Same problem for me.
still waiting for the patch
2 Likes
Just has this happen to me. Unbelievable Jeff! (and Hans).
1 Like
Still annoyed by the Np too low issue at ground idle 
I know that it take time (and for good reason, they donāt want it to be the only issue fixed), but iām still annoyed by it
1 Like
Not sure if this was addressed, but can there be a hotfix to improve one engine taxing?
Having problems setting up flight plans in the aircraft FMS. Many nav points are missing or send me away thousands of miles in the wrong direction. Any fix for this. It seems the ATR doesnt read the MSFS nav data correctly. I know the nav points exists in the sim because I can use them in other aircraft.
Interesting. Iv flown this one a lot and never experienced this problem. Where are you flying? Is it related to some exact part of the world?
Ok. Iāll try to give you an example. I plan a flight in the FMS from ESOE to ESOK in Sweden. Departure on rwy 21 no SID present. So I go to the approach where there is no approach to choose in the FMS, but LittleNavmap shows TESD5F as an alternative for rwy 19. But when I execute this there is some totally irrelevant nav points inserted taking me 3654 nm south.
If I instead try to use the NDB south of ESOE called RB I get directed 2309 NM to the north. Then I put in the NDB for the approach at ESOK rwy 19 called NKS I get directions 5772 NM in the wrong direction.
Something wrong here. Seems it chooses similarly named duplicates without the option to choose. Or I am doing something really stupid. But I have tried this many times without success.
NDBs are still completely bugged sadly, try to avoid them. A few works but mostly not. I have not experienced the other problems you describe though. Is distance between ESOE19 and CF21 still buggy if you delete the discontinuity?
Yeah, have the same problem approaching to Mykonos. Same thing - default planner reads the STARs correctly but ATRās fms places the NDBS god knows where. It is a hit and miss - some STARs work flawlessly (well, not considering the incapablitiy of the ATR to mainain the glideslope correctly but thatās an entirely different matter). Only solution - forget the STARs and fly either a visual or a VOR approach in affected airports
2 Likes
Hello to everyone! Does anybody have the same problems or has any solutions to the following:
- In flight i can set the throttles (by using either a physical throttle or even keys) far behing the flight idle notch. It works like this - the virtual throttles stop at the detent but i can decrease the power a lot beyound. And in ātrueā flgiht idle, full flaps and LG down it feels very difficult to shed off speed.
- Ground handling at takeoff and landing isā¦ strange. After touchdown if thereās any crosswind component the aircraft banks violently at any rudder input and the wheels feel on ice - it feels almost impossible to maintain centerline. And even then, rudder authority feels not enough to keep aircraft on runway in crosswind on landing and takeoff - the wings bank abruptly at any input with and without aileron counteract. Thanks to everyone
Yes it stays the same
Yes you can pull the throttle behind flight idle in flight but it shouldnāt. And yes slowing down is not very easy with flight idle but still doable.
Well Itās not only NDB:s. SID:s and STAR:s as well as other nav points are missing or misplaced
I havenāt had any problems, but Iām using Navigraph navdata for FS.
1 Like
Hopefully we get a patch very soonā¦ No communication from the team?
2 Likes
Iām guessing weāre never going to get the freighter version of this aircraft. Thatās all I wanted.
1 Like
The ATR is what you get when the developer is a one man show. I think theyāve overpromised with this aircraft and went about it the wrong way, starting with systems depth and modeling first, then avionics, and left the flight model until last.
I went back to flying it and found itās impossible to land in anything other than perfect weather, it wonāt maintain VAPP because fine throttle control is impossible. The flight model is all kinds of broken and thereās clearly some very odd things going on under the hood. Not only does it like to spool RPM up and down when turning into the wind on the ground, the 42 still likes to rotate all by itself, and the PFD canāt draw Bezier flightpath curves if itās life depended on it.
Itās a real shame Asobo jumped in on the ATR and Milviz stopped work on theirs, as weāre all left with a really mediocre product. It just shows how far other dev teams have come in their competence building aircraft for MSFS (BlackSquare, Fenix, SWS, MilViz, etcā¦) I really hope Asobo take their time with the new iniBuilds 320Neo.
14 Likes
Yeah, I think an update is long overdue, even more after the SU13 wich bugged ACW again, V-FP bugs, flight model, texture, propeller brake being only a visual effect and some other things, I really love this airplane, have put hundreds of hours flying this, but itās sad it could be really a lot more than it is. But as the above comment remembered, being a one man show is really complicated when the project is something as big as this and with an āexpert seriesā label on it. There should be more communication with costumers/players/users, and surely a monthly update would me great.
2 Likes
hotstart with their challenger (in xp) have 2 devs, one for system and one for the textures. so one man show is quite common in flight simming. no excuse to make an aircraft better.
Asobo will not make a āstudy levelā aircrafft sorry to say. they will always stop at a certain point.
problem is, it will be good enough for many people and they wont buy a good expensive one. For the other devs it is not feasable anymore to make a reall good aircraft. Asobo / MS grabs all the money and for the others nothing is left. either you are first in the market like fenix or you have a monopoly like pmdg with the 737. alternatively if you have old fsx P3D code you can copy then it might be feasable.
again sorry, but many flight simmers dont care if there are failures or other high fidelity elements modelled.
1 Like