Any News on the Beechcraft B55 SP?

[pmanhart 176]

Like the title says, any news?

 

Thanks!

[Roadburner426 19]

I am testing it as we speak. About halfway from Jacksonville, FL to Newport News, VA. So far no problems. I have no ETA on time myself, but providing I don't run in to any issues I would say a day or 2 at the most. We have already had a few of the other testers run through it, so just doing a QA flight on it myself at this point.

[briansommers 74]

what needed fixed?

[Milviz 919]

tons of stuff... Most of which relates to the RXP integration... and other small stuff that bugged us... even if it didn't bug anyone else.

 

we have also added another plane... the E55... This has a new and different FDE... but it LOOKS the same... so no complaints on that score please...

 

should be interesting... two for the price of one...

[pmanhart 176]

Great news, thanks Steve!

[Tabs 2,790]

Nice, looking forward to the RXP integration!

[Milviz 919]

Please do remember... we do not (still) support 3rd party stuff. If it works, great, if not... well we did our best...

[tttocs 301]

Appreciate your taking the time to give this a whack, and I understand your position relative to support. Don't really expect you to support someone else's product, but... RealityXP integration is a huge selling point for many of us, and any bumps you can smooth on your end to allow that integration will be helpful and appreciated.

 

Thanks,

 

Scott

[briansommers 74]

Please do remember... we do not (still) support 3rd party stuff. If it works, great, if not... well we did our best...

 

this kind of attitude seems so common with today's businesses - the idea of lets just serve our customers juuuuust enough to get buy, but whatever we do.. lets never really go all out and LISTEN to what our PAYING customers are saying.. I guess it's easier this way isn't it?

[Milviz 919]

Well, I hardly think that's what we're doing. I think, and you may think what you wish on that score, but we try very hard to make sure our product is good enough on its own. If you, the client, wish to add a 4 barrel hemi converter agnositicator to it... how the heck am I supposed to plan and adjust for that?

 

There are so many different agnosticators out there... which ones do we cover? Only the ones YOU like? what about every one else? How many hundreds do we have to make sure work?

 

let me be clear on this one... we make PLANES. The "agnosticators" make products that go in the planes... I would think that it would be up to THEM to make sure that we, the plane makers, have sufficient info so that we can make it work easily. That they don't should be a signal to you (their client) that maybe you should contact them and tell them what you're telling me.

 

In the end, we cannot and will not support what is not made by us, for us or with us. Why would anyone do that?

[tttocs 301]

lets never really go all out and LISTEN to what our PAYING customers are saying.. I guess it's easier this way isn't it?

 

Brian, this seems waaay over the top to me, especially prior to seeing what the SP actually brings. I've seen some pretty positive response to virtually all of the issues users have had with the B55 so far (in other words, LISTENING), including comments suggesting that RealityXP integration will be improved. Note that, like others, I have managed to get mine working, albeit with a couple of minor issues.

 

And Colin, I guess I'm confused. I'm NOT a dev (or even close to being one) so I'm speaking entirely from ignorance and a desire to learn, but others offer RealityXP integration ranging from good to outstanding. Do they have something from Jean-Luc that you guys don't?

 

Referencing my comments above, I certainly don't expect Milviz to provide support for someone else's product, but as a customer I do like plane devs to know that RealityXP integration is often a make or break point in my purchase decisions, especially if I'm on the fence a bit and the plane already features a Garmin 430 or 530. Case in point is the 310 - a plane I'm considering but probably would have purchased long ago had I felt more confident about being able to use my 430 and/or 530.

 

Looking forward to the SP, and as always, thanks for listening,

 

Scott

[Milviz 919]

I have no idea what they have or do not have. All I know is that it's a real pita to get it to fit right and work right. It could certainly be made much easier by having JL supply us devs with a 3d max model of where the buttons (and their tool tips) go. This would also allow us to better integrate them into our lighting systems... Why he doesn't do this? I will be asking him that very question sometime in the next week as we are going for beers...

 

That said....

 

The 310 works with the RXP set using the radio free panel model. We've no complaints. (note that we've had complaints about the 55 due to there being so many other things in that area and not being able to turn the knobs properly as well as the setup issues)...

 

JL is a personal friend of the guy who coded the B-55 (Chuck). They have arranged something that is supposed to work very well.

 

We do try to make these things work but....

[n4gix 4,947]

We have included an RXP_panel.cfg file specifically for the RXP integration, as well as a 3d panel specifically for RXP so that the knobs will line up and function properly.

 

I have included check code in my avionics that will automatically swap the 3d panel from "ours" to "RXPs." This will allow any or all of the units to be replaced depending on what the customer owns.

 

As far as I'm concerned, that's as much "support" we can offer... :Nerd:

[Milviz 919]

It's out for those of you who bought it from our site. Other sites will have it shortly....

[RudiJG1 172]

Thanks for the service pack and for the handy EZdok camera profile; it's perfect.

 

Forgive the dumb question here, but what's the proper way to ensure the use of my RealityXP Garmin units? Do I simply rename the RXP_panel.cfg to Panel.cfg (while backing up the original)?