Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

boing71234567

Wilco or Eaglesoft Citation X?

Recommended Posts

what is better in your opinion? Im looking for a good one and I found these two but didn't know which was better.-thank youMatthew Miller

Share this post


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

The Eaglesoft version is much better looking and flies pretty well, FMS is good.I have had some stability issues with it, which other people have also had - although they seem to be improving with the latest version of FSUIPC, hopefully that is not a coincidence. You also need a FULL version of FSUIPC to be able to run it properly, so if you don't already have that then you can add that into the cost.My only bugbear with Eaglesoft is that I have always found their support to be awful. :( Final point is that since the Eaglesoft version is sold through Flight1 you can get a refund if you do not get on with it for up to 30 days after purchase.G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks Alex. :( Gazz. Eaglesoft builds and sells its own products. It happens that we chose to use the F1 Wrapper System and include a 30 Day Refund Option as it is the most user friendly system available.I suppose you could compare our "awful support" to that of the notorious "support merry go round" of the other vendor/publisher mentioned here but to do so would invite a "food fight" would it not?Or could that be your goal here? :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks! I am very happy with the inside of the plane but how is the outside of it? the overall appearence? animations? etc, compared to the wilco one?-thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abacus did a CX in their old Corporate Pilot Series, Eaglesoft built a very successful CX V1.0, Wilco built theirs, and now Eaglesoft offers CX V2.0 w/Full FMS.That is a short history of FS CX 750 Development. There are a number of screenshots at our site and in our Support Forums for your evaluation.In addition, we've heard that the Avsim Review of Eaglesoft Citation X V2.0 is coming soon. Plenty of info in our support forums if you would like to evaluate further. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Eaglesoft version is much better looking and flies pretty well, FMS is good.My only bugbear with Eaglesoft is that I have always found their support to be awful. :(
Yes, I agree, with Gaz The guys at ES are too grumpy and defensive over almost anythng you say/ask there. Sometimes their attitudes even spill over here as well. I don't think this helps their company or their good planes. For what it matters, I've never had a problem with FeelThere over years asking so many questions on their boards. I even got direct and quite reasonable answers from Wilco! (lol, but that was only via email). As to CitationX its FMS seriously lacks Direct to proper functionality. I'd say it is the biggest issue for me with CX now. I hope it won't take them long to complete it. Otherwise their planes are really good. In view of the above my first personal choice now is ERJ-135v2. CX is the second, and I can recommend strongly to buy it.Dirk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ES support may be a little terse at times, but the fact remains that if you're looking for a complete and detailed Citation X with a largely fully functional FMS, flight model, etc, the ES Citation X 2.0 is the only choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ES CX v2.0 is not only the best CX but also one of the best addon aircraft for FS ever. You simply cannot compare the two CXs, and yes I own both, although one is long gone from my HD. If you are in any way into bizjets, the ES CX is a must have. Their support is also one of the best. I've never dealt with any other developer who fixes bugs so fast and so completely on something of this complexity. The way they fix bugs is pretty much how we would WISH others would do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gazz. Eaglesoft builds and sells its own products. It happens that we chose to use the F1 Wrapper System and include a 30 Day Refund Option as it is the most user friendly system available.I suppose you could compare our "awful support" to that of the notorious "support merry go round" of the other vendor/publisher mentioned here but to do so would invite a "food fight" would it not?Or could that be your goal here? :(
As usual you see a motive where non exists. I know Eaglesoft build it and sell it through Flight 1. I am more than happy with that and I would recommend it to anyone since I have used the 30 day refund option and know how well it works, for the record I did NOT use it on the Citation X v2 which I a pretty happy with - there are a few issues that I have with it, which I will attempt to take up on your support forums, although wether I get an answer is another question.Actually rather than leave it open and have people thinking that there is something terminally wrong with the bird: one is the use of VNAV on SIDS & STARS, which I am still trying to get my head around - however I guess this has been tested to death so is probably something I am doing - especially since I have only just started using them. The second is how you divert to another airport in flight (alternate or other), I know you can't build a new plan, but can you "divert" ?? Neither query is a killer for me .. .. .. I like the Citation and would recommend it.I don't know what Wilco/Feelthere's support is like, it may well be worse than yours although your post actually makes my point better than I can since your first instinct is to try and accuse me of something which is false, something which I have seen time and time again on your own forums. I have no goal other than perhaps you looking at how you respond or NOT to support requests, I don't compare it to any other company - in my opinion, your support is very poor - if you don't like that then rather than spend time attacking me set your own house in order.G
thanks! I am very happy with the inside of the plane but how is the outside of it? the overall appearence? animations? etc, compared to the wilco one?-thank you
The Eaglesoft one is much better looking. They seem to have captured the look of the plane, unlike the Wilco which just looks wrong. Just do a search on YOUTUBE if you want to see - you can tell the difference !!G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ES support may be a little terse at times, but the fact remains that if you're looking for a complete and detailed Citation X with a largely fully functional FMS, flight model, etc, the ES Citation X 2.0 is the only choice.
More or less same thing if you want a good boeing. Pmdg boeings are basically the only good choice even if their support@prec*.* in my experience is very sad.Take it or leave it :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember asking the diversion question once. The answer is no you cannot since the CX does not support a second flightplan, which is what you need to do a diversion the right way. Yes I do agree that some of ES team are way too defensive about their work. Whatever you ask the attitude is pretty much that you don't really know what you are talking about. Only wish you'd read the manual. And whatever problem you present you will often get a it's not my fault it's yours. Their attitude intimidate some customers while annoys the rest. But if you look beyond that, what is GREAT about ES is they do look into everything mentioned afterall and they won't let go of anything that does need fixing or improvement. And then there is their excessive "hijacking" of topics here. "We have rights too." Yes they certainly do. It's not about violation but rather bad taste. I don't see a SINGLE other developer who does so, and for good reasons. It annoys way more than it pleases. But in FS we are pretty much dealing with all small shops and individual craftsmen. These talented people work at their syfy work bench all day and they turn around to attend us when needed. It's against the nature of the business to expect corporate style customer service. If I have to choose I'd rather have plenty great addons and all the bugs fixed than a corporate smiley face. In that sense I personally rate ES a top notch developer. Yes it would be nice to have both but I can't think of one that offers both...aeroworx was pretty good...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if you look beyond that, what is GREAT about ES is they do look into everything mentioned afterall and they won't let go of anything that does need fixing or improvement.
Very good observation, windycloud, and I suspected it too. Whatever you point out or request at ES, they know more hard work is coming their way, because they themseles won't let go of anything broken or non-completed in their planes. And therefore their initial reaction or just instinct is more like to retaliate you first and then tackle the problem. Poor guys, I wish their MSFS business were more compensating.Dirk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I remember asking the diversion question once. The answer is no you cannot since the CX does not support a second flightplan, which is what you need to do a diversion the right way.
That is a damn shame, I can understand given the level of complexity that it would be awkward to do a full plan - although I would have thought it would be well within Ed's considerable abilities to let you change and go direct - that should suit 90% of users !! As for the attitude stuff I would agree with that 100%...G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gazz, the OP question was for a direct aircraft comparison. It is interesting that he did not ask for an opinion on the relative merits of each vendors product support.You introduced the subject and we wondered why? That's not an accusation, just a question as to why do so if you did not intend to see this become a "food fight" over what you call "awful support".Anyway, thanks for your input on the aircraft itself. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is a damn shame, I can understand given the level of complexity that it would be awkward to do a full plan - although I would have thought it would be well within Ed's considerable abilities to let you change and go direct - that should suit 90% of users !! As for the attitude stuff I would agree with that 100%...G
The jury is still out on that issue and meantime users are using Direct in certain situations. Check our support forums if you rerally want to be up to date on whats going on.As others have mentioned, we don't leave things hanging and never answer. If a thing cannot be accomplished we will clearly say so.That policy is in place for users as well. We clearly state whether an issue is on us or the user. If it lands on the user there is a solid reason and you can expect that we will clarify erroneous information as we go.As to attitudes, certain users would do well to check their own attitudes before they attack others.Something about glass houses and stones if I recall correctly. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The ES CX v2.0 is not only the best CX but also one of the best addon aircraft for FS ever. You simply cannot compare the two CXs, and yes I own both, although one is long gone from my HD. If you are in any way into bizjets, the ES CX is a must have. Their support is also one of the best. I've never dealt with any other developer who fixes bugs so fast and so completely on something of this complexity. The way they fix bugs is pretty much how we would WISH others would do.
Thanks Windy. You've hit the nail on the head when it comes to extra work but that's what it takes these days.We won't coddle folks but we do support our products and those who honestly need help.I've banned a user who registered as Satan and asked for support on a pirated copy within the last twelve hours.The support game is a little more complicated these days... :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gazz, the OP question was for a direct aircraft comparison. It is interesting that he did not ask for an opinion on the relative merits of each vendors product support.You introduced the subject and we wondered why? That's not an accusation, just a question as to why do so if you did not intend to see this become a "food fight" over what you call "awful support".Anyway, thanks for your input on the aircraft itself. :(
From a personal perspective the support that you are going to get, if you have issues with a product, is part of the comparison process, perhaps that is me being picky being an (ex) Customer Support Manager. No point having the prettiest aircraft if you can't fly it because your support queries never get answered. That is why I introduced it !!G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose you could compare our "awful support" to that of the notorious "support merry go round" of the other vendor/publisher mentioned here but to do so would invite a "food fight" would it not?
ron:why do you even say things like this? why do you find it necessary to attack another developer? the poster stated they had concerns with ES support ... and you respond by attacking feelThere and wilco ... ?? :( --

