Well they have done some very good things with the CRJ but on the other hand some things that can be improved that i dont think they will address. The FDE is done nicely, sounds are good, aircraft textures are good. Ont he other hand, FMS lacks functionality, no TCAS.

>>Shane>>This belongs in the hardware forum but this is the only place>I can find you. Just wondering what you use for cooling. I>have a P4c 2.6 running at 3.38, 50 deg C under load, stock>cooling and voltage, on an Asus P4P800 Deluxe. Sure would like>to run it at 3.8 ghz.>>Thanks>David>>Hope the game was a good one.> No problem! :)I use a Zalman 7000A-CU (the all copper model) as the HSF. For the case cooling I use 4 80mm case fans (the flourescent blue ones...can't remember the exact brand name but the fans are VERY quiet). In addition to the case fans I also use 1 120mm Evercool fan located in a blowhole at the top of my case.I know it sounds like a lot of fans but the fan noise is almost nonm-existent. I have a watercooling setup as well but I never installed it....too much effort with too much going on in my personal life to worry about it for the time being.As of now (close to Summer in Fresno CA.) I idle at around 27-29 and load has NEVER gone above 40-41 @ 3.6 GHZ (running for around 24 hours straight under load conditions).One thing to note about running at 3.8 GHZ is your FSB is going to have to exceed the "magic 300" and once it does many machines will actually lose performance. I ran my FSB at 301 and I lost about 100 points in 3DMark01 vs a FSB of 300. The only way to beat this "wall" at 300 seems to be the installation of an older videocard (GF2 would suffice). Unfortunately, doing this causes you to lose the benifits of the newer videocards :(Hope this helps!If you have any more questions feel free to ask! (maybe email me though so we don't get off-topic and get into trouble. lol ;)):)

>I see that my recent post started some stuff. I do think I>was wrong just to blast feelthere on here, but I was really>angry, and took all of my system problems out on them. On a>good note: I think if the CRJ had icons for opening panels,>like other aircraft do EX: PMDG, Eaglesoft etc...that would be>the first step in the right direction, updating the manuals>would also be more helpful to some of us. The plane could be a>great addition to any flight sim pilot. I saw a post on>feelthere's forum about the frame rates.>http://www.iemit.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=402 >They said the problem is mostly with ATI card owners, they are>going to release a patch when the 700 / 900 come out, but the>quality of the texures won't be as good. At least that's a>start. It does suck just spending another $250.00 on my>9800pro. I am now thinking of a NVIDIA card. Maybe thats the>answer?? If anyone on this forum has one of them, let me know>how it is working out for you, and which one to by so I can>return the ATI. I have 12 days left to do so. Like I said>before, I would do anything to get the best performance>possible. I am obsessed with making this flightsim work>perfectly, so I can help others do the same. >I plan on opening a website soon just for this purpose. If>anyone has any suggestions what you would like to see, let me>know. Regards, J.MossJ, sorry if my first post in this thread was inflamatory in nature, although I didn't mean to be I see how it can be taken that way and for that you have my apology.The other stuff that went on between Rightseat and I was just stupid and uncalled for. So, my apologies for cluttering your thread with Rightseat's as well as my banter.Again, my apologies regarding both situations. :)

>somewhat cartoonish ones in>Eaglesofts Cit X. But that's just my opinion though! :-)"Cartoonish?"The default C172, C182, and Lear panels are cartoonish; the Cit X is pure artistry...

ShaneThanks for the reply. I've been getting lots of conflicting info on this stuff but since you're the one getting results I feel like I now have some direction.Thanks againDavid

No problem bud.You can try going over 300 FSB but I honestly do not think you would see one bit of difference, and in fact, I think you would see a degradation in performance. :)

I'd like to respectivley disagree. I think your being a little too hard on Feelthere.com, as their forum states they are aware of the bugs and a patch is in the works. Remember all the problems PMDG had with the initial release of the 737NG? As for the blurry gauges in VC I do agree thats a problem, but overall I think it's good product with a lot of potential.Dave FisherCYYZP4 2.8 GB 478P 533 MHZ CPUP4P800S Asus Motherboard512 DDRGeforce Ti 4200/128Maxtor 80 Gig ATA 133 HDhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpg

Dave, I agree with you. This is a pretty good, well, very good first kick at the can. These guys are here to stay, and we're all going to benefit from it. billg

Well I have also gave the CRJ more air time and a I am going to say that I am starting to like her more and more.I did post some negative comments and I am apologizing to Feel There for my lack of patience.I am just too used to the PMDG and the ES CitationX that I was using them as a benchmark.The CRJ is modeled nicely and there is room for some improvement, but for 29.95 it is worth the $$$$.My apologies again ...Andy

>>somewhat cartoonish ones in>>Eaglesofts Cit X. But that's just my opinion though! :-)>>"Cartoonish?">>The default C172, C182, and Lear panels are cartoonish; the>Cit X is pure artistry...I like "cartoonish". In fact, all of Flight Simulator is a cartoon, so why should the panel be different.Bill

Thanks Bill:I wasn't going to say anything, but if the X is "cartoonish" and/or "blurry" I think somebody has a system that needs attention. IMHO it is a prize.Also, thanks for originating this post Capt. Such info both pro and con (without the personal takes) is the most credible information we have on new products (especially pricey ones).Happy flying:RTH

I have decided to buy this plane, but Im going to wait until after they fix the bugs. They said in the Feelthere forums that the bugs will be fixed.

LOL!!!! What a temper tantrum. The common thread here is the CRJ, not you, Shane!!! LOL!!!! But seriously, I don't know why I was so crappy yesterday, maybe I'm pre-mentsral! I'm done with the thread.

My system works just fine thank you :-) I like the Cit X a lot, the external model and virtual cabin is fabulous, however I find the 2D panel looking just a bit too hand drawn for my liking, not a very big problem though. BUT I'm really having difficulties with the blurry panel textures, both in the VC and the 2D-panel. Even if you zoom in on, for example, the ap-control in the VC you can't really read what the buttons are labeled...Perhaps some pop-up texts describing the buttons would solve this problem? But I'm not here for bashing the good folks at Eaglesoft, just trying to compare the two a/c:s that are fairly comparable when coming to price and features. If you like the Cit X and the level of complexity in that one, you won't be disappointed with the CRJ. The CRJ-panels are a lot more readable and you get a nice, although not complete, FMC. Of course the quality of the Cit X's Virtual Cabin is hard to beat, and unfortunately there are no wine-drinking businesswomen in the CRJ (maybe I can ask for one in a future patch.. :-))So the bottomline is, if you own the Cit X and like it, I think that you're probably gonna like the CRJ if you've been looking for that kind of ac. However, if you're looking for a PMDG-type all systems modelled ac you'd better look elsewhere! But once again: that's just my thoughts! :-)rgrds/fredrik granfors

>andunfortunately there are no wine-drinking businesswomen in the>CRJ (maybe I can ask for one in a future patch.. :-))>How about vodka-drinking men? :-beerchug