CRJ700 Mini Adventure

[Lionheart]

Hey all,

I live under the Sky Harbour approach pattern for jets coming into Phoenix from the North. Its great seeing the birds fly over, even if they are way the heck up there.

So... Its been getting me wanting to do another tube flight, something I hadnt done in a while. So I decide to fly one of the new jets in FSX, (I usually fly FS9 for fun flights). I select the CRJ700. But... Man.. The color selections are just not me. Purple? Pure white? Fiesta colors? hmmm.... I decide to make up a quick Executive looking version, slap on the company logo, add a little racing stripe. Voila... My own custom ride.

Next, I dial up a flight, IFR (yep.. going bold here. I want ALL of the effects of a tube flight). I select Phoenix to San Diego and boot up at a gate in my new ride.

I take off and during my climbout, I am relearning the semi-sophisticated AP system all over again, which dial does what, etc. Soon I am heading to California properly at FL 200, scooting along at a nice 320 knots. Very nice...

Coming into San Diego airspace, I am told to drop to FL 080 and begin a city size pattern entry, just as I am coming over the mountain ranges outside of town. ( I used to live here, many many years ago as a kid. An awesome city. Back then, it was cooler, not as much smog. So much so, we didnt have an air-conditioner in our house. Those were the days).

I am routed over the ocean in a direct approach at KSAN International, (Lindberg, named after the great Aviator that crossed the Atlantic in the Spirit of St. Louis).

Just as I am about to touch down, my frame rates, which were starting to go south over the city, are now really low, and bang, I hit the tarmac a bit hard from the planes controls stuttering.. But....! I made it! My bird decellerates to a stop, I exit the runway, and shut down.

Aside from frame rates dropping and stuttering occuring, it was a smooth flight. Awesome job Aces did on those CRJ's. Brilliant VC's.



Bill

[harleyman]

YUP...They are my fav tube when I do fly them....


Just gotta love the frame drop ....:isadizzy:

Happens to us all...

[Daube]

Lionheart, just in case it's not already done: when approaching the runway for landing, switch your FPS limit to "unlimited". It might give you some more FPS than if you were running on a limited setting.
EDIT: oh, and very lovely paint, sure looks better than the default ones (I always select the total white one).

[falcon409]

I have to run unlimited all the time on my rig. If I set it to say. . .20fps. . .I get no more than 10-12, if I set to unlimited it stays around 18 to 19.

Bill, amazingly, I have never flown any of the default tubeliners. That sounds like fun though, so I may give it a try here today sometime.

[gera]

Nice plane, but I like the older "propeller tubes" like the DC-7......

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d145/scratchbuilt/SANTIAGO-STOP2.jpg

[Daube]

I have to run unlimited all the time on my rig. If I set it to say. . .20fps. . .I get no more than 10-12, if I set to unlimited it stays around 18 to 19.

Bill, amazingly, I have never flown any of the default tubeliners. That sounds like fun though, so I may give it a try here today sometime.

The default liners in FSX have one of the major issues that the default FS9 liners had: there's not much clickable stuff in the virtual cockpit.
But appart from this:
- the external models are really nice
- the virtual cockpits are beautifull
Two features that were missing from FS9 default liners. It compensates a lot. I fly those default tubes from time to time, and it's always a pleasant experience (I mean, for somebody like me that is not used to payware ultra detailled PMDG-style aircrafts, of course).

[CG_1976]

Beautiful paint Lionheart. Yep the frame bounce game gotta love it. mine are only minor unless you land in the Arctic then its a dreaded russian frame roulette.

[Chacha]

I haven't tried to fly that aircraft, I am still a learner, maybe one of my days off, hmmmm, like today!

Love the new Paint of that plane, (I think it needs a little touch of red ... a little)...

Air Lionheart Creations.... Lionheart Air...

Thanks for sharing your adventure!!! :applause:

[Marvin Carter]

Try coming into San Fransico Int. turns into a slide show for me.hehe

[Bjoern]

(yep.. going bold here. I want ALL of the effects of a tube flight).

You're missing Active Sky X, Radar Contact 4 and an extensive flight planning phase. ;) :d



Brilliantly looking VC's.

Fixed. ;) :d


Nice to see you trying your hands on a tube though. If done right, recreating standard commercial airliner flights can be one hell of a satisfying experience.

However, I strongly recommend taking that CRJ up to 30000ft or more. They're much more efficient up that high.

[cheezyflier]

However, I strongly recommend taking that CRJ up to 30000ft or more. They're much more efficient up that high.

the learning center talks about that. they say that it's rarely done unless to take advantage of extremely (their words) favorable winds. they claim the fuel burn to reach higher than (i think they said 22K) usually isn't worth it on commuter flights like what the crj usually does.

hey mr. bill, you gonna upload that sweet paint? please?

