Sign in to follow this  
windycloud

Feelthere CX - let's talk about the ACTUAL PLANE

Recommended Posts

Since the other CX thread turns out to be 6 pages of...well...pretty much nothing IMO, I am starting a new one for those who actually OWN the product to exchange experience. I took a quick flight. First the model doesn't look quite right to me. The nose, windshield and engines especially. http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170507.jpgThere are some glitches. For example, check out the landing light at night.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170508.jpgThe standby attitude indicator doesn't work. It can't be uncaged.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170509.jpgOver all it's a very good product IMO. VC gauges are very smooth (so is the legacy). No performance hit even with the cabin. Sound is great. I hand flew a quick pattern, it's very smooth. The only thing is it didn't feel quite as heavy as I had expected, probably because I didn't carry much fuel.Check out the avionic suite:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170510.jpgBeing a feelthere plane, not all switches are modeled and clickable like PMDG or LVD. But nevertheless it's a great X. If you think their Legacy is nice and worth having, this X will be a keeper for you.I'll spend more time with it and post more observations.Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>As for the standby gauge make sure to switch on the standby power to on ;-) it works fine here...Some minor issues and try to look out of the cabin windows in the FSX version :-lol only a grey wall :(Notice the landing lights too, I think the model is fine :-)Missing the window mirror effect in the VC ;-) also some difference between 2d and VC regarding position of the same switch for example the weather radar...Avionics and system are great :-) of to discover more ;-)Andr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found it to be a nice little plane! I, too, was certain that there was something wrong with the model, but I compared it with a few photos on A.net and it seems to be pretty accurate! I think the wing to body fairing could use a little work.. and I think the tail is a tad bit too thick and squared on the leading edge...but hey... it still looks good to me!I'll bet with a few hi-quality paints for her, she'll look just fine! Let's hope the paint kit follows soon!The nosegear light problem reared its head for me too... but only when visibility is low... I think the only way to eliminate it is to turn off the landing lights after takeoff!One drawback for me... I would have preferred some panel icons in the 2D view (like the Legacy or their other products) or even just some invisible click spots!)... it's tough to do a Shift + key combo to open the sub panels while flying. I know they aren't realistic.. but they're definitely helpful! I can click things in the VC view, but I prefer the 2D view for managing systems.No performance hit on my end either... smooth as butter, just like the Legacy!I think the gauge legibility and nightlighting is MUCH better than the Eaglesoft model... but then we haven't seen what Eaglesoft has come up with for V2 yet.. so I'll withold judgement there...I can safely say I'll probably have them BOTH in my hangar!BUT...Did anyone else notice the "rack" on the flight attendant?:-eek Alex:-xxrotflmao:-xxrotflmao:-xxrotflmao:-xxrotflmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>As for the standby gauge make sure to switch on the standby>power to on ;-) it works fine here...>Lovely, thanks!>I found it to be a nice little plane! I, too, was certain>that there was something wrong with the model, but I compared>it with a few photos on A.net and it seems to be pretty>accurate! Again, lovely! :) I say it's good enough for me. After all we fly in the cockpit not on the exterior model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Again, lovely! :) I say it's good enough for me. After all we>fly in the cockpit not on the exterior model. I dumped the Eaglesoft CitationX the day I got my TrackIR device. The 2D panels may look nice, but the look of the VC is definitely too blurred. So for me the cockpit is even more important than the exterior model.What can I say, I love the VC in the new Wilco CX :-)Regards,Micha :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I dumped the Eaglesoft CitationX the day I got my TrackIR>device. The 2D panels may look nice, but the look of the VC is>definitely too blurred. So for me the cockpit is even more>important than the exterior model.>>What can I say, I love the VC in the new Wilco CX :-)>>Regards,>>Micha :-)>The wilco CX VC is nice. I think this CX is a solid step forward from their already very good Legacy. So far I haven't seen anyone complaining about major bugs.I actually find the eaglesoft VC pretty nice, but you are right blurry is a problem. Their V2.0 comes out when it comes out. We'll see how good it is. I'll get it if it's $40 better than the feelthere.Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will take the Eaglesoft version (v1 or v2) over this plane. The outside model looks better on the Eaglesoft one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I will take the Eaglesoft version (v1 or v2) over this plane.>The outside model looks better on the Eaglesoft one. It depends on what one's looking for in FS. There is nothing wrong with just wanting a good looking model. 