Carenado - It is true, it was not in our initial plans,… | Facebook
3 Likes
They should properly update the aircraft that have already been released and not launch one aircraft after the other. They won’t get another cent from me, no matter what they release. 
38 Likes
I’ve got no problem with Carenado aircraft that I own, the Skymaster, the twin Beech, and the Waco Biplane are all very good.
Their best features to me outweigh the few that seem to irk some folks, but I understand that some folks insist on working circuit breakers and other features I don’t need.
I also understand that some of the issues that many developers have are MSFS/Asobo shortcomings that either cannot be correctly modelled or that need constant workarounds that are broken by sim updates.
I also see where some of the Carenado bashing comes from folks who have issues with Carenado related to other sims and the previous iterations of flight sim.
As to ‘updating the aircraft they’ve already released’ I think its pretty clear that they have been keeping pace with the Sim Updates and adding features to their models to reflect that, at least as well as any other developer has - if not better.
Still I knew when I posted the news those who love to hammer Carenado would immediately make their appearance and you did not disappoint.
13 Likes
totally Agree with you, I dont need Circuit breakers working, waste of time as far as I am concerned.
only thing get sometimes in the Tablet wont come up. sometimes I wonder if it just me.
Greg
5 Likes
An aircraft with working circuit breakers is often a sign that the electrical system is well-modeled. Less so that they have any real (simulated) utility, other than to fail individual, electrically-driven instruments and equipment. It’s not an end-all, be-all, but it goes a long way toward demonstrating the level of detail that has gone into the product as a whole.
3 Likes
First Carenado I’ll probably pick up because our flying club has two PA-28-181s. The Carenado is probably going to be in better shape than our club aircraft lol. I have Just Flight’s PA-28-161 Warrior II already, which is a super similar aircraft, and it has a lot of nice bells and whistles. However, one of the sim updates botched their custom flight model. I think they tried to make the airplane have some real inertia and not be super twitchy like the stock GA, but now the JF Warrior jerks abruptly in the pitch axis instead of smoothly rotating. It’ll be interesting to see how these two compare.
2 Likes
probably a click spot problem - but who knows - you might try deleting and reinstalling if it’s in one particular aircraft.
I think it just represents an appeal to a specific target audience - the one that wants every single button, switch and breaker to function no matter what. I have found that a few models with all of that extry functionality just eat frame rates like a duck eats corn feed.
Breakers in a car or plane or at your house are only checked when something isn’t working. If you find a popped breaker or a burned one in reality you have to switch it back on or replace it…then you have trace the fault to find out why it happened. None of that is modeled in flight sim and if it were I wouldn’t want it. For me - the reason to flight sim is to fly - not inspect the cockpit as an A&P man. For some folks I guess it’s fine though - to each his own.
2 Likes
good a reason as any - hopefully you’ll be satisfied with their efforts…
as we’ve seen - some of the workarounds used by developers to get to decent flight model or system functionality are easily and frequently broken by sim updates. It’s a case of shorcuts ending up being the long way around in the end
Not to be controversial, but it seems the thing Carenado does so well is often disregarded—really great graphics, especially the exteriors. The recent V-tailed Bonanza is a joy to look at, and this sim is about what you see much more than what you hear. I, at least, am most pleased by the look of things, and really look forward to the Archer, one of my favorites to fly in real life.
5 Likes
If you’re going for immersion, checking breakers in the Archer happens twice before the wheels leave the ground. They’re also referenced 14 times in the abnormal procedures, at least in the G1000 model, so it goes a little beyond what we expect of household breaker use, and hardly a waste of time.
But to be clear, it’s not a deal-breaker for me by any means. I enjoy plenty of aircraft without them, however I did want to offer perspective from real-life Archer pilot and simmer who appreciates the depth and immersion.
1 Like
I should also add that pulling certain breakers allows a fair amount of partial panel work. I’d like to see full reversion mode in the G1000 - it’s almost implemented in the Kodiak, but not quite there. That would allow a person to practice failing the PFD or AHRS1 and navigating with the MFD and the backup ADI only.
Staying on topic, as this version will likely be steam-gauge only, I’d like to be able to fail the TC or HSI without going into a kludgy mod or menu.
1 Like
People going on about circuit breakers and Carenado bashers. There is a middle ground, you know. I also don’t insist on circuitbreakers and having every rivet in the right place. And speaking of rivets, I don’t think anyone disputes that Carenado’s modelling is second to none, their modelling and texturing is outstanding. Those rivets probably ARE in the right place.
But at the same time, when you look at pure overall product quality, they often leave lots to be desired. And there’s no way you can dispute that. Name me one Carenado product that was spot on from day one, or is currently without any problems.
The blanket statement “Carenado doesn’t update their stuff” is not true in the strictest, literal sense. They do. However, they are SO slow, and SO unresponsive, and their patches always seem to fall short of fixing ALL issues, that to the average customer it looks like they don’t patch at all. Not to mention it’s very clear they just stop updating their planes after an arbitrary period.
Their recent PC-12 was an absolute mess when it released. And yes they patched it, MONTHS after release. And it’s still not right.
I really believe that most commenters here, including myself, are really not here to instinctively and automatically “bash” Carenado just for the sake of it. A lot of complaints about them are perfectly valid. And I object to any and all slightly critical comment being brushed aside as ‘bashing’ or ‘hating’. Not all of use are rivet-counters and circuit breaker fetishists. But a lot of us DO expect a little more than just a pretty plane for our money.
7 Likes
I’d like to actually be able to use the tablet that comes with some of their planes. That’s been broken for over a year.
Their planes are the worst for ground handling too, and even though there are lots of complaints about that, they won’t fix that either.
I’m sorry, but more and more I’m inclined to buy from devs who provide actual support and updates.
It’s not controversial to say that, it’s simply true. Their models and textures, even on addons that launched just after the sim did, are still best of the best.
1 Like
That’s exactly right! Nobody expects infinite system depth. But if basic functions such as instrument displays (PC12), tablets in some liveries or sound bugs are not fixed for ages, the customer will eventually get so annoyed that statements like the one above will come out.
And Carenado has had the greatest impudence with the PC12, recommending their customers to reverse Win updates just so that their products work.
1 Like
When I look at pure overall product quality with Carenado I see a solid product and good value for the money - so I think of this statement as a glass half full or half empty thing.
Also - I can’t name a single aircraft that was spot on from day one or that is currently without ANY problems in MSFS.
3 Likes
Agree with this. Everything in MSFS2020 is fluid, a work in progress. There’s so much effort going on and the sim just gets better and better (with obvious setbacks along the way). I’m glad I get to see all of it happen in real-time and be part of the constructive feedback process.
It’s when a developer abandons past releases, never to update, or just remains stagnant despite the progress every other developer is making that I get a little disenfranchised. Not saying that’s happening here, just a “word to the wise” about brand identity. 
3 Likes
Did they really get requests for an Archer II? I frankly doubt it. It’s not like there’s a distinct lack of Pipers in the sim right now (except for the Tomahawk - get your ■■■ in gear JustFlight).
I’m sure this is a perfectly fine little add-on, but unless you’re a Piper completionist, it’s just too similar to other stuff that’s already out.
I’d like them to finally bring over something I’ve seen ACTUAL numerous requests for, and that’s the Fokker 50 or Saab. Because there’s a huge lack of regional turboprops. And yet they feel like bringing another Piper over… wonderful…
3 Likes
I had the same question, to be fair. I wonder if it’s not aimed at the flight school segment. However, if it’s not a TX with a G1000, that kind of negates that theory.