fixed it for ya
I have found that using the individual throttle 1 decrease and throttle 2 decrease doesn’t work. Try with just “throttle decrease”
I ended up using the guidelines from the fenix website and now all is well.
Though, the reverse thrust feels pretty week. I was just on a 175 about a week and the reverse was pretty loud…
I had a 2nd flight with the 175 today and it was WAY different than my first. I used FLCH for both climb and descent. AT kept the speed nicely all the way throughout. ILS capture went without a hitch. It was actually really enjoyable. I wonder what went wrong that first time, but I can honestly say I am looking forward to flying this more. The workload is a little more without VNAV for now, but it’s definitely possible to have a nice flight with it.
Wow that’s a totally different opinion compared to all the statements made earlier in this thread a couple of days ago. Maybe edit those statements a bit to do the devs justice?
Seriously, I was just about to type the same. You were pretty harsh in some of your prior posts. Always a good rule of thumb to presume with anything flight simming (or anything in life, for that matter, IMHO) that “I’m the problem” and check out feedback, online advice, and community input before trashing the product. Perhaps a tiny lesson learned?
And also, haha on that comment… Do you fly the BAe 146 or the CRJ in the sim? Try the same workload without AT or FLCH…
The most modern IRL E-Jets, Airbuses, and Boeings are comparatively simple. I have huge respect for all of those CRJ pilots that are the backbone of the US regional fleets. I imagine 110% engagement all the time in those up/down flight plans. And on top of that the IRL CRJ pilots I’ve talked with say that it’s a really kinda quirky, unpredictable plane on top of it, some of that has been modelled in the CRJ for MSFS (and people mistake as bugs).
IRL switching from a CRJ to an E-Jet must feel like a spa vacation in comparison!
Yes, I do fly both BAe 146 and the CRJ (which I have had since release)… As for my harsh statements? I do not apologize for making them at the time I did because they reflected my experience at the time. I have always been very straight forward and don’t believe in erasure. It will be easy for anyone that cares enough to see that I have changed my mind about the aircraft due to a subsequent try. It doesn’t eliminate the fact that I had that first experience. It also doesn’t eliminate the fact that using IAS mode, the aircraft wasn’t behaving as nicely as it does in FLCH mode. If anything, my sequence of posts illuminates my initial opinion (which is not a secret, I hated it)… as well as the way it changed and what I tried that got me to successfully change my opinion. If anyone is struggling with it the way I did the first time, it will be a good suggestion of something to try to remedy the bugged behaviour. I am going to do one thing - I will remove my recommendation AGAINST buying it, but I will leave my experiences as they are. That way, it will be easy for someone to see the journey I had with it and will also serve as a warning for those expecting something polished that there are plenty of things right now than CAN go wrong. Fair enough?
Also, a good friend of mine who flies KA 350i now used to be a CRJ pilot for the regionals. He has made it a point to say how much he hated flying that thing and how unpredictable and unreliable the aircraft was at times. It’s one of the reasons he switched. So yeah, what you are saying definitely mirrors my experience with talking to a CRJ guy.
Not really. The product title on the FSS website is “The E-Jets Series (Early Access)”.
How could anyone miss, and then go on to misconstrue, the prominent “(Early Access)” part of the title?
On every site which sells “The E-Jets Series (Early Access)”, this is not only explained but also highlighted in red on SimMarket.
On the FSS website, the third paragraph of the introduction to “The E-Jets Series (Early Access)” reads:
“At this Early Access phase there will still be bugs and missing features, as with any newly released sofware, but you will already be able to do full flights and enjoy the products. These bugs will be fixed continuously and free of charge. Please read the full product description carefully to understand what is already included.”
How could anyone miss this important information and good, honest advice?
I think because there are “early access” products that are way more developed then other “early access”. So that gives a certain expectation ( at least flyable )
I think with all the “early access” hype we have with ALL software nowadays there should be new categories.
In this case when the E175 was released … it was category “early early early access”!
I think the “early access” stamp is getting abused nowadays and misused for a excuse to grab money as fast as possible.
Early access a couple of years ago had a way better standard the nowadays
WHAT IF Captain Sim would just add the words “ early access” … is it all ok then and we are not allowed to complaint ???
When this came out nowhere it was said “early access unflyable”
Why would it?
I bit the bullet and bought it beginning this week in Contrail’s summer sale, thinking that I will just keep it in my hangar till the VNAV is available. But today, out of curiosity I opened the online manual and I tried a short flight in Brazil and I must say that I will definitely fly it regularly from now. I like it. Ok, there’s still a lot of work to do, it’s not the PMDG, Fenix or Just Flight simulation depth yet but it’s a fun plane to fly and a nice contrast to the old timer Fokker 28 that I fly the most nowadays.
And a question for you guys flying it… There was a warning in the beginning that this plane doesn’t work in DX12 but I ignored it and I haven’t noticed anything dodgy
I flew it today in DX12 and also no issues.
Maybe not working in DX12 is part of a future release
Is it worth 30 dollars,I’m thinking of buying it knowing the limits,it’s that or a Fenix
Pretty much my thoughts and experience too, decent now and will likely get better. Working fine on DX12 here too.