since fss released their 727 , and I bought it and it is a living dream for me as a boeing fan, I wanted to look at the other products of FSS and the embraer, even in early access its starting to look good. But no Vnav is a huge dissapoint and No RNAV either. At least if it had vnav but no Rnav approach you could just do the vertical part with vnav like in the a300. But yeah. But We should not forget that its still in early access( still for a year but) yeah. I gonna wait the real release. in the meantime i can enjoy the fss 727 which at this stage I consider it better than the 737 because of only 1 reason. The sim rate support. The fss 727 can go to 4x and even to 8x but be careful with 8x. The pmdg 737 cant go to 2x because it mess the turns, it mess the vnav, it mess the A/T and all other things. The pmdg 777 however is very stable with sim rate as the dc6. I wonder y they did not implemented the 777 autopilot flight logic into the 737. Maybe some day. Sometimes we gotta wait for a product to be decent , but its not a problem for me because I have the 727. Anyway very interesting video, lot of useful info about the aircraft and me too im sorry for the guys that have to sit in the high density class. Just imagine Ryanair operating the embraer: 357 passengers because added seats in the cargo. lol
I did a spit-take on your "my condolences" remark regarding the seating accommodations for the "high density" cabin. Laughed out loud. Thanks for that, Emmanuel.
The models of the plane are great, my only problem is I see the change log for this plane every couple of weeks, and I don’t understand why getting Vnav, directs, etc… Is not there number 1 priority. This plane is a VNave away from being really decent. Right note it’s mediocre at best. Like I said though, model is pretty well done and I really want these to become good.
Probably they want to get their custom navigation system working first. I could understand why they don't want to invest time into a default direct to system if they replace that a while later with their own one. Similarly they probably don't want to program VNAV for the default system. But I agree, they should invest more resources into getting that custom FMS done.
I believe they are. VNAV and custom FMS are non walk in the park. They had had choices: halt all core updates while building custom fms for another whole year or give existing customers something to scratch their embraer itch while they do. I'm holding off on purchase until they get their custom fms up and running. Ill be watching from the sideline.
Just a quick note I have heard that only the outside models of the E170/E175 were imported. The outside models of the E190/E195 was made by FSS from scratch but I’m not entirely sure wether that’s true or not.
To manually turn on ice you need to turn the mode switch on. The buttons are Off or Auto. All valves should open, it's reported. You can preselect course by bringing up your preview needles and using course knob
What I do: save my money for the MD11😍, and this when it´s developed further.Nevertheless it seems promising as it already has some nice features like the tablet.
Real life E190 Pilot here. If u want a nice looking Addon, which is not an Airbus oder a Boeing. This Addon is for you. But if you want a study level Ejet for msfs, you will have to wait 2-3 years I guess. This is so far off the real thing it hurts me. The Jungleboeing is a nice aircraft with many awesome features. I would love to see pmdg style Ejet for my fellow simmers to enjoy. I think it’s just a matter of time. I would think twice spending money on a plane which has less system depth than most default aircraft. Maybe I’m a little biased, but I never heard someone say, oh the pmdg 737 or fenix 320 is way off and not realistic. I know many colleagues who use those Addons to train for checkrides and stuff. Cheers everyone ❤
Thank you very much for the info. I like the great details this plane has like at 45: 48 one can see the projector for the copilot HUD being illuminated and flickering, or during the walk-around for example the detailed gear with even the brake wear pins visible. On the other hand this plane still has a few nasty visual glitches like that missing texture chunk see-through area in the gear well. The systems are all 100% custom instead of putting in default G1000 screens, and custom computer screens (especially an FMC) need an enormous effort and great amount of time to get finished. That´s why we still don´t have an A350 or A380 after three years because simulating such complicated cockpit systems is a hard task for every development team. To be honest I know nothing about Embraer planes (flying Fenix only).... but this cockpit looks good and techy, and maybe some day this plane is going to get study-level quality, with a few circuit breakers functional and a few interesting failures and realistic oil pressure oil temp and other realistic simulated engine data. Who knows ;) A real pilot of course sees the millions of differences on all the computer screens and system pages when comparing it to the real deal, so for absolute system and avionics enthusiasts the Fenix will surely be the better plane. But to fly something completely different occasionally than the typical Airbus cockpit style this plane is a nice alternative.
