Sign in to follow this  
Guest ARUBANEZE

Citation

Recommended Posts

Thinking of picking up the wilco citationX.The panel graphics look very good but can anyone advise on the flight model and systems simulation.Should I wait for the eaglesoft version?Thanks,dimitri

Share this post


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

You don't need to WAIT for the Eaglesoft version for FS9, it's been out for several years. I have it and it is a beautiful piece of artwork. A truly wonderful addon in all respects.Also, it does actually port over to FSX reasonably well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the Feelthere version has a lot more system modelling (FMC etc) where the ESDG 1.0 version has very little to none. However the 2.0 version is in the works and ESDG has a better track record so I would in fact WAIT for it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was meaning version 2 of the eglesoft citation.Thanks for the advice but can somebody comment on how the wilco version performs in terms of flight modelling.Dimitri.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the product has a solid published release date, I don't believe you should wait for it. People have been told on this forum to wait for the Eaglesoft Citation X 2.0 since at least March of 2007 by my recollection. And this is true for some other products like Airliner XP, etc. This is not a knock against Eaglsoft or other publishers, but the facts are what they are.I think its time to be a little more pragmatic about these things when giving buying advice/suggestions.Focus on the here and now, unless there is a published release date for an upcoming product. IMO the Eaglesoft Citation X product without the FMS is a quite nice product (FS9 only). But if you absolutely must have the latest in available systems modeling and simulation in your Citation X, or you want to use it with FSX,then the Wilco Citation X product is what you should consider.RegardsErnie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought it, flew it and later uninstalled it. I would say it's a pretty good product. But like some other feelthere products, it has some issues that are not addressed/improved and most likely won't be in the future. If you are after some causal flying in a good looking X, it's definitely good enough. But if you want to do it to the book and as real as it gets, you may encounter frustrations here and there. Sorry I can't be more specific since it has been a while since I flew it last.I own their legacy, which is a more issue free addon than the X. I understand their 737 is a very solid product as well. If you crave a CX, the feelthere X is the best "here and now". The question is whether it's good enough. For me it wasn't quite.Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for your information.I did read that it has a few issues and that wilco is supporting the product and not feelthere.But as always I prefer to get a first hand report from people who have bought and flown it.I mainly fly lvld 767, pmdg 747, the dreamfleet range of aircraft, and the aeroworx b200,so I wanted to add a bizjet.Regards,Dimitri.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>wilco is supporting the product and not feeltherenot exactly correct.Q&A about how to fly the aircraft and use the modeled systems are supported on the following feelThere forum -http://www.iemit.com/forum/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=27if there is an issue that is bug related (ex, graphics error related to VISA/FSX) one reports the issue using wilco's support form. (as has been discussed in the recent issues around PSS, the support form confirms that a person with a problem is an owner of the product (ie, a form of piracy protection); and has the user properly outline their system setup to assist the programmers in IDing the challenge.)--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>so I wanted to add a bizjet.IMO the best bizjets now are the Legacy and the eaglesoft Citation II with the newly released expansion pack.Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Thinking of picking up the wilco citationX.The panel graphics>look very good but can anyone advise on the flight model and>systems simulation.Should I wait for the eaglesoft>version?Thanks,>dimitri---------------------------------------------------------------For the record. Eaglesoft CX1.0 was a groundbreaking product a few years back despite it's lack of fully functional FMS. Eaglesoft CX1.0 has provided a LOT of enjoyment for a LOT of simmers over the years. It was decided over 16 months ago to do complete rebuilds for FS9 and FSX and include full Honeywell Primus 2000/FMS/RTU systems modeling and name the new products Eaglesoft CX2.0 for either FS9 or FSX.Our CX2.0 is a work in progress but is not ready for prime time so those who wish to own a CX with Honeywell Primus 1000 system have the W/F/T option.Another option is our CX1.0 without a fully functional FMS but with Honeywell Primus 2000 System.As to waiting for our CX2.0, we suggest that users examine their current needs and decide according to what they wish to own now:-)By the way, Eaglesoft is currently working on our CX1.0 for FSX Package.Hope this helps:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>>...I am tired just reading your reply to the OP.Just a reminder. I have a right to respond and post in these forums just as you do:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>...I am tired just reading your reply to the OP.>>Just a reminder. I have a right to respond and post in these>forums just as you do:-)>Relax. No one said you had fewer rights to do so. But on the other hand, I believe some people find many of your posts in this forum to be suggestive promotions of your own commercial addons. Granted they are all in good spirit but still. It's ok for me to post 10 shots of the, for example, Citation II in the screenshot forum. But you are "NOT allowed" (quote forum rule) to do so. Along the same logic, I can recommend or sing high praise for the Comanche in a "what should I buy next" post but when you do it the taste changes, even when you make it sound like the praising words came from customers' mouths. Of course it's a different story if you are providing support information for existing customers. Just my personal opinion. :)Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jason, our posts are within the rules at Avsim and are informational in nature. We appreciate your support and your views but promotional type posting, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.:-)Why I even remember a recent post by another developer who actually ran a poll here asking users to vote on which of their products should be ported to FSX next.:-)Jason>"Of course it's a different story if you are providing support information for existing customers......." Unlike another developer whose support forum is a hassle for users, we refrain from answering Eaglesoft support issues in Avsim forums and direct users to our own support forums.Hope this helps:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Jason, our posts are within the rules at AvsimNo doubt>and are informational in nature. That's a very ample concept. All commercials, for example, are informational in nature. I quote your post in another thread here, "You may wish to take a look out our Piper Twin Comanche...a little smaller than the other two but real twin drivers seem to like her a lot". Is that informational? absolutely, there is a comanche in the market and real pilots like it. Is that promotional? I would say more so than anything else. >We appreciate your support and your>views but promotional type posting, like beauty, is in the eye>of the beholder.:-)Appreciate your good spirit. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we appreciate your quoting our comments here for informational discussion but you should be careful lest someone accuse you of promoting Eaglesoft products:-lol :-lol At any rate, promotional posts, like beauty, really is in the eye of the beholder. Kind of like everyone has an opinion but not all opinions are objectively true:-lol Hope this helps,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>but you should be careful lest>someone accuse you of promoting Eaglesoft products:-lol :-lol>I can do it and no one can accuse me. Why? Money from sales doesn't go into my wallet. If it did I would be purchasing a banner ad on this website to deliver my "product information" rather than sneaking it into the free forums.Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>but you should be careful lest>>someone accuse you of promoting Eaglesoft products:-lol>:-lol>>>I can do it and no one can accuse me. Why? Money from sales>doesn't go into my wallet. If it did I would be purchasing a>banner ad on this website to deliver my "product information">rather than sneaking it into the free forums.>>JasonNothing sneaky at all...it's all right here in broad daylight for all to see and decide for themselves including the mods here.Relax. Some will see it one way and others will see it in another light. The forum exists for exchange of information and really that's all we've provided:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>By the way, Eaglesoft is currently working on our CX1.0 for>FSX Package.>What? Its your business but why on earth waste man hours on the old CX v. 1.0 for FSX instead of focusing on the 2.0 for both FS9 and FSX is beyond me. Waste of time IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>By the way, Eaglesoft is currently working on our CX1.0 for>>FSX Package.>>>>What? Its your business but why on earth waste man hours on>the old CX v. 1.0 for FSX instead of focusing on the 2.0 for>both FS9 and FSX is beyond me. Waste of time IMO.First of all we are not interupting any current project schedule.CX1.0 for FSX is not a new rebuild and does not contain anything new with the exception of FSX type engine starting routines.The only reason we are working it into the gaps is because a large number of folks request that we do so:-)Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,Well, I also don't find it good style if developers jump with advertising in a thread affecting another developer.And besides that, where can one discuss about Eaglesoft products and/or planes made by Eaglesoft without developers interference ?If you would put yourself in a customers role, you wouldn't want to ?Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>>By the way, Eaglesoft is currently working on our CX1.0>for>>>FSX Package.>>>>>>>What? Its your business but why on earth waste man hours on>>the old CX v. 1.0 for FSX instead of focusing on the 2.0 for>>both FS9 and FSX is beyond me. Waste of time IMO.>>First of all we are not interupting any current project>schedule.>CX1.0 for FSX is not a new rebuild and does not contain>anything new with the exception of FSX type engine starting>routines.>>The only reason we are working it into the gaps is because a>large number of folks request that we do so:-)>>Hope this helps.>>>YES PLEASE! And I can't wait for the new one from Eaglesoft! :-wave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Ron,>>Well, I also don't find it good style if developers jump with>advertising in a thread affecting another developer.>>And besides that, where can one discuss about Eaglesoft>products and/or planes made by Eaglesoft without developers>interference ?>>If you would put yourself in a customers role, you wouldn't>want to ?>>MikeA reread of the thread will provide clarity on the subject. Everything we've posted is subject to the mods here.We happen to be users as well as developers and have a perfect right to post here as long as we obey the rules just as you do.:-)

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