[Bjoern]

the learning center talks about that. they say that it's rarely done unless to take advantage of extremely (their words) favorable winds. they claim the fuel burn to reach higher than (i think they said 22K) usually isn't worth it on commuter flights like what the crj usually does.

CRJs usually operate 200nm+ routes which justify a ballistic flight path to a good extent. The higher you go, the more efficient your turbojets are and the fuel efficiency on descent isn't to be neglected either.
The CRJ-700 also climbs better than its smaller brother, the CRJ-200, so why wouldn't you want use that to your advantage?

I'm pretty sure Bone (who's a real life CRJ-700 jockey) won't tell you anything much different.

[cheezyflier]

CRJs usually operate 200nm+ routes which justify a ballistic flight path to a good extent. The higher you go, the more efficient your turbojets are and the fuel efficiency on descent isn't to be neglected either.
The CRJ-700 also climbs better than its smaller brother, the CRJ-200, so why wouldn't you want use that to your advantage?

I'm pretty sure Bone (who's a real life CRJ-700 jockey) won't tell you anything much different.


of all the people here who would know, i wouldn't be one of them. i was just repeating what they said in fsx. not like they were ever wrong... (cough, choke) :wavey:

[Bjoern]

not like they were ever wrong... (cough, choke) :wavey:

Hehe, how true. :d


:ernae:

[Lionheart]

Hey all,

I'll see about finishing that paint scheme and upload it. It has one cool reflection in it, via the Specular input. I only colorized the purple one and added some bits. The Spec adds a jade or turquoise reflection in the sun in the paint color. Awesome. Looks like Land Rover green back in the early Discovery days.



ChaCha,

Flying tubes (big jets or heavies) can be learned in the FS Learning Center (built in courses with training missions). I learned on the 737 and 747 in the sim courses. When you practice touch and goes, your loop pattern is about the size of half of Phoenix, lolol... You get used to it. Nothing but a giant Cessna... or really fast Zeppelin.. :d



Roger that Bjoern on the Alt. I'll give that a try. Its been a while for me. I used to fly tubes back before I went into FS as a business. I was a big time VA guy, with British Airways Virtual, BAV738. Almost made it to Senior Captain.



Bill

[hobofat]

CRJs usually operate 200nm+ routes which justify a ballistic flight path to a good extent. The higher you go, the more efficient your turbojets are and the fuel efficiency on descent isn't to be neglected either.
The CRJ-700 also climbs better than its smaller brother, the CRJ-200, so why wouldn't you want use that to your advantage?

I'm pretty sure Bone (who's a real life CRJ-700 jockey) won't tell you anything much different.

Inter-island here between Honolulu to Hilo, about 200nm, they range between 17,000 to 24,000 in the CRJ-200, but I imagine if the distance is any further they would definitely climb higher.

[Lionheart]

Here in Phoenix, when doing a hop to LA California, they only get time to get to FL 200, and then they are dropping back down again. 25 mins to half way point, 50 min flight.

Takes longer to drive to Sky Harbour then to fly to California, lol.....



Bill

[cheezyflier]

the 2 times i have flown on the crj (air canada jazz cyyz to kphl) they never got above 18k. however, that's only a 500 mile trip, so maybe that's why.
i went on a 737 to cleveland and once to detroit from here, and i think both of those was still kinda low, about 20k, but that was 5 yrs ago, i'm not positive.

[Bjoern]

the 2 times i have flown on the crj (air canada jazz cyyz to kphl) they never got above 18k. however, that's only a 500 mile trip, so maybe that's why.
i went on a 737 to cleveland and once to detroit from here, and i think both of those was still kinda low, about 20k, but that was 5 yrs ago, i'm not positive.

Weird.

I had a one hour hop from HAJ to STN in an A320 and and that thing went up to FL390 and almost immediately back down...

[cheezyflier]

Weird.

I had a one hour hop from HAJ to STN in an A320 and and that thing went up to FL390 and almost immediately back down...


i don't think any of the flights i mentioned were even that long.

[Bjoern]

i don't think any of the flights i mentioned were even that long.

CYYZ to KPHL is equally long (~350nm).
CYYZ to KCLE is about half that distance, as is CYYZ - KDTW (~180nm).

Anyways, I still find it very odd as to why an airline prefers a penalty in fuel consumption over longer climbing phases.

[Chacha]

Hey all,

I'll see about finishing that paint scheme and upload it. It has one cool reflection in it, via the Specular input. I only colorized the purple one and added some bits. The Spec adds a jade or turquoise reflection in the sun in the paint color. Awesome. Looks like Land Rover green back in the early Discovery days.