Hi, had the same issue with the aft cargo door. I found a solution for me. Just go in GSX to airplane settings. At the aft cargo door select “door with no open/close checks”. I assume GSX does not recognise this door even if it’s open. You just need to remember to open and close this door manually. 😅😂
Never mind, I found it. For others it's half way down in the center of the MFD. It has a little turn indicator↪. The zoom level is in brackets. [ 50 ]..
Another great video Amano, thank you. I bought the EJ EJETS 170/175 aafter your last video, so about three weeks ago. I enjoyed two flights, but for some reason I have to uninstall and then reinstall the EJET’s before I fly them again. The team at FSS support don’t seem to be able to give me a resolution. Would love to buy these 190/195’s but don’t want to waste another £30 on an aircraft that I can’t even load without uninstalling and reinstalling. Every time I reboot the sim. If any of your fantastic viewers, have any idea what the problem is, I would love to hear from them. This seems such a fantastic little aircraft. I would love to be able to fly it just like all of my other payware aircraft in MSFS
I have the 170/175 but have yet to even fly them. Lol. Im working on the atr 42/72 at the moment, and the crj is next. Probably wont be studying the e-jets until February or so. So many planes. Lol
@50:54 ... great content, though I have a question, bare in mind I'm a noob and slowly learning more as I go, but as for the time stamp, what do you mean by this? being able to fly direct and using VAT-SIM? is that because VAT-SIM gives you callouts midflight, from where you must enter a "direct to" route? or if I'm wrong, could you elaborate? I don't use VAT-SIM yet, but to plan on getting it
Thanks for the video! Excellent as usual. What is announcement sound at @35:00? I can't quite make it out. Cabin crew? Also the HUD FPV has had too many espressos! (@44:08) 😂
hey there Emi, great video! Also, how do you roughly calculate a TOD and what does CAVOK mean? The textures on that aircraft indeed do look good though!
Hi, thank you very much. As for the T/D: Cruise level, divided by 1000 multiplied by 3 is the base formular. So let's say if we're in 37.000ft we take 37x3 and end up with 111NM as base. Now we got to take wind and speed into account. Let's say we got 50kt of headwind and plan the descent at 300kt. Per 10kt of headwind you substract 1NM, per 10kt of tailwind you add 1NM. Likewise per 10kt of speed above 200KT IAS you will add 1NM. So in our example we subscract 5NM for the headwind and then add 10NM for the 300kt descent speed. So that now gives us 111NM minus 5 plus 10, so we end up with 116NM for our descent. CAVOK means ceiling and visibility okay. So a cloud base no lower than 5000ft above the field (or MSA, whichever is higher), visibility more than 5km and no significant weather phenomena (such as fog, thunderstorms, windshear, etc.).
Hello friends, Thank you for this great tutorial !!! I have a question; I realy want to study this aircraft. I run FS2020 on my PC. But it is also available within the store of FS2020 it self (€ 10,49). What is the quality of this in store plane compared with the one demonstrated in this video form Flightsim-Studio? Hope somebody can help. Many thanks !!!
Hi, the one in the MSFS Marketplace is even more basic than this one. Right now there is no real high fidelity Embraer 190 addon available for MSFS. There are some very good ones for the B737, A320, MD-80, BAE146, Fokker28, A300, etc. available, but we don't yet know what will ultimately happen with this Embraer. I hope they will eventually turn it just as good as those above, but right now we're quite a bit from that. If you go for an E-Jet then by all means take this one over the one from VirtualCol. But don't expect it to be high fidelity yet. It isn't.
What I'm trying to understand is how do devs release further aircraft whilst their first aircraft (The 175) is pretty much Beta. One of the most obvious things that after all this time isn't implemented is vnav. Perhaps they should have asked X-craft to purchase the coding or get help coding VNAV
I hope they bring this to the marketplace and Xbox in the future. They did a good job with the Tecnam aircraft, it would be nice to use their Mission Hub with a proper airliner as well.
