exactly what I'm telling it to do. Incidentally, if this kind of issue a couple of weeks from release of a complex airliner add-on is so big for you that you think it should clutter the sales page, then this may be your first rodeo on a flight simulator.

 

If you plan on continuing to fly virtually on anything more complex than a Cessna, I suggest you get used to it, or don't buy any complex airliner add-on before at least 6 months from their release, because I haven't seen a single release of this complexity since the times of FS2004 (just because previous sims weren't as complex) that didn't come with problems aplenty to be solved with time. 

 

 

Being able to fly an ILS properly is a basic necessity in an aircraft like this. If you know before release that your airplane is not able to do this properly, you are releasing too early. And in an unfinished state with known issues. And you should be honest and open about that.

 

Happy that for you, ignorance is bliss. You don't know the real plane, so you are happy with deficiencies. Let's both stay in our lanes, I'll do the real flying and fact checking the nonsense you post :) .

  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CRJay said:

 

Being able to fly an ILS properly is a basic necessity in an aircraft like this. If you know before release that your airplane is not able to do this properly, you are releasing too early. And in an unfinished state with known issues. And you should be honest and open about that.

 

Happy that for you, ignorance is bliss. You don't know the real plane, so you are happy with deficiencies. Let's both stay in our lanes, I'll do the real flying and fact checking the nonsense you post :) .

 

Feel free. The airport is that way. 

 

One thing is for sure. If you think "being able to fly an ILS properly" is something so "basic" in an aircraft add-on of this complexity in its infancy in any flight simulator, you may have all the (alleged) real flying experience you want, but you certainly lack it in commercial flight simulators. 

 

So perhaps do indeed keep to your lane, and don't think your (alleged) real flying experience makes you the ultimate authority when you're flying a $50 software and not a $33 million aircraft. 

  • Downvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Abriael said:

 

If I had a dollar for any "real pilot" waving an alleged resume around in flight simulator forums over the past 30 years or so, I'd be able to purchase every add-on on the market and likely would have money left for a fancy dinner.

 

 

I'm fairly positive that type rating courses are a bit more expensive than an aircraft add-on for a flight simulator. Manuals are provided for a reason, and this one has more exhaustive manuals than most. 

 

Ok man. I'm really trying to be pleasant here. Is it really hard to understand why not every simmer would want to read manuals all day and would prefer to ask questions in a helpful forum? 

 

There are times when RTFM is absolutely the correct response. There are also times however when that's not the case. That's all I'm trying to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chaxterium said:

 

Ok man. I'm really trying to be pleasant here. Is it really hard to understand why not every simmer would want to read manuals all day and would prefer to ask questions in a helpful forum? 

 

There are times when RTFM is absolutely the correct response. There are also times however when that's not the case. That's all I'm trying to say.

 

I haven't said it it's always the correct answer. What I said is that it's the answer that would be warranted if support people weren't trying to be kind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, flyingguitaristsam said:

Tracking a glideslope is a very core functionality of an airplane. A $50 addon should be able to fly a semi-decent ILS on autopilot.


How many of these $50 (or more) add-ons of complex airliners have you flown before two weeks from their release? 

  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well "the first complex addon for MSFS" should be able to do that imo. I'm not asking for anything perfect but at least pretty good. And if not, acknowledge it openly that it's not up to par in that regard yet. But please dont make up facts about the airplane to support the bugs

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, flyingguitaristsam said:

Maybe you're right, the real CRJ has a pretty terrible autopilot and you have to  disconnect it if you wanna add flaps while on an ILS... 

 

2 minutes ago, flyingguitaristsam said:

Well "the first complex addon for MSFS" should be able to do that imo. I'm not asking for anything perfect but at least pretty good. And if not, acknowledge it openly that it's not up to par in that regard yet

 

You haven't answered my question. Since you're happy to wave around your real-world resume, I'm sure your PC flight simulation experience isn't excessively personal information, is it?

 

Incidentally, the first complex add-on for a new simulator doesn't make issues less likely to appear. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact. For what it is, the CRJ has amazingly few issues.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Deputy Sheriffs
7 minutes ago, CRJay said:

If you know before release that your airplane is not able to do this properly, you are releasing too early. And in an unfinished state with known issues. And you should be honest and open about that.

 

Talking about honest and open communication. The following was written 5 days before release...

 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually a real world pilot to be fair, not an airline pilot however. But I can watch videos of the CRJ and learn that the autopilot can handle config changes on an ILS. Additionally, I've used general aviation autopilots that do a much better job that the AS CRJ currently does on an ILS. None of that matters to be fair, I just dont get why the argument was made that the CRJ flaps somehow affect the real airplane's ability to do an AP ILS. I even posted videos here that showed the CRJ autopilot doing amazing irl...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, flyingguitaristsam said:

I'm not asking for anything perfect but at least pretty good

 

Well this is the thing. The plane isn't just "pretty good". It's amazing. Which makes the fact that it can't fly an ILS properly so astounding.

 

I can't wait until it gets fixed. Until then though I guess I'll just have to use VS mode.

Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 1 minute, Abriael sagte:


How many of these $50 (or more) add-ons of complex airliners have you flown before two weeks from their release? 

 

You are unbelievable... 

 

There are free mods (FBW A320N and WT CJ4) which handle the ILS GS very well. So I think when I spend €50 I can expect that as well. 

 

I do agree that we can live with some issue as long as they are acknowledged any planned to be fixed. But constantly blaming customers or the simulator software (same simulator other mods use) instead of simply saying "yes, there is an issue and we are working on it" is really not a way to treat paying customers.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...