Wilco or Eaglesoft Citation X?

[N400QW 205]

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. :(

[N400QW 205]

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... :(

[Gazzareth 808]

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

[scoob 18]

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 ... ?? :( --

[n4gix 4,947]

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! :(

[N400QW 205]

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" :(

[N400QW 205]

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. :(

[N400QW 205]

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. :(

[WarpD 824]

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 :(

[Gazzareth 808]

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 .. .. ..

[N400QW 205]

Gazz, I have already thanked you for your positive posting regarding our Citation X V2.0 and don't mind thanking you again. :( I'm way too busy to contact every user whose opinion is negative toward us as to why they have a negative opinion.With your comment about privacy, I'm left to wonder why you could not have contacted me privately with the reasons you think our support is "awful".Nonetheless, you are entitled to your opinions and your comments just as we are.We accept your apology and are quite willing to forgive and forget.I posted about what you and another had called "Diversion" as did Bill and Ed.I'll also note that users are doing fine with "Direct" flight based on whether accurate use of FMS and the most up to date FSUIPC is in place.That issue has been posted in our support forums for days now and was first noted by a user if I recall correctly. :(

[TheDanger 182]

Why is it that whenever there is a thread about Eaglesoft products somewhere inside it usually takes a turn for the worstGraham

[scoob 18]

ron:gazz stated

My only bugbear with Eaglesoft is that I have always found their support to be awful.

no reference to another support forum ... just EAGLESOFT'S. :( you reply

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?

and then state:

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.

gazz NEVER stated wilco nor feelThere in his post. he NEVER drew a comparison. YOU decided to 'defend' yourself by attacking another developer. :( gazz even responds he has no comparison to draw as he has never asked from support from feelThere nor wilco. i guess i'm not surprized ... you find every chance you can to take a cheap shot at wilco and/or feelThere. :( shame shame on your ron. shame shame on you. B) --

[David Roch 1,953]

OK, now that D.Scoobie answered to Ron, I ask devs to leave the discussion here.It's a pity that the OP didn't get the answer he was expecting.Now, Eaglesoft, please let simmers give their opinion about these two products, instead of this very boring, agressive, sterile and everlasting ping pong game between you and forumers . Thx

[Dougal 165]

About time too. Thank you David