I would Never buy from Marketplace as, I am on V1 of Cessna 310 bought from Marketplace....Been 3 updates for the 310 still waiting for MFS to release the update V3...If I had bought the 310 from the developer would have been flying the update for over 6 weeks now...
If youre not a real world pilot, how are you supposed to calculate TOD and when youre supposed to descend, etc. Releasing a plane like this with no VNAV or LNAV is beyond stupid.
@@A330Driver ah yeah, the lack of custom LNAV is a problem, but I found the rest of the systems to be of a similar complexity to the CRJ, maybe that's just me though.
The model looks nice, but it makes me so angry, that MSFS is not even capable of correct direct-to or Wx radar and so on, but they have already announced the next simulator.. the „old“ one not even finished… i cannot understand this step.
wait a minute, hold up. You are telling me that a plane in the early access state is UNFINISHED??? What an amazing find, we should give you some sort of award for that discovery
@@QuotenwagnerianerAs long as they finish the product I don't see any problem with it,this is normal in todays gaming industry and, yes this is a game like it or not
The problem is that you often just don't know where the devs will call it a day and stop. We've seen that with quite some planes now that devs promised much but delivered little. Nobody knows with FSS as it's their first airliner and when we think back to their original as-close-to-scam-as-it-gets-without-being-scam adverts for the Embraers which only changed after a huge pressure arose from the community, then there is all reason to be critical of them. It's up to FSS to proofe that they will hold their promises. Until now at least they are showing good progress to indeed fulfill them however!
since fss released their 727 , and I bought it and it is a living dream for me as a boeing fan, I wanted to look at the other products of FSS and the embraer, even in early access its starting to look good. But no Vnav is a huge dissapoint and No RNAV either. At least if it had vnav but no Rnav approach you could just do the vertical part with vnav like in the a300. But yeah. But We should not forget that its still in early access( still for a year but) yeah. I gonna wait the real release. in the meantime i can enjoy the fss 727 which at this stage I consider it better than the 737 because of only 1 reason. The sim rate support. The fss 727 can go to 4x and even to 8x but be careful with 8x. The pmdg 737 cant go to 2x because it mess the turns, it mess the vnav, it mess the A/T and all other things. The pmdg 777 however is very stable with sim rate as the dc6. I wonder y they did not implemented the 777 autopilot flight logic into the 737. Maybe some day. Sometimes we gotta wait for a product to be decent , but its not a problem for me because I have the 727. Anyway very interesting video, lot of useful info about the aircraft and me too im sorry for the guys that have to sit in the high density class. Just imagine Ryanair operating the embraer: 357 passengers because added seats in the cargo. lol
I did a spit-take on your "my condolences" remark regarding the seating accommodations for the "high density" cabin. Laughed out loud. Thanks for that, Emmanuel.
Walking over the seats is a pretty realistic simulation of an E190 cabin 😂
And that's all we gotta care about right?
The models of the plane are great, my only problem is I see the change log for this plane every couple of weeks, and I don’t understand why getting Vnav, directs, etc… Is not there number 1 priority. This plane is a VNave away from being really decent. Right note it’s mediocre at best. Like I said though, model is pretty well done and I really want these to become good.
Probably they want to get their custom navigation system working first. I could understand why they don't want to invest time into a default direct to system if they replace that a while later with their own one. Similarly they probably don't want to program VNAV for the default system.
But I agree, they should invest more resources into getting that custom FMS done.
I believe they are. VNAV and custom FMS are non walk in the park. They had had choices: halt all core updates while building custom fms for another whole year
or
give existing customers something to scratch their embraer itch while they do.
I'm holding off on purchase until they get their custom fms up and running. Ill be watching from the sideline.
It may seem simple at first glance, but once you try it, everyone will truly understand your capabilities. 💪😀
Hi Emi,as always a very professional, clear and concise video as you always do.
Thank you for all of your fantastic videos.
Just a quick note I have heard that only the outside models of the E170/E175 were imported. The outside models of the E190/E195 was made by FSS from scratch but I’m not entirely sure wether that’s true or not.
I have to buy this plane. Still learning the ATR-72-600 I bought.
To manually turn on ice you need to turn the mode switch on. The buttons are Off or Auto. All valves should open, it's reported.
