I've been watching some posts in here for quite awhile trying to find a good review for the FSX EG Citation X V2.0 extreme plane. However, every time someone tries to post their opinion, a couple guys from Eaglesoft come in and "defend" their product and accuse the original poster of having an agenda. That in itself is hypocritical because Eaglesoft's agenda is to sell their plane and protect its image.It reminds me of years ago with the Battlecruiser 3000AD series and Derek Smart. You couldn't go anywhere, to any forum, without seeing him there to pounce anyone who said ANYTHING negative about his baby.I would like to hear from owners of the product and not the people that designed it. I have come to the Avsim community for an unbiased opinion of the plane. Good or bad. Let me know how it is.It looks great, I really enjoy flying my Level D 767, PMDG MD-11, and Feelthere Citation. I have a couple Eaglesoft GA planes, but would like to replace my Feelthere plane with a better, updated model of the Citation. Is the FMS on par with the PMDG and Level D quality? Is it true that FSUIPC reg. version is required?So how is it owners? Pros and Cons!!!!

Well, I've posted in some of those other threads regarding this aircraft, so it shouldn't come as any surprise that I'm a big fan. I waited a long time for its release and purchased it immediately after it became available. That said, I haven't flown it nearly as much as I would have liked because, mainly because I've just made the leap to airliners for the first time...starting with the PMDG MD-11! So I've spent most of my FSX time in that over the past couple of months.Regardless, I have been spending more time with the EA Citation X v2 lately and don't regret my (substantial) purchase. First, it is a beautiful high fidelity aircraft with detailed, complex, systems and FMS. I wouldn't compare its FMS with the MD-11's because the aircraft are so different from each other. That said, the Citation's FMS is a genuine re-creation of the real thing, with SID-STARS, VNAV, and other complex capabilities that I'm still learning. You will need to spend time with the documentation to get the best out of this jet (more on this below).The quibbles I have with it are these -- first (and you've probably read about this already), the Citation's VC just isn't up to par with what's available these days. I've been totally spoiled by the VC in the PMDG J41, the Flight1 Cessna Mustang, and the RealAir Duke B60...and the EA Citation's VC can't stand the comparison. This is important to me because I use TrackIR and mostly fly in the VC, using 2-D panels only occasionally. Second, the documentation was thin upon initial release, with much important information left out. I'm disappointed that we don't have access to the detailed docs for the Honeywell Primus 2000 FMS in this aircraft, but I understand that the reason for this is Honeywell's refusal to allow its distribution.Now, to be fair, Eaglesoft is responding to these shortcomings. They are taking customer input seriously and have produced two hotfixes, with another in the works. The plane has measurably improved as a result. The last hotfix included additional documentation, which has proven very helpful in operating this complex bizjet. There are some experienced pilots on the Eaglesoft forum who are providing some great advice as to how to get the most out of the FMS. And finally, customers have been informed that an improvement to the VC panel is in the works...I can't wait to see what they come up with. Even without that, I'm still flying the jet and look forward to many hours learning its nuances.

Since your not 100% happy with the VC, do you find yourself flying it mostly with the 2d panel? ES have always had very nice 2D panels. Also, what are your thoughts on the pilot, copilot and VIP passenger details?

Since your not 100% happy with the VC, do you find yourself flying it mostly with the 2d panel? ES have always had very nice 2D panels. Also, what are your thoughts on the pilot, copilot and VIP passenger details?

I do use the 2-D panels to operate the jet much, but not all, of the time...not my preference, but I've grown used to it. The 2-D panels are terrific.Frankly, I haven't paid much attention to the passenger and pilot/co-pilot details...they're fine by me, but I'm focused on the cockpit, the exterior details, and flying the aircraft.

If i don't have a registered version of FSUIPC, can I still fly the plane? What would I be missing?

If i don't have a registered version of FSUIPC, can I still fly the plane? What would I be missing?