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I remember asking the diversion question once. The answer is no you cannot since the CX does not support a second flightplan, which is what you need to do a diversion the right way.
It would be more accurate to say that "FS doesn't support a second flightplan." In fact, there's no provision in FS9 or FSX to actually load a saved flightplan into the sim. We can of course load a flightplan into the FMS, but that's not the same thing, since FS doesn't "see the flightplan" until the same flightplan is loaded into the sim via the upper toobar GUI. :( But, technical difficulties and limitations aside, that doesn't stop any of us from trying to figure out a new angle of approach to circumvent this issue! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ron:why do you even say things like this? why do you find it necessary to attack another developer? the poster stated they had concerns with ES support ... and you respond by attacking feelThere and wilco ... ?? :( --
Scoob, there is no attack on anyone here. Gazz seems to think he's an expert on support and opened the door for a comparison discussion of the two companies support.You can thank him for that portion of the discussion. I've simply drawn the comparison to its logical end.You can thank your detracters for the other aspects of your support just as we can thank ours.One of the most troubling aspects of this hobby is the near constant negative refrain by those who don't appreciate some aspect of a development house.We've experienced it just as well as you and others have. The statement about PMDG that was posted here speaks volumes.In that statement the poster essentially said the PMDG aircraft are great and their support sucks. We've seen the same posted about Wilco/Feelthere, Flight One, FSD and most any other development house you want to name.In our view, the OP simply wanted a side by side AIRCRAFT comparison and you can easily see how far OT the thread has become based on the "food fight" over "awful support" :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From a personal perspective the support that you are going to get, if you have issues with a product, is part of the comparison process, perhaps that is me being picky being an (ex) Customer Support Manager. No point having the prettiest aircraft if you can't fly it because your support queries never get answered. That is why I introduced it !!G
Hmm, while your view may be valid, the OP did not ask for a personal review, just an aircraft comparison.Your view would be more valid if the Eaglesoft CX 2.0 were "unflyable". Your implication that the Eaglesoft Citation X 2.0 is "unflyable" is simply not the case and we suspect that you know that to be true.Since you injected your personal view on "awful support" we've seen no one provide the OP with a direct, side by side AIRCRAFT comparison with one exception.That exception is that people who own both say they've removed one of the Citations from their hard drive.The upcoming Avsim Review should help answer the OPs questions since Avsim seems to present relatively unbiased views in their Review Process. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is a damn shame, I can understand given the level of complexity that it would be awkward to do a full plan - although I would have thought it would be well within Ed's considerable abilities to let you change and go direct - that should suit 90% of users !! As for the attitude stuff I would agree with that 100%...G
Upon further review the answer to the Diversion Question is quite simple.The real CX 750 does not support Diversion as it relates to a new flight plan while in flight.Neither does FS. Asking Ed to accomplish something the real CX 750 cannot accomplish is expecting too much. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reviewing this thread... I believe the question is actually about alternate destinations.While the Citation 750's FMS can indeed support alternate destinations... we didn't develop this in ours. The reason: Discussion with real world Citation 750 pilots revealed they never used it. So... that's the jist of it. If you take issue with this... *shrug* We didn't charge $80-$100 for the addon either :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,I feel I need to clarify what I said concerning your aircraft after your post which included:

Your view would be more valid if the Eaglesoft CX 2.0 were "unflyable". Your implication that the Eaglesoft Citation X 2.0 is "unflyable" is simply not the case and we suspect that you know that to be true.
I did not say at any point that your Citation X v2 is unflyable, and I certainly did not mean to imply that it was unflyable either. If you or anyone else has taken it as that then I apologise unreservedly. I think that the flight model, visual model and systems are excellent. The comment, which you have taken out of context, was purely to respond to your questioning as to why I brought up the subject of support. If I could go back and edit that so it was clearer I would............However, in my previous posts in this thread I said of your Citation X v2:
The Eaglesoft version is much better looking and flies pretty well, FMS is good.
and of buying it through Flight 1:
I am more than happy with that and I would recommend it to anyone since I have used the 30 day refund option and know how well it works, for the record I did NOT use it on the Citation X v2 which I a pretty happy with
and back to the Citation:
I like the Citation and would recommend it.
You read all of those because you responded to them, so I am a little confused as to why you would think I would suddenly say it was unflyable. Then again perhaps I should have used an example that made it completely obvious I was not talking about your product. However, all said and done I am still a customer of Eaglesoft and frankly your responses to this thread show your attitude to your customers. Would it not have been much better to try and find out WHY I think your support is awful which could have killed the criticism there and then (even in private) rather than let the whole thing deteriorate into the "food fight" that you accused me of being so anxious to start. Finally:
Gazz seems to think he's an expert on support
No I don't, I did the job for 12 years and learnt something new every week. We managed to keep our customers pretty happy, even when they didn't get what they wanted. In fairness I never had to give support on a public forum at any point, I don't overly envy anyone who has to do that day after day. I hope that can draw a line under it and get back to discussing the Citation since I wish you nothing but good luck with the sales / upcoming reviews and any continued development (such as 1.84) of that and any other aircraft you care to work on. If you wish to contact me to discuss why I think what I think about your support then feel free to PM/E-mail me through AVSIM or Eaglesoft forums.GPS: Ed, Bill - thanks for your responses on the diversion / alternate issue as I previously posted it would be great if you could get a different destination into the FMS (even as a "direct to" rather than building a new plan) although it is not a killer for me. I am of course assuming that the real pilot's use the FMS somehow for that rather than relying on other forms of navigation .. .. ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.