You can preselect course by bringing up your preview needles and using course knob
What I do: save my money for the MD11😍, and this when it´s developed further.Nevertheless it seems promising as it already has some nice features like the tablet.
Real life E190 Pilot here. If u want a nice looking Addon, which is not an Airbus oder a Boeing. This Addon is for you. But if you want a study level Ejet for msfs, you will have to wait 2-3 years I guess. This is so far off the real thing it hurts me. The Jungleboeing is a nice aircraft with many awesome features. I would love to see pmdg style Ejet for my fellow simmers to enjoy. I think it’s just a matter of time. I would think twice spending money on a plane which has less system depth than most default aircraft. Maybe I’m a little biased, but I never heard someone say, oh the pmdg 737 or fenix 320 is way off and not realistic. I know many colleagues who use those Addons to train for checkrides and stuff. Cheers everyone ❤
Thank you very much for the info. I like the great details this plane has like at 45: 48 one can see the projector for the copilot HUD being illuminated and flickering, or during the walk-around for example the detailed gear with even the brake wear pins visible. On the other hand this plane still has a few nasty visual glitches like that missing texture chunk see-through area in the gear well.
The systems are all 100% custom instead of putting in default G1000 screens, and custom computer screens (especially an FMC) need an enormous effort and great amount of time to get finished. That´s why we still don´t have an A350 or A380 after three years because simulating such complicated cockpit systems is a hard task for every development team.
To be honest I know nothing about Embraer planes (flying Fenix only).... but this cockpit looks good and techy, and maybe some day this plane is going to get study-level quality, with a few circuit breakers functional and a few interesting failures and realistic oil pressure oil temp and other realistic simulated engine data.
Who knows ;)
A real pilot of course sees the millions of differences on all the computer screens and system pages when comparing it to the real deal, so for absolute system and avionics enthusiasts the Fenix will surely be the better plane. But to fly something completely different occasionally than the typical Airbus cockpit style this plane is a nice alternative.
Hi, had the same issue with the aft cargo door. I found a solution for me. Just go in GSX to airplane settings. At the aft cargo door select “door with no open/close checks”. I assume GSX does not recognise this door even if it’s open. You just need to remember to open and close this door manually. 😅😂
Exactly.
Vnav and Autoland is the best part of this RW aircraft.
Flew Air Dolomiti from Munich to Florence on an E195 and actually quite surprised how nice it was. I'd never heard of them before booking that flight
How you doing? Great video. Maybe I just can't see it, but have you found a way to zoom in or out on the mfd map? 🤷
Never mind, I found it. For others it's half way down in the center of the MFD. It has a little turn indicator↪. The zoom level is in brackets. [ 50 ]..
Happy to hear you found it!
Great video once more !!
I wonder however how you walk around so smoothly and especially : how do you climb stairs ?
Drone camera I guess
Im not interested in the 170/175 as im more into European ops so when this it's at a good level im going to buy the 190/195.
Another great video Amano, thank you.
I bought the EJ EJETS 170/175 aafter your last video, so about three weeks ago. I enjoyed two flights, but for some reason I have to uninstall and then reinstall the EJET’s before I fly them again. The team at FSS support don’t seem to be able to give me a resolution.
Would love to buy these 190/195’s but don’t want to waste another £30 on an aircraft that I can’t even load without uninstalling and reinstalling. Every time I reboot the sim.
If any of your fantastic viewers, have any idea what the problem is, I would love to hear from them. This seems such a fantastic little aircraft. I would love to be able to fly it just like all of my other payware aircraft in MSFS
Maybe you do a steep approch into lcy with the e jet?
That's coming up next!
@@A330DriverFrom what I've seen so far it works really well. The devs have proven themselves with that feature IMO.
When u check doors it also includes cockpit door which was open.
Nobody cares. How about you worry about "checking" your grammar before you tell others what to do.
Is this the 190-195 thats is on the xbox marketplace????
I have the 170/175 but have yet to even fly them. Lol. Im working on the atr 42/72 at the moment, and the crj is next. Probably wont be studying the e-jets until February or so. So many planes. Lol
Think Im actually on schedule. I posted the e-jet around February, and that is probably right. Did some CRJ flying, along with my typical a320 flying.