50 North, CLS, Overland...the list goes on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looked around the aircraft last night, though haven't had a chance to fly her yet, hopefully tonight. The engines sound very quiet, which I'd expect in a tail-mounted configuration. Thanks FT for not putting the engines in the cockpit with me! The VC is wonderfully crisp and clear, and no frame rate hit, good stuff!I noticed a couple of things though, can others confirm this?In the VC, the FO's Nav display configuration panel (immediately to the right of the FO's PFD) has an 'in-development' texture containing a design note about which texture should be used. This needs to be removed?Also in the VC, the FMC PERFormance button is actually labelled 'PREF'.Other than those two things the look and feel of the aircraft is superb, I can't wait to give it a go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here ya go:LOLhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170600.jpgLOLhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170601.jpgLOLhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170604.jpghmmmm......LOLhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170603.jpgOk all small things. Nothing a SP can't fix. Still love this X.By the way this is what Feelthere gets for deciding not to have an open forum for the X. The "bug reports" come here. :)Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to the last picture, I see nothing small there! :-) I wonder if repaints can be made of certain, ahem, internal cabin textures?Seriously though, thanks though for illustrating my points, Jason. Hadn't noticed the missing digit on the Compass arc!EDIT: I meant to add this earlier, now that I see someone else has reported this I'll raise it - During a static thrust check on the ground, I noticed that the maximum N1% I could achieve was about 87% or so. Does anyone else notice this? Will the N1% get higher as you accelerate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MoreMissing AP status indications in VChttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170614.jpgCheck out the rudder padels in VC, and no, they are NOT animated.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170615.jpgNo turn indicator in VC. There is no way to know if you are making a coordinated turn or not from VC. (same problem with the Legacy).http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/170616.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>With respect to the last picture, I see nothing small there!Ha! It's all about personal taste I guess. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I've had it out for a couple of legs now. (FS9, WinXP SP2)First general impression of the plane is OK. It's stable, sounds are good, no really ugly problems, but lots of issues that should have been caught in any sort of decent beta test.1. Takeoff fan RPM will not reach the computed takeoff thrust index. Index shows 3-5% higher than max thrust attainable.2. Overhead panel -- misspelled "PASS SAFTEY" label3. Wind entry cannot be made with single digit speed...i.e. 020/7 knots has to be entered as 020/07, or it won't take it.4. Master caution and warning lights, when pressed, make a deafening click that sounds like somebody jacking a 12-ga riot gun next to your head. (Make sure to squawk 7700)5. Brakes will not hold the jet at takeoff power.6. Speed brakes are massively overeffective...should be labeled "Retro-rockets" instead.7. Barometric altitude mins only selectable in 100 ft increments. Needs to be at least 10 feet increments.8. MFD shows "WX/OFF" in standby mode...should be "WX/SBY"9. Idle thrust on the ground is extremely anemic...shows only 90pph FF and takes a lot of throttle to break loose. The real airplane will accelerate nicely with idle power on a flat surface.10. Aircraft accelerates significantly when banked. Suspect an FDE problem that I've seen before in other planes causing this.11. VC very dark...haven't found a light control to brighten it up.12. Installation overwrote a newer nav data set with an older one without asking, which affected the FT Airbus and PMDG planes. Not cool.13. Thrust curves at altitude look a little iffy. With a nearly 30,000 lb jet, I was climbing at 4300 fpm passing FL340. Guess I forgot to jett the SRBs.14. APU sound is a bit on the loud side. Engine sound levels are good (very low), but APU sounds like it's running in the overhead panel somewhere.As far as looks, the exterior looks OK to me, but I make no claims to be a stickler. The 2D panel graphics are acceptable, but not photoreal...especially the pedestal, but they function OK. For me, function beats form unless it's horrible, which it is not.The Primus 2000 implementation is the best I've seen for FS to date. I have a lot of time on Honeywell FMCs, and this appears to be done right, at first look anyway.With the displays zoomed, however, there is no way to operate the knobs at the bottom of the CRT (baro set, range etc) Should be some invisible clickspots there to facilitate.There are a pretty fair number of non-functional switches on the various panels...including some commonly used controls that I'd have liked to see, like engine synch.Performance is hard to address...my PC is very powerful...a Core 2 Extreme running at 3.6GHz with 2GB and an 8800GTX...I keep frames in FS9 locked at 30, and at 30 it stays with this panel.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this