May I add A2A, QW787 and the wonderful Q400 to this, life will be great
I have moved your post to Third Party Addons.
People who want a $30 airplane have tons of options out there.
People who want something accurate do not. I would rather have one fully functional and fleshed out professionally produced aircraft than have 3 half-assed $30 airplanes. But, that is just me.
Vote with your wallet, you should do nothing less. If it isn’t worth it to you, find the one you’re looking for. I don’t buy Ferrari, but I don’t expect Ferrari to come to my price point.
You have to consider the competitive market. The JF Piper Arrow just released at $45. Would you honestly suggest that the Aerosoft CRJ be priced 33% below the Arrow? Both of them are fantastic planes, but the CRJ is an airliner and quite a bit more complex (yes, despite the functioning fuses on the Arrow). You would price the Aerosoft CRJ around the same price as the FlyingIron Simulations Spitfire, or the Zenith 701 by SimWorks Studios, the DC Designs F-15, and the duo of T-45 & MB-339 jets by IndiaFoxtEcho? By most accounts, those other planes have done quite well, so why on earth would any business come in and price a vastly more complex plane in-line with those products? Frankly, I was pretty happy to find it priced just slightly above the Arrow. It is well worth the $50.
Msfs might have a “bigger” user base of casual simmers, but how many of those will buy, frequently fly or enjoy an aircraft modelled with the complexity of the Aerosoft CRJ?
When you really think about it. $50.00 is less than an evening meal at a nice restaurant for a family of 4. or about a weeks worth of Starbucks coffee. And less than a tank of fuel. All of which I will use for less time than this plane. I think it’s easy to forget how much work goes into these things. I don’t do 3d modeling, or programing, but I dabble in liveries, and I know how long those can take. I can’t even fathom the amount of hours that goes into these. I’m happy to give up some coffee and a meal out for a plane of this level. And I am not surprised it surpassed expectations. Lots of people have been waiting since the sim was released. Finally got to scratch the itch
You have to look at it differently. MSFS is a platform, but it by no means does everything right or correctly in respect of how all planes work. This is not a short coming of the sim but the nature of it. The CRJ is essentially a sim within the sim. They are not just taking the default stuff such as AP Code, etc and reusing it. All of the systems within the CRJ are custom coded and are not just reused from MSFS.
It might be a hard concept to understand, but it is how this works with complex Add-ons. If it was all available from the start it would be included in the base sim. If you fly the FBW A320 or the CJ4 you maybe forgetting that even though these planes are part of the sim, the actual mods which make them a million times better are adding so many custom parts to the them that have probably taken 1000’s of hours of work combined and often exceed payware in other sims.
Working title’s CJ4 destroys many $40 like wise add-ons for other sim’s that is free, FBW A320 will soon be on par with $80 add-ons, I know I have them all. And its the same, for those sims. The Toliss and Flight Factor Air buses for X-plane are actually separate sims that run inside Xplane, why because for all the great stuff inside MSFS / Xplane they simply do not ship with the systems to simulate complex aircraft at a level some people want or desire.
When you drop $40 on an add-on like the CRJ you are not dropping $40 on reused bits and a panel swap, you are dropping money on having the system and additions added to the sim in the form of the add-on to be able to simulate that plane usually as closely as possible.
Look how far the A320 by FBW has come, look at the ECAS pages, on the default nearly every button is INOP, both the A320 and WT CJ4 are easily worth $40 in their current state.
The sim gives you the basics, and that’s about it.
I think there is a big bit of targeting of market going on here. Price it too cheaply and you essentially devalue the product and will attract too many casual fliers who will probably not enjoy the complexity and realism provided by what Aerosoft have made. That means dissatisfied customers and probably increased support tickets and negative reviews. Price it too highly and you limit the market and start to set expectations beyond what you can deliver - and also create other dissatisfied customers and negative reviews.
It’s a tricky balance, but their pricing doesn’t feel far off. Especially, from my perspective, when you compare it to airports. There are airports out there (e.g. EDDM by SimWings that Aeorsoft promote through the tutorial) that cost half the price of the aircraft. However, I think that’s more the airports being massively poor value rather than the CRJ.
Its too bad for the money, the aircraft can’t do ILS approaches, or VNAV. Or also be compatible with the microsoft navigation world page like all the other planes.
I have yet to get the aircraft to perform one approach yet after days of trying… The plane just decides it does not want to maintain altitude and drops from the sky.
The flybywire Airbus 320NX is much better at flying and getting to the destination, and performing its approaches, I miss the call outs to the passengers, and the serving of sandwiches in the back, but rather complete the flight
CRJ sales are good . Glad to hear it.
I purchased the CRJ, just to really see how much better a MSFS plane could be, when the developer works closely with Asobo.
It will probably take me, a GA Pilot, many months to become familair with all the features of the CRJ, and that alone , makes it cost for entertainment very low at a $ / Hr measure.
GREAT SALES – but that does not necessarily mean the AeroSoft is swimming in money. It will probably be some time before they are out of the Red on this MSFS CRJ project.
My main hope is that all the improvements that ASOBO made to allow the Aerosoft CRJ to come to market, is passed on to other developers (SDK?) so others at least have the required information to be able to attempt to produce MSFS Planes of the CRJ advanced caliber.
Lol. Doesn’t perform ILS approaches? Not sure what you’re doing wrong, but I’ve done over 10 successful flights and the plane did outstandingly in all phases of flight. “Can’t do ILS approaches” is just lies.
The distinction is, is are we talking about the PLANE, or the PILOT
The CRJ does not do VNAV climbs well or at all as I understand it. You climb using speed, to your teaget alt. VNAV is not really common on the CRJ hence it being an option in the SIM.
VNAV works very well for descents and for me has always hit the alt restrictions. For ILS you need to switch the nav source I am not sure if it is automatic but I switch it. I believe there is an glide slope interception bug where it works better if you are in a slight descent, but I don’t know.
Thee is no auto land you need to land it, but it handles nicley so that’s not an issue. If you are not using VNAV to descend then a general rule is
3 X your current altitude gives you the distance from the platform alt you need to start descending
And to calculate the rate of descent you divide your current air speed by 2
So at 30,000 feet would be 90 NM form the platform alt and if you were traveling at 400knts then you would be descending at 2000 ft per minute.
This is just a rough calculation so many other factors come in to play.
If you press the MFD Data button it will display how far you are from the airport and you can calculate on that. To do this all correctly you really need charts. Also the mfd gives you ALTs on the legs page, especially if using a star. Download “SIM tool kit pro” it has charts will track your flight, import flights from simbreif etc and it’s free
Please read the manual. The task plane doesn’t have coupled VNAV in any event. That’s like asking why the auto throttle doesn’t work.
This is explained in the manual
The task plane?
Sorry I am not sure I understand. Maybe we are crossing wires? There is a coupled VNAV option in the EFB for VNAV which I am using for descents whilst I am learning the finer points of the plane.
Ah thanks, I must of missed that
Sorry, auto correct got it. I meant real plane. It explains the vnav limitations in the manual and that the real plane doesn’t have vnav.
I’m thinking of shelling out for this for VR, but I don’t want to use the FMC - it’s something I have never been interested in, as is autopilot etc - I like to hand fly 95% of the time and only use the AP for straight & level flying if the trim isn’t up to it and I need to take my concentration away for a minute.
So can I hand fly this model - or fly it visually, if you like, without having to use the FMC - does it have independent navigational instruments, for example? Am I going to have constant alarms and warnings going off if I don’t use the FMC?
I’m flying it around (non-VR) by hand and not using pretty much anything but the stuff needed to make the engines work