@50:54 ... great content, though I have a question, bare in mind I'm a noob and slowly learning more as I go, but as for the time stamp, what do you mean by this? being able to fly direct and using VAT-SIM? is that because VAT-SIM gives you callouts midflight, from where you must enter a "direct to" route? or if I'm wrong, could you elaborate? I don't use VAT-SIM yet, but to plan on getting it
FLCH should not have engaged by itself after engaging the autopilot after takeoff
I guess they wanted to make up something, so that the autoflight system somewhat guides people while there is no VNAV simulated.
Not only the model, but lot's looks like the xcrafts one
Thanks for the video! Excellent as usual. What is announcement sound at @35:00? I can't quite make it out. Cabin crew? Also the HUD FPV has had too many espressos! (@44:08) 😂
From GSX - unlocking gear.
video starts 13:56
Can u share the takeoff sequence, TOGA setup on the ground but after rotating what u click to make the AP follow the climb and route? Thanks
Nice aircraft
How does this compare to the 170/175? I have seen some bad reviews of it? I would prefer the 170.
It’s exactly the same, system wise they’re on the same level.
@@A330Driver Thank you.
hey there Emi, great video!
Also, how do you roughly calculate a TOD and what does CAVOK mean?
The textures on that aircraft indeed do look good though!
Hi, thank you very much.
As for the T/D: Cruise level, divided by 1000 multiplied by 3 is the base formular.
So let's say if we're in 37.000ft we take 37x3 and end up with 111NM as base.
Now we got to take wind and speed into account. Let's say we got 50kt of headwind and plan the descent at 300kt.
Per 10kt of headwind you substract 1NM, per 10kt of tailwind you add 1NM.
Likewise per 10kt of speed above 200KT IAS you will add 1NM.
So in our example we subscract 5NM for the headwind and then add 10NM for the 300kt descent speed.
So that now gives us 111NM minus 5 plus 10, so we end up with 116NM for our descent.
CAVOK means ceiling and visibility okay. So a cloud base no lower than 5000ft above the field (or MSA, whichever is higher), visibility more than 5km and no significant weather phenomena (such as fog, thunderstorms, windshear, etc.).
Thanks very much! (Sorry for the late reply though, had many emails that made it impossible to see your reply)
So you were changing the speed bug by touch screen on the PFD or what? Is that a real life feature also?
Mine looks completely different
Is there any tutorial to configure the throttle quadrant with the efb?
Hey, what mod is that for walking model? I couldn't make anything work for it.
Great review btw! :)
why dont i have the departure page there ? like in the efb?
just bought the aircraft
Perhabs they changed its location with an update since the video came out? The plane is very much a work in progress still.
@@A330Driverthank you for the response , I got it now
Fly the Binter Canarias one from GCLP-LESO
Nice video, but I have to add something: the e170/175 is from xcraft....the e190/195 Model is from fss
Are you sure? Did they write that anywhere?
is this a sound mod or the normal fss sounds?
Hello friends, Thank you for this great tutorial !!!
I have a question; I realy want to study this aircraft. I run FS2020 on my PC. But it is also available within the store of FS2020 it self (€ 10,49). What is the quality of this in store plane compared with the one demonstrated in this video form Flightsim-Studio? Hope somebody can help. Many thanks !!!
Hi, the one in the MSFS Marketplace is even more basic than this one.
Right now there is no real high fidelity Embraer 190 addon available for MSFS. There are some very good ones for the B737, A320, MD-80, BAE146, Fokker28, A300, etc. available, but we don't yet know what will ultimately happen with this Embraer. I hope they will eventually turn it just as good as those above, but right now we're quite a bit from that.
If you go for an E-Jet then by all means take this one over the one from VirtualCol. But don't expect it to be high fidelity yet. It isn't.
What I'm trying to understand is how do devs release further aircraft whilst their first aircraft (The 175) is pretty much Beta. One of the most obvious things that after all this time isn't implemented is vnav. Perhaps they should have asked X-craft to purchase the coding or get help coding VNAV
Money money money💰
Off-topic. But, anyway. What's wrong with your keyboard? It's too loud. I guess that's a convenience fee?
