If you really think the Universal FMS is less capable than the one in the Citation X, then I suspect strongly that you haven't even bothered to look at the manual supplied. It is actually more fully featured, and is capable of doing things that aren't even possible on any other real world FMS.

 

In addition, you can drive the system with regular Nav radio or FMS. The ability to use the G500 as a source was my idea, to act as a backup for those who were too timid to learn how to use the UNS-1Fw system.

 

Now your comment has given me cause to regret that decision... ^_^

 

 

Now your comment has given me cause to regret that decision

 

Its never a bad idea to add features to a plane.. its up to the user to maximize those.. If they don't bother to learn the whole system, thats on them!

N4gix, your post has made up my mind on what plane I own to learn next, cj1+ it is, thank you.

BOO! nothing worse than a link to an expired coupon! prospective customer too...moving forward from PMDG 737/747 MD-11 and most RealAir planes was looking for a small fast jet for a change...

Here's the most recent: http://www.eaglesoftdg.com/coupons.htm

Eaglesoft CXv2 is awesome. Buy it. She isn't the youngest girl at the prom but she still has it.

Thanks Mr Eaglesoft man! Sorry can't see your name on my tablet.. Link says valid till end March still. Will it still work? Seeing as my j41 is still grounded I will certainly buy for my current world tour once I've landed this engine out duke turbo in EGAB..

 

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk 2

Well another crappy night...had to divert the Duke to Belfast as no lights at EGAB....finally landed safe on one engine