The FADEC programming depends on the registered FSUIPC - your throttles won't work properly without it.By the way, the Eaglesoft aircraft are sold using the Flight1 wrapper, which means that if you are unhappy with your purchase, for whatever reason, they will refund your money within the first 30 days with no questions asked (of course you will then have to stop using the aircraft). I would agree that they can be too aggressive at times, but their refund policy demonstrates the flip side of that coin - they clearly stand by their product.

If i don't have a registered version of FSUIPC, can I still fly the plane? What would I be missing?

Oops..I meant to respond to that question as well...the Citation X v2 includes an accurate simulation of FADEC. In order for the user to experience this, a registered copy of FSUIPC is required (and is a great investment besides...). Wihout that, you can still fly the plane, but you won't benefit from FADEC-controlled TO, CLB, and CRZ throttle modes. Your throttle and the plane's engines will instead respond linearly, which isn't how a real Citation X is flown (I gather).

The FADEC programming depends on the registered FSUIPC - your throttles won't work properly without it.

I'm working on a more complete review right now."not work properly" means without a registered FSUIPC the throttles work like a regular mechanical cable-and-pulley throttle without the FADEC's features.I'm a 2D guy but I will use a VC if it's state of the art (like the aforementioned F1 Mustang, PMDG J41, or RealAir Duke). That said, I think the excellent wide-format 2D panel in the CX 2 goes a good way towards making up for the somewhat underwhelming VC.The dual-Honeywell Primus FMSs are well-done, fairly complete, but the only docs for the FMS are contained in a short sample flight tutorial. The Honeywell units are not as intuitive as some others, and docs are sorely needed or you'll miss out on a good deal of the capabilities.Exterior model is good, as are flight dynamics. Sounds are a little sterile but not bad. I have a few issues with the nav display and autopilot...you can wait for the review or read the ongoing dialog in the Eaglesoft forums.RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

Bert Pieke and Marlon Carter are working on the Avsim review as well.One user has so far noticed the split bus electrical system.This is from our support forum:Eaglesoft Citation X Extreme V2.0 Documentation is a good starting point but we are happy to point out a few sites where users can find real world documents as well.First on the list is My Cockpits.org here: http://www.mycockpit.org/fileshare/brow ... ry.php?c=7Second on the list is Smart Cockpits.com here: http://www.smartcockpit.com/plane/cessna/CITATION-X/This just in! Our resident Citation X Pilot Chad Christopher has just now loaded his CXE V2.0 Video Tutorial Series to You Tube! See the "Chad Channel" here: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p ... 52B3D90941Run dont walk to what we call the "Chad Channel" for accurate operations information on your new Eaglesoft Citation X Extreme V2.0!Please post your feedback there as well as here. :(

I've been watching some posts in here for quite awhile trying to find a good review for the FSX EG Citation X V2.0 extreme plane.

An Avsim review is in the works, but we were asked by Eaglesoft to wait until the recently released hotfix was out and stable.I'm presently flying the CX both in FS9 and FSX with hotfix 1.83, without any problems.I have a registered version of FSUIPC and I do like the FADEC implementation. As mentioned in this thread,you can operate the aircraft without this feature. As a matter of fact, my co-reviewer Marlon is flying withouta registered FSUIPC copy, and he is also documenting his flying impressions.Without jumping ahead too much, I'll say that I really like the Citation. I have a 16:9 monitor and do not usuallyuse 2d panels much because of the distortion on most panels. The Citation, however, comes with a very good16:9 panel and now, I find myself switching from VC to 2d from time to time. Both panels are very legible,but when programming the FMS, I like the 2d popup panel better. The plane flies nicely with either FMS or hand controls and is a pleasure to take for a ride.Now, I better get back to writing the review :(

I'm looking forward to those reviews.Thanks!

Anyone else have anything to add or say about their experience with this plane?