Any idea why I can’t turn the APU off inflight?
The plane won’t move when I apply throttle, and yes I check me brakes. Someone help
The best source for support is always the developers support system or their discord. Please ask there and I'm sure you'll get assistance soon.
Not on Vatsim?
I hope they bring this to the marketplace and Xbox in the future. They did a good job with the Tecnam aircraft, it would be nice to use their Mission Hub with a proper airliner as well.
I would Never buy from Marketplace as, I am on V1 of Cessna 310 bought from Marketplace....Been 3 updates for the 310 still waiting for MFS to release the update V3...If I had bought the 310 from the developer would have been flying the update for over 6 weeks now...
If youre not a real world pilot, how are you supposed to calculate TOD and when youre supposed to descend, etc. Releasing a plane like this with no VNAV or LNAV is beyond stupid.
Question. how did you get the Crossbar FD ?
You can change it in the EFB options I believe
Thanks but I just can’t see the options to do that?
Is there direct-to functionality yet in the FMC? If so, how can we do it?
Yeah it is
You can only do a "direct-to" if your are not in a STAR or APP/Arrival
How can i do a direct - to ?
@@nobodyisperfect3744 I think like in the B738
Is it buggy or anything? Or does it feel like the E170/175?
wait a second. buggy *OR* feel like the E170? Ain't that the same thing?
@@A330Driver haha yeah, but i mean like how the 170 used to be on luanch
Should I buy this plane? or give it more time?
It's the same level of complexity as the CRJ without the VNAV - depends really. If you are searching for a stable finished product - don't go for it
Nah, the CRJ has custom LNAV and is a LOT more flexible.
Can’t say more than my advice in the video really.
@@A330Driver ah yeah, the lack of custom LNAV is a problem, but I found the rest of the systems to be of a similar complexity to the CRJ, maybe that's just me though.
The model looks nice, but it makes me so angry, that MSFS is not even capable of correct direct-to or Wx radar and so on, but they have already announced the next simulator.. the „old“ one not even finished… i cannot understand this step.
Is this the e2
No
@@A330Driver what one is it
We're can I buy this plane?
Contrail or Aerosoft
@Maplelf if I have the old plane it's same
@@MaplelfContrail is much faster to update.
@@ahmadodeh2929 170/175 and 190/195 are separate. Different versions.
@@ahmadodeh2929 yes, it's same but they will give you for free the next version of the 195 on the freighter variant
Is this available on Xbox yet
which version did you download? my cockpit doesnt look anything like that
It's the first version that got released.
@A330Driver that version looks way better then mine. Mine has a tacky tablet and looks like fsx
@@Ricky251985 Are you sure its the FSS not the virtualcool?
I noticed I got the Virtualcool one
Too stretched for my liking. Sorry.
Ah... another premature unfinished relase by FSS. Who would have guessed...?
This time around you shouldn't be surprised
wait a minute, hold up. You are telling me that a plane in the early access state is UNFINISHED??? What an amazing find, we should give you some sort of award for that discovery
Of course,its early access
"Early access" or otherwise known as: "Unpayed alpha-testing"
Early access should have no place in the development flightsim add-ons.
@@QuotenwagnerianerAs long as they finish the product I don't see any problem with it,this is normal in todays gaming industry and, yes this is a game like it or not
Yet another "we'll finish it later" product. Insta-skip unfortunately.
its actually making good progress like monthly or so, lots of new features being added
What's the problem. When they improve the 170/175 it's not a big deal to bring it to the 190/175. They have basically the same systems.
Cool story, Bro.
The problem is that you often just don't know where the devs will call it a day and stop. We've seen that with quite some planes now that devs promised much but delivered little.
Nobody knows with FSS as it's their first airliner and when we think back to their original as-close-to-scam-as-it-gets-without-being-scam adverts for the Embraers which only changed after a huge pressure arose from the community, then there is all reason to be critical of them. It's up to FSS to proofe that they will hold their promises. Until now at least they are showing good progress to indeed fulfill them however!
@@FinlandGuy747 That is exactly the problem: When. Actually, it's not when, it's "IF".