MD-80 also wont be a lot more interesting in-flight compared to the 737 or A320, its very close in actual operation to a 737 anyway i think. If you wanna really have anything to do in flight its probably really the best to wait for these upcoming aircraft or going really old school without any MFDs and stuff, then you need to work without all the autopilot and fly-by-wire stuff. Just the mix of graphical quality and system depth and level to detail (+ the price is also good) the Fenix is probably the best out of all of the planes i own, but if theres nothing there what you like (= being unsure about it is at least for me a good sign for that) id just save the money for now.
For the graphics, yes i think its really easy to hide bad quality behind some nice graphics, im still sometimes amazed what for example “Project Stealth Fighter” on the C64 achieved with such little hardware back in the days.
I like the CRJ a lot. Fun to fly, deep enough when it comes to systems (but not nearly as much as the Fenix), inmersive and appropriate for short inter-city hops. You can´t go wrong with it, unless you are one of those simmers looking for failures and true-to-life QRH experience (I´m not, so this aircraft is perfect for me).
I admit I´m partial to Airbus aircraft (as an engineer, there is something about their philosophy I find inherently attractive), but I really think the Fenix is a masterpiece. It has evolved fast and very positively, and the support from the developer when I ran into some troubles, was fantastic (something I can not say about Aerosoft…). It´s deeper than I need, and just has something that makes it the most inmersive aircraft I ever used. The fact that I always try to replicate real-life flights, and most of them are actually flown using Airbuses is also a factor for me. Again, you can´t go wrong with it.
I can´t comment on the PMDG 737, as I don´t fly it. Nothing against Boeing aircraft, in fact, I´m really looking forward to the Blue Bird 757.
Wow… Aerosoft CRJ, Fenix A320 (also the great A32NX), PMDG 737, Leonardo MD80, JustFlight BAE146, the recent introduction of the A310 in the past days, and the ATR 72 coming close (I can hardly wait for that one), we are heading to a really great time to be in flight simulation! (if only a good A350 was near the horizon… sniff).
I don’t have the crj so I can’t really comment but I think it’s quite tricky to master.
The Pmdg 737 lacks something, the sounds to me are poor, it doesn’t feel like I’m in a real plane. There are no environmental noises. It does fly ok and it has fairly high fidelity systems.
The Fenix a320 to me is on another level. The sounds are phenomenal and it really feels like you are flying a plane. The systems are about as close to real lift as you can get. I find it tricky to fly in windy conditions but I think this mostly the fault of the sim.
“I flew single engine fighters during the war, but this thing has four engines! It’s an entirely different kind of flying, all together”
Randy, Rumac: “Its an entirely different kind of flying”
I’ve been flying CRJ since first release on P3D. In my opinion is beautiful looking plane. Handling is really good is quite agile and flies more like Citation than 737. Engines are rear-mounted and interesting wing characteristics which is making it very slippery bird its quite hard to slow it down. Has natural tendency to rise nose when you pull back power which makes landing very interesting. If you bang on speed and profile on approach once you close throttle you may not need to flare as she will settle nicely on tarmac by her own. Also is quite easy to over rotate on flare and can float forever sometimes you even need a little push to get her down. Once you get used to it landings are very satisfying. As mentioned above its regional jet so is smaller with smaller range than others and mostly used for short routes often to small regional airports. If you are using something like Pilots life go for Iberia you will have interesting and challenging approaches. System wise is not as automated as Boeing or Airbus. Doesn’t have A/T but it has some throttle detends for climb and toga which makes it easier to manage on takeoff and climb. Its climbing nicely but is losing loads of performance above FL300. Its mostly cat1 and sometimes cat2 rated for ils but quite often you will shoot visual or circling approach (Pamplona is great) on small airport. With lack of automation is very busy plane to operate. FMC works well and easy to set but has some quirks ND is clear and easy to follow. It has quite modern cockpit which I found much nicer and easier than 737. Has also modern features like EICAS that making life much easier to find out whats going on and Nav autotune with that is winning with 737 in my opinion. Real crj drivers saying that it flies very close to real thing but system simulation is lacking a bit. Is not as detailed as pmdg or fenix. Is giving you what you need to perform full procedure flight but some switches are not doing much. E.g you can turn off all hydraulics and still all system works, you can still taxi with nose wheel steering off, start engines with fuel pumps off etc. You have EFB so all settings ground services and perf calculation are easy to do. Aerosoft promised some updates so I guess it will get better with a time.
737 is completely different plane. Much bigger much heavier and in my opinion much harder to fly than CRJ. Its like sports car to family van. Engines are mounted under wings so is giving you opposite characteristic than CRJ is rising nose when you give more power and dropping heavily when you reduce drastically you need work much harder on flare to get her nicely on tarmac. But its quite rocket ship with climbing rate which makes her hard to control if you have SID restriction on some 3-4k. System wise is more automated than CRJ you have full Vnav, A/T loads of MCP modes to learn but boeing has not change much since beginning and cockpit looks complex and overwhelming its modern very automated plane but seems a bit like from 60s. Displays are not as clear and informative like in CRJ in my opinion but automation is doing loads of work for you. Its very popular so again if you are using Pilots life you will find plenty of routes to do. Simulation wise according real pilots that opinion I heard its state of art. Flies like real thing (with msfs limitations and quirks) but best thing is system simulation. Is very detailed and you really need to know what to do to operate this plane to avoid nasty surprises and “what the hell this plane is doing”. If you forgot about something it will bite you not like with CRJ. E.g fan is not spinning on engine start you forgot APU bleed, you get waking alarm on climb probably packs or press on manual. Failures simulation to very deep level where without QRH you lost. Overall 737 as simulation is more complex and more detailed than CRJ therefore much harder to learn but really satisfying once you get there and is always something to explore and push yourselves to extreme situations with failures simulations. It lacks EFB but is still easy to operate with FMC. Performance calculations is biggest problem but is couple good tools that helps with this.
I can’t say much about fenix as I’m not big fan of airbus. I was flying one in P3D just to explore. Flies similar to 737 but is massively automated and in most cases plane tells you what to do. ECAM is a great thing that 737 lacks in my opinion. Has really easy cockpit to follow but more systems to set than Boeing. Once is configured properly it flies alone pretty much. Fully FBW you don’t need to trim it so I’m finding it a bit boring and I prefers yoke than sidestick. But what I found as home-cockpit single pilot environment Airbus is much easier to handle but still much complex to learn than CRJ. Based on what I’ve seen about Fenix is as detailed if not more than PMDG.
Its really how much time you invest because each of them are not jump and fly and if you are seeking realism you will have learning journey in slightly different direction with each model.
Below few videos I found interesting that will give some view what you are getting into:
CRJ
737
Fenix - whole chanel I found interesting about fenix
One comment about the CRJ not having “deep” system modeling - the real jet has a very well-designed cockpit, most of the functions work automatically. This makes the operation of the systems rather “simple”, which is nothing but a good thing. For example, In the CRJ, you can just disconnect ground power and the APU power is automatically connected to the bus. In the Dino-Jet, you have to flip multiple switches. Same thing when the engines are started, once stabilized, you can simply shut off the APU, no need to flip switches to get the engine’s generators online. You can readily see the advances in cockpit design that occurred over 40 or so years. Granted in the CRJ, as others have noted, you can fly with the hydraulics off, steer without the steering system engaged, but in the big scheme of things, does that really matter if you are flying the jet correctly?
Why is this such an important feature for so many people??? You know it takes literally 3 minutes to manually do the CDU preparation in the real airplane like it’s done in real life in most airlines.
LH used the 700 for a while - at least I assume they did, because they operated a simulator for that model in Berlin-Schönefeld, 12 or 13 years ago. I know that, because back in the day I spoilt myself with 1h in that sim
This is just my opinion ofc, but if I were in your shoes knowing what I know, I would get the PMDG - any of the variants you like, you could even just get the 600 and try it as its priced extremely well.
The reason for this? Because the A310 is free, so if you buy the PMDG it gives you something a bit different than if you bought the A320 (another … airbus).
I know the A310 is a bit different compared to other airbus, but that would be my choice.
I fly the 737-800 weekly and its one of my favourite aircraft and I actually think for a hobbyist simmer (like myself), its virtually a perfectly detailed aircraft and 100% is exactly what I want out of an aircraft in a simulated environment. The lack of EFB doesn’t bother me at all.
Not at all. In my airline we load the CDU manually. The 737 is a short/medium haul airplane. The routes are short. It takes just a few minutes to load the whole thing up manually with route, dep/arr, performance, engine out and some wind data.
Uplinks make sense in long haul airplanes that fly very long routes and can load winds for various levels for each point. They even do winds updates inflight. That doesn’t make much sense in the 2-3 hour flights that the 737 is usually used for.
That’s because you have to fly it. I love the fact that it has no autothrottle. If you want to learn to fly jets this is a great plane to do it with. I’ve watched and read a bunch of tips, tricks and procedures from real-world CRJ pilots and literally every one of them works in the Aerosoft CRJ. It’s simply a wonderful rendition of the airplane.
I would just like to point out that they literally helped me on Christmas Day with an installation problem, not that I was expecting them to of course. They went above and beyond. Best customer service experience of my life.
CRJ is an interesting mix of no-tech and high tech. The system procedures are much more automated than the 737, the EICAS is a big advantage over the 737 but as noted, you don’t get autothrottle or VNAV so you actually need to be hands-on during most of the flight. Aerosoft refuses to fix some remaining glitches (but then again, where is the EFB that has been long promised by PMDG?).
Look at the CRJ as not better or worse, just different than the A320/737. I get a lot out of flying it.