I own the Citation X 2.0 for FSX and have flown (and do fly) only with VC, never 2D. It is my opinion that the VC is terrific and lacks nothing. I realize I might be in some kind of odd or unvocal minority. I do not agree that the VC is underwhelming in any aspect. Has anyone ever checked out a real pic of a real Citation X cockpit? If not, go to airliners. net and check it out. The pics of the real thing really do make the Citation cockpit "looks" very pedestrian or utilitarian. Eaglesoft, in my opinion, has only stayed true to the real machine and not tried to enhance or de-enhance or short change anything. It is not their problem if Citation made the real cockpit looks kind of plain for "beauty" or whatever it is that some users of their product think is lacking.I simply don't know what else Eaglesoft could have done better or different. That they are issuing some kind of hotfix with regard to the VC is something I cannot speak for of course. I do not work for Eaglesoft, I am only a user of their products and have nothing to urge or prove other than my opinion about this fine product.Randy Jura, KPDX

I own the Citation X 2.0 for FSX and have flown (and do fly) only with VC, never 2D. It is my opinion that the VC is terrific and lacks nothing. I realize I might be in some kind of odd or unvocal minority. I do not agree that the VC is underwhelming in any aspect. Has anyone ever checked out a real pic of a real Citation X cockpit? If not, go to airliners. net and check it out. The pics of the real thing really do make the Citation cockpit "looks" very pedestrian. Eaglesoft, in my opinion, has only stayed true to the real machine and not tried to enhance or de-enhance or short change anything. I simply don't know what else Eaglesoft could have done better or different. That they are issuing some kind of hotfix with regard to the VC is something I cannot speak for of course. I do not work for Eaglesoft, I am only a user of their products. Randy Jura, KPDX

I agree the same. Although usually not into these type of aircraft, I bought it cause I wanted to see what the hoopla was. It is stellar imho, and though not my usual cup of tea of what I choose to fly-I am inspired to give this one a go. It is a great piece of work as are many aircraft available for fs at what imho is a bargain price. I just went to Ikea tonight and spent more which will without a doubt have less lasting power. This one to learn to fly properly I figure is at least a year proposition.

I own the Citation X 2.0 for FSX and have flown (and do fly) only with VC, never 2D. It is my opinion that the VC is terrific and lacks nothing. I realize I might be in some kind of odd or unvocal minority. I do not agree that the VC is underwhelming in any aspect. Has anyone ever checked out a real pic of a real Citation X cockpit? If not, go to airliners. net and check it out. The pics of the real thing really do make the Citation cockpit "looks" very pedestrian or utilitarian. Eaglesoft, in my opinion, has only stayed true to the real machine and not tried to enhance or de-enhance or short change anything. It is not their problem if Citation made the real cockpit looks kind of plain for "beauty" or whatever it is that some users of their product think is lacking.I simply don't know what else Eaglesoft could have done better or different. That they are issuing some kind of hotfix with regard to the VC is something I cannot speak for of course. I do not work for Eaglesoft, I am only a user of their products and have nothing to urge or prove other than my opinion about this fine product.Randy Jura, KPDX

My critique on the VC appearance isn't due to the flat gray appearance, which is how the real C-X does look. It's things like the lighting knobs and skirt panels which have no appearance of depth/relief when viewed cross-cockpit, it's the fuzzy and nearly unreadable text on panels with some of the backlighting on, and it's obvious irregular straight-line polygons on things that stare you right in the face like the emergency T/R switches.All it takes is one good look around the Flight1 Mustang VC, or the PMDG J41 VC, and it's impossible to NOT notice how relatively crude the C-X VC graphics (outside the glass displays themselves) look in comparison. As to what ESDG could do differently...the answer is, simply, make it look as finished as some of the other really stunning late arrivals to FSX...the RealAir Duke, the F1 Mustang, the PMDG J41 and MD-11, or the Lotus L-39. There's a world of difference between the quality of the VCs. The Citation's VC is usable enough, but there isn't the visual "wow" factor most of the other recent high-end FSX add-ons bring to the table. I'm a systems and performance guy myself, so appearance is not all-important. But there are others that place a very high premium on the visuals. It's going to be up to the individual to decide if the various tradeoffs meet their requirements for a $50 add-on. With the Flight1 wrapper, you can take 30 days to decide.The ESDG Citation X has some other good qualities that help counterbalance its lack of a state-of-the-art VC. But for many folks that have grown used to the immersive rapture of the really good VCs hitting the market of late, I just don't think this is going to come anywhere near topping their list.RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO