Version 0.9.7 of the FSS Embraer 175 was released today. Made two test flights so far. The first was at KPDX to see if it would capture the localizer and glide slope for runway 10R, which was successful. Then made a flight from KPDX to KPSC, landing on runway 21R at KPSC. This was also successful, but on the first approach did not capture the glide slope, so had to go around and make a second attempt. This time captured both the localizer and glide slope and landed on 21R. Understand that a simbrief plan can be loaded into the E-175, but have not tried this yet. There are still issues, but this version is much improved for me over 0.9.2 and 0.9.6.
The Tecnam 2006 and the Embraer of this studio seem to be really beautyfully modeled with very detailed systems and functional circuit breakers.
Looks like we have a new top-notch development team.
That might be (kind of) true for the Tecnam, but surely not for the Embraer. The system depth of the Embraer, at least right now, is non existent and no, there is not a single circuit breaker working. The last update just seemed to have fixed, that the aircraft can finally capture an ILS. VNAV still far on the horizon. The version number is 0.97 which would make you think itâs almost completed, but it is month if not years from it. So please donât raise false expectations here (as the developers did with their teasers).
Yes, absolutely right that this is a waaaays off from VNAV and completion, years wouldnât surprise me. They said in their announcement that the next update will have the custom autothrottle, which is the first step in the plan of custom AP and VNAV.
Edit: Also, I donât know if it has a custom flight model yet, but landing dynamics still feel squirrely to me in a âdefault jetâ kind of fashion, certainly not nearly as solid and fine tuned as established planes like the PMDG, Fenix, FBW, WT, etc. But Iâm not a IRL pilot, so WDIKâŠ
Hi all
I did two flights today, on one approach the aircraft did not capture GS (EFHK), on the other it did nicely (EPGD). There are few things I noticed though, that need to be fixed asap:
- When performing light test, there is no lights coming up on autopilot panel. In fact, these lights are not illuminating when autopilot functions are engaged either. During light test the fire extinguisher handles do not illuminate.
- On MFD electrics page, there is no display of GPU nor APU power availability/connection.
- There is no fuel agreement between EICAS and MFD Fuel page. Only EICAS fuel display matches what is loaded, MFD is showing 4oookg regardless of fuel load.
- When programming FMC for departure, Vspds seem to behave in very odd way - when I put the first one, all disappear, when I put the second one, the first appears, when Iâm putting third second is still absent, when putting the Vfs than all appear after a moment.
- TO Config button does not produce any aural sound when pressed.
Iâm using stable version
Best
Andrew
Oh thanks for the warning! I thought about giving the Embraer a try soon. But this airplane and the whole development team has great potential, and some day their E175 will be finished.
The cockpit in VR is very nice, makes up for some if the bugs
The way the aircraft is doing now, Iâd say itâs worth a try, just donât expect PMDG level on systems depth.
How is the VNAV? IS the aircraft useable on VatSim yet, the last I checked even the website stated ânot ideal for online flightsââŠ?
No VNAV. Mine is parked in the hangar. One of the few purchases I regret - at least so far.
So sad. I was excited for this but after watching the reviewsâŠ. Sad face
2 Likes
Quite true, no VNAV as yet.
As far as regret, thatâs in the eye of the beholder, but a PSA for anyone thinking about buying: This product is basically a early access alpha, if that. If the expectation is of anything close to a full product, than steer waaaaay clear. Itâs not at all a satisfying fly in any regard in its current state, and shouldnât be played as such. If you want to watch and take part in the evolution of a product to (hopeful, maybe) completion and have input along the way, than by all means purchase.
Now, 2 years on, if itâs in a sorry state, then regret is quite warranted. I was EA on the MK 787 for XP which, years and years on, lacks custom systems and is unsatisfying. THAT is regretâŠ
He has been hating it since they announced it and the comments are showing people are really starting to get annoyed with him. Especially when he likes to go on about the legal side of things etc.
2 Likes
I just read through all 137 comments on that video and didnât find a single comment that expressed frustration with his views. If I missed one, itâs certainly not the majority of opinions in his comments.
1 Like
I must admit I donât always like his attitude, be his videos saved me from purchasing this aircraft. His objections are quite valid imho.
2 Likes
Interestingly he doesnât mention anything âlegalâ or âhating itâ in that video (if you had watched it, rather than delving into comments). He has previously been critical (on release), but this video (as the title suggests) was actually a great âok lets see where we are atâ assessment of where the aircraft was at feature wise three months on. Iâve been keeping an eye on reviews on this aircraft, and I have to say for me itâs really not ready yet. I think the only bit in the video that is anywhere mildly controversial is where he suggests (in his opinion as an experienced beta tester for other products) that it could take years of dev to get the aircraft up to scratch. He does point out all the positive improvements/changes as well as the flaws though. IMO itâs a very interesting video for anyone considering buying it. I guess it depends on how deep a sim product everyone is expecting to see, but to me itâs good to get reviews without rose tinted glasses on.
4 Likes
I can live with this not having VNAV in the early stages. My requirement for a purchase is when I can fly from A to B without unexpected issues, ie it properly follows LNAV, intercepts the ILS etc. Sounds like this is getting close?
This is a lower standard than I have for most aircraft but I really love the E-Jet.
Having watched the video.
Maybe the others videos then but heâs definitely said about legal terms and people have said that he needs to stop slandering the product. People comment and he takes no notice especially when they say you should be doing it this way but itâs his mentality of he knows everything. A few pilots of the E175 even commented but again he doesnât care. âLove when he says the ND only shows the current active waypoints In Magenta then says I donât really think that it does it in the actual aircraft when it does. The tone in which the way he says explains a lot in my opinion. Comments to a person saying itâs â â â â . Someone comments I hope itâs good in the end but he seriously doubts it.
Comment saying things werenât done but decide to slam it anyway. Etc
If he wants to keep criticising like he does he should offer his assistance. It would go a long wayâŠ.
1 Like
Even for what I would agree is a low standard, itâs not there yet, not close. I would say that is not yet where the FBW was in its early initial releases. It doesnât reliably yet do what you want. Landing dynamics feel super iffy for me and, when asked if there is a custom flight model yet on Discord, it never gets answered. This plane has essentially no custom systems yet.
Not being critical, itâs just the reality. Again, I would not get it to fly it yet, but to help development.
3 Likes
Thanks guys. Every time Iâm tempted to invest my earned money in this plane I visit this thread and I decide to buy some nice airport(s) instead and wait further.
3 Likes