Not pitting one against the other but it seems that Working Title has done a fantastic job with their mod & documentation and the best part it is free. Whereas, Aerosoft has an excellent product also for $50 with quite a bit of functionality ( I believe…I dont know hands-on but from what I have read about it ).
Just seems it is all about preference and spending the dough for an additional plane for study level vs having just as much fun with a free mod…
Anyone’s thoughts are welcomed…sometimes it is about the cash outlay…
Apples vs Oranges. One is a business jet and one is a regional airliner. Different manufacturers as well. Completely different operations.
Having a sim and not buying any payware planes for it is a bit of an underwhelming concept to me. At the end of the day, you won’t get as much out of it if you stick to free stuff. So many great aircraft to come!
Owning both, agree they are different animals so one may not be better than the other considering the missions they are designed for. I will say that what the WT folks are doing with the CJ4 is amazing. It’s a solid aircraft and systems wise, very on-par with the CRJ. Just my opinion.
I’ll add, I’m not sure why there are thoughts that the CRJ is so “deeply” simulated requiring intense study. It’s a great aircraft but it’s no A320 as far as systems depth goes and things you need to study and truly understand to be able to fly the aircraft proficiently. Different animals for sure but I just don’t get where the “need to crack open the manual” comes from for the CRJ yet people will bang on in the A320 like it’s a 172 and complain about things not working when it’s a lack of understanding.
For someone familiar with large aircraft systems and a general understanding of how they work, you’ll be fine in the CRJ. If you don’t have this basic understanding, yes, you’ll need to study that but it’s nothing unique to the CRJ. With basic systems knowledge, what you’ll really need to invest time understanding in the CRJ is the Collins Pro Line avionics suite, how the AP works and manual flying skills. THAT is the depth you’ll need.
It’s probably just the price difference. Psychology says that people tend to value things they spend money on more. So with the A320, since it’s free they probably figure it should just work no matter what. But since the CRJ costs $50, ooh it must be more complex…
320 Sim Pilot said the CRJ flow is very different to an Airbus, more than he anticipated. He’s a real Airbus pilot, and took time to study the systems differences.
If you care about proper procedure and its logic rather than simply not crashing the plane, then you need to watch The Dude’s videos at least. The manual V/S descent management being so different, as well, setting fixes for TOD helpful to learn, for example.
320 Sim Pilot also goes into fascinating detail about the aerodynamic design of the plane with the engines being mounted by the tail and how that changes flying and landing characteristics vs the Airbus.
Not essential to know if goal is not to crash, but if you’re trying to pilot the thing authentically, definitely important to know.
Reading the manual can only help this. But, yes, one can say the same of the A320 on that point.
I’m sorry, I really don’t understand the question. What exactly are you asking?
I see you say one is this, and one is that, thoughts?
Thoughts about what? Whether or not you feel like spending $50? That’s up to you and what you want to do. I’m not a jet guy, so I didn’t. Pretty simple on my end. But, could you be more clear about what you’re asking?
Thanks for the reply. I’m familiar enough with the CRJ but I’m going to do as you mentioned and watch these videos. It’s always good to learn something new and then see how that translates to your virtual flying.
What the Working Title Simulations have achieved with the CJ4 is just awesome. Their customized AP had avoided the issues of the stock AP. Pay-ware developers seem to realize that only after release and than scramble to follow WT strategy.
Functionality wise the WT CJ4 has managed to achieve many firsts in MSFS for a freeware; RNAV, Missed Approach, PT, Geo-referenced Navigraph charts etc. It’s a joy to fly with the right balance of automation e.g. RNAV and manual e.g. no auto throttle.
The Collins systems and manual throttle are quite similar on both and anyone who has flown the WT CJ4 would find them familiar. But at the end of the day, they are different; biz jet vs regional airline. They will each continue to have their attractions and fans.
It’s the CJ4 for me, FMS is a bit better with VNAV on small airport without approach, CRJ is buggy on that. Fuel page is also better with for exemple consumption with distance information.
Zero problem with ILS with the WT but sometime horrible with aerosoft
CRJ, engine response is horrible, throttle up means less power for a couple of seconds, it’s clockwork on CJ4
Lastly, they should have keep the HUD for a future update, right now, it’s useless
Crj engine is 4x the thrust, of course it spools up slower, not sure where you even find that an issue to be honest, approach and landing with CRJ is a cakewalk to hand fly.
CRJ does have fuel burn and distance data available on a fms format.
This is not about spool time, it’s about when you want to increase thrust you will see the N1 drop for a couple of seconds then go up, I tried it with both TM airbus yoke and Throttle quadrant. I am not the only one with this issue and other planes, like the CJ4, A320, 172, works like a charm.
That makes small adjustment of the power a real pain.
I am talking about the Perf/fuel mgmt page, from time to resv to sp rng gs, it’s empty.
The flight path symbol is supposed to show you where the plane will end up based on your speed, wind, attitude, etc… it’s wrong most of the time and will jump up and down on it’s own, for no reason.
On a real HUD, if you point your flight path symbol on the runway threshold and move your head up or down, it will stay on the same position. On AS CRJ, if you use a different camera height “seat height”, you will make the flight path symbol point a wrong position
Lastly, Approach mode “AI to AIII” is useless because you don’t see the runway edge and angle on your HUD, so you can’t do ILS manual flight, without looking at you GS/LOC indicator.
This is just my opinion, full of conjecture, with no cited sources, and based on no facts at all, is that the WT team may be to busy working on sim wide avionics to focus on long term development of the CJ4. I think in time the CRJ will become more true to life, unless the CJ4 attracts more quality volunteer developers.
Also bizjetz are kind of niche in flight simulation where as airliners have a larger following.
I like them both as they seem to sit in the middle between complex GA aircraft and full featured modern airliners.
I think the CJ4 is a bit more newcomer friendly to those new to jets with the CRJ being closer in complexity to an larger airliner.
Nothing can be further from the truth. If you have been following their discord channel you would have realized that Working Title Simulations have already indicated that their development of the WT CJ4 will continue together with their work on their MSFS2020 partnership.
And yes!, they do already have “quality volunteer developers”.
