RJ Professional

Nope. Clearly there is a bug here. And as far as I can see people have been reporting it for over a year and all they receive is irrelevant information. It is time to find out that bug causes the TRP not to turn on because it ruins the experience. I would say, there is something with the EFB turnaround states.

That would be cool. Most modern aircraft addons provide such updates on demand.

I bought the ARJ yesterday and I experienced this very issue myself on my last flight, approaching Calgary. The aircraft started to capture the LOC, after I prepared by flying a nice 40-degree intercept angle but it overhsot and continue turning in the opposite direction. I disengaged the A/P and landed manually. Both NAV radios were tuned to the ILS and both were active, with the correct course set.

@TrailerSwift89 Yes, both the 2020 and 2024 versions will be receiving another free-of-charge upgrade in the new year, which will then bring them both up to the same standard. The v1.5 update was released ASAP to address the loading issue introduced by 2024 SU4, and we included the new EFB as it was simpler than removing it ahead of the next upgrade.

@Vatnsfjord they also do NOT work

I've just double checked this, and the ENTRY light switches are working as per the real aircraft in both the 146 and RJ. The switches override each other and don't have fixed on or off positions. If both switches are "on" (up), then the Entry lights will switch off. Mark - Just Flight

Hi Micstatic, thank for the info. I did not know you could download other liveries for the RJ. I’m very new to PC converter from the Xbox. I do love the cityjet livery but older and new aer lingus livery looked amazing on the RJ

Thanks Mark. Roger

This would suggest that MSFS 2024 is not able to detect an installation of the RJ, possibly caused by the RJ not being installed in the expected location. Could I kindly ask you to contact Just Flight Support via the following link, and one of our support team will be able to assist with troubleshooting this: https://www.justflight.com/support Mark - Just Flight

@gazdav787 exactly. thanks so much for the help

I suspect that they aren't factoring in the thermodynamic limits of the engines, which when applied will lead to a limitation on T FLEX. There are further limitations that must be applied too. I made a small app for calculating T FLEX based on the numbers from SimBrief, and even that results in sketchy take-offs now and then so there's more to it than that. There is at least 1 bug in the TRP N1 calculation, which is that it uses indicated altitude instead of pressure altitude, which will result in different N1 REF values than the N1 values that all performance data tables are based on. This could result in better and also worse take-off performance (I sent a ticket about this but nothing's happened yet). If the QNH is low, the pressure altitude is higher and usually means a higher N1 REF is required. Let's assume bleeds and eng ant-ice off, OAT 15 and the airport elevation is 0 ft. Assuming we've set the correct QNH, that would yield an N1 REF of 94.2 in the JF RJ since it uses the indicated altitude, which would be around 0 under those conditions. The pressure altitude would only be 0 at QNH 1013. But if the QNH is 978, the pressure altitude is around 1000 ft. If we enter the N1 REF tables with 1000 ft instead of 0 ft, we get an N1 REF of 95.5. Because the performance tables assume that an N1 REF of 95.5 is used under these conditions, SimBrief would calculate a higher MTOW than the JF RJ can actually manage since it will produce less thrust than IRL for those conditions. On short runways, you may want to reduce the calculated max temperature by 10 degrees or something like that to give you greater margins and consider using N1 REF instead of N1 REDU or N1 FLEX. I would've made a proper TKOF/LDG performance calculator long ago (completely free of charge), but no one is willing to give me the data I need, so sadly that will never happen.

Hi Mark I found out what the issue was, APU was not running as you mentioned above, Thanks for resolving it. Regards Joe

We would like to add it to all of our MSFS 2024 airlines at some point, but it's not something we would be able to share a timeframe for at the moment. Mark - Just Flight

Appreciate it, thank you.

another feature I'd really like is for the Flight data computers (FMS) to be capable of displaying their outputs. So those of us with external hardware FMS's could use a program like spad.next to display on our hardware. Input is working, not output though.

The 146 and RJ both simulate cabin temperature based on the selected air source and temperature selections, and take into account factors such as if the aircraft is in direct sunlight, or if one or more exterior doors are open. We did make some minor improvements to the Air Conditioning logic with the 146 v2.4 update that will be brought across to the RJ in the next update, but that's primarily related to the DUCT TEMP / CABIN TEMP relationship and rate of change. Mark - Just Flight