ChaCha,

Flying tubes (big jets or heavies) can be learned in the FS Learning Center (built in courses with training missions). I learned on the 737 and 747 in the sim courses. When you practice touch and goes, your loop pattern is about the size of half of Phoenix, lolol... You get used to it. Nothing but a giant Cessna... or really fast Zeppelin.. :d



Roger that Bjoern on the Alt. I'll give that a try. Its been a while for me. I used to fly tubes back before I went into FS as a business. I was a big time VA guy, with British Airways Virtual, BAV738. Almost made it to Senior Captain.



Bill


I finally attemted to fly that thing.... I choose a flight from KMCO to the neighboring KNAS, a good 1hour and 30 minute flight (I cheated on the time ;)). Heart pounding, forehead sweating, hand trembling, took off and zoom up to the sky, oops what button does what?? I should have done the SIM course Lionheart recommended. I am up the air, I have to do something, I have to fly this plane..... Wheeeew, some more sweat and trembling hands, I have to reach my destination.

Like learning to drive a new car, I tried each and every buttons and dials, oops that one is for the wiper,... uhhhhh. Ehhhhh. AHHHH! ok..

I was mesmerized with an awesome view, reached the international waters, beautiful sight, what a relief, yes I can fly this... ready for landing, I was cleared to land.... whoa, I burned the tires, oops, no I did not the tires are gone.... It's good I have my seat belt on....

Did I bring my passport?? :isadizzy::isadizzy:

I learned my lesson, a relaxing flight, overall...:icon_lol:

[Lionheart]

They are tricky and a bit sophisticated compared with a Cessna or Epic.

The Auto Pilot on the CRJ is really difficult to work unless you are in 2D panel mode. (The VC version moves when you are changing altitude and all, so it makes it difficult to keep your mouse on buttons).

Also, there is a white airbrakes control lever on the center console. Crank that back about 50% when you are descending to keep your speed down, but remember to move it back to zero position after your descent, or you will be flying with your nose in the air, lol.


The CRJ is a neat little jet. Sort of like a huge Lear, basically. I need some time in that Airbus. I wish I could put it in FS9 so my frame rates would be up there. arrgh... Oh well.


Bill

[Bjoern]

The Auto Pilot on the CRJ is really difficult to work unless you are in 2D panel mode. (The VC version moves when you are changing altitude and all, so it makes it difficult to keep your mouse on buttons).

This is really just a matter you have to get used to. I always turn the buttons in VC mode, even in more complicated planes (Wilco E-Jets...).



Also, there is a white airbrakes control lever on the center console. Crank that back about 50% when you are descending to keep your speed down, but remember to move it back to zero position after your descent, or you will be flying with your nose in the air, lol.

Well, you could also try to lower your sink rate a bit. I think the CRJ starts slowing down at 1500 to 1600fpm. Or simply put the speed hold to less than 250 KIAS to make AutoThrottle cut out down power to idle.



The CRJ is a neat little jet. Sort of like a huge Lear, basically. I need some time in that Airbus. I wish I could put it in FS9 so my frame rates would be up there. arrgh... Oh well.

If size doesn't matter try Aerdesign's A318 for FS9 (it's considerably smaller than FSX's A321 though). Or Moach's 737-700 for FS9.
Both aircraft are awesome freeware. in fact, they're so awesome that I created a paint for the A318 and a VC upgrade for the 737-700.

In case you want to try the FSX A321 first nonetheless, here's a site offering a modified (and way more realisitc) FDE for it (and other FSX default aircraft):
http://www.metzgergva.de/default_e.htm

[Lionheart]

This is really just a matter you have to get used to. I always turn the buttons in VC mode, even in more complicated planes (Wilco E-Jets...).




Well, you could also try to lower your sink rate a bit. I think the CRJ starts slowing down at 1500 to 1600fpm. Or simply put the speed hold to less than 250 KIAS to make AutoThrottle cut out down power to idle.




If size doesn't matter try Aerdesign's A318 for FS9 (it's considerably smaller than FSX's A321 though). Or Moach's 737-700 for FS9.
Both aircraft are awesome freeware. in fact, they're so awesome that I created a paint for the A318 and a VC upgrade for the 737-700.

In case you want to try the FSX A321 first nonetheless, here's a site offering a modified (and way more realisitc) FDE for it (and other FSX default aircraft):
http://www.metzgergva.de/default_e.htm




Hey Bjoern,

Awesome man! Many thanks.



Bill

[Bjoern]

Awesome man! Many thanks.


No biggie; always welcome. :)