I don’t normally fly planes this large although I think the 146 is truly excellent and I wouldn’t mind another plane in this category. I have the CRJ and in all honesty I do not think it’s worth the high price. A bit dated now and I cannot get past the ridiculous clicking sequence to get the knob centre buttons to work (I know there’s a work around). I also have never figured out how to get the cabin crew to talk despite the option on the tablet. I like the HUD in CRJ which I believe is also present in E-jet 190/195.
Are the E-jets better than the CRJ? They’re cheaper and looks like development is very active which I don’t get the feeling is happening for CRJ any more. Worth buying?
I asked the very same question a few weeks ago and went with the E-170/175 (although I did get the CRJ bundle during last week’s Contrail sale). I like both, in spite of the CRJ’s too perfect and slightly unrealistic ground handling.
The one thing about the E-Jets is that they’re pretty resource-intensive so if you’ve a low or mid-range PC, I’d say forget it. You can get a few extra fps by turning the cabin interior off in the EFB, however. FSS have acknowledged the performance issue (apparently it’s because the avionics are done in Javascript and not WASM) and are addressing it in a future update.
While the AP currently borrows heavily from default aircraft, they are eventually going to make it completely custom. Updates are every few weeks (the last one was a few days ago).
The E-Jets have some pretty cool features seldom seen in other aircraft: fully-functioning windscreen wipers (that actually smear the raindrops) and a very subtle engine smoke, just like the real thing. They sound great, they look great and the ground handling is reminiscent of the Fenix 320 (so likely very faithful to reality).
If you simply want a regional jet, stick with the 146 and CRJ. But if you’re looking to replicate real-world flights, the E-Jets offer far more versatility since they’re in much wider use globally.
1 Like
The CRJ has some awful bugs still present years after launch - you can easily crash the entire aircraft systems with the wrong fms entry, and it can be comically bad at following a route ( don’t even start on holds, they’re simply broken ) - there are quite a few more. Could have been forgiven as issues to fix but not after years of promises.
Meamwhile the E-jets are under heavy development, but still have quite a way to go. The polished entries would be the JF pair, but personally I can’t stand how the F28 flies & it’s ap does wander around, and I’ve not tried the latest 146 update - I’d easily recommend older versions but that one could be a wreck now too.
IMO, both the F28 and 146 v2 are excellent and I would personally not classify either as wrecks.
For the OP @BartZiemski I’d echo the general sentiment in this thread so far. Strictly limiting to the two options you initially asked about, I do generally prefer the FSS E-jets over the CRJ, but the E-jets do still have a couple more bugs/quirks than the CRJ for now. However, updates come fairly frequently and the quality has improved steadily. That cannot be said about the CRJ which has been untouched for a very long time. FSS are about to release a separate freighter version of the 190 as well if that’s something you’re interested in.
If you’re interested in expanding your search to some older airliners, the F28 or 146 are excellent options but they are more work to fly with significantly less automation, analog cockpits, and definitely longer checklists, which are not for everyone. I’d recommend the 146 over the F28 as it is slightly more modern, has a proper FMS vs Garmin retrofit, and offers something like a half dozen variants in one package.
1 Like
Not to get too much off topic, but for older planes like the 146, and F28, how do you fly it without a map display? I’ve gotten so used to Garmins, Boeings, and Airbuses with some sort of map, I’m not sure what I’d do. I assume those are both GPS-capable, and you just follow the HSI needle and distance, steer where it tells you, and visualize the route via charts?
The 146 has a FMS which I don’t use much, I just fly it on raw radio data usually but the option is there. The F28 has a garmin option but I’ve never used it. Not having a map isn’t a problem, just do as you said ( although the EFB has a moving map if you want ). I learned to navigate at sea so it’s pretty natural.
The 146 startup is not what I’d call long, other than having two more engines to start. It doesn’t have an INS, which is one long item out of the way… maybe it’s just the practice from a lot of startups.
1 Like
I agree with @JakTrax78. CRJ is despite its bugs a great airplane, a fun to fly, very soft on the performance (probably the best MSFS airliner in this area) and with the awesome Boris soundpack I fly it very often again. E-Jets are more complex, still half-way to go (no VNAV etc.) and it’s much heavier on the performance. On my “not so great anymore” machine i9-10800 + RTX 2080 it can really kill my FPS. But it has a big potential.
And F28 flies absolutely great and its autopilot does not wander around. All JF aircraft are in the top league.
1 Like
In raw VOR nav mode it does still - or at least it does on my system, which isn’t short on performance & doesn’t contain anything that interferes with it’s AP ( use the //42 tool to check ). Sounds & graphics & general ambience are top notch, can’t fault JF there.
I’d agree the CRJ is pretty nice to fly, if you remind yourself of the things you shouldn’t do - I still fly the 900 around every now and then. MSFS updates have robbed it of a little weight & some performance ( although overperforming was something some real pilots were complaining about at one point ).
Also to be clear I own the FSS E-190, not the other one by… Virtualcol? I can’t remember. I flew it a bit - was quite nice if rather poor at handling turbulence back then, got thrown around like an ultralight - & put it away while it’s worked on. It’s getting updates at a pleasing rate.
Just not to the bits that matter like FMC for VNAV say. I’ve been reading so much about how this was going to happen (for a year or more) and so far they managed to bring out a new money making variant instead but no custom FMC. But hey ho a freighter is on the horizon.
Even the CRJ has somewhat functional VNAV.
Great write up JakTrax! Fully functioning wipers would be a first for me. I have not seen this anywhere yet! Not that this is a make it or brake it thing but nice to see attention to detail. I don’t really care for authentic routes and flying planes still in service but E-Jets look like an attractive alternative to CRJ.
To be fair a freighter is mostly modelling with a little work in tweaking the config and perhaps coding a door, which doesn’t cross over into writing an FMS - I would not expect the same people to do both unless the team is extremely small ( like, two ). I share the frustration somewhat, but this is MSFS.
–
I tnink one of the a320s has fully functioning wipers thst clesr the screen? there have been a handful of a/c around for a while that do.
1 Like
Big question for me is will it ever happen? If so how many more years? What incentive will there be when they have maximised their revenues already and moved onto something else. The FMC + VNAV is arguably the hardest part. There’s been a year with no updates or info on it other than vague promoses that it will happen at some point. Hence the reason I havent bought it. There do seem to be a few angry customers out there having forked out full price for the two variants and still having default sim AP and no FMS/VNAV.
EDI: Just did a cruise of their Discord and someone mentioned ‘summer’ for custom FMS. Although it does seem to have had Direct To’s added recently.
Fenix. I don’t know of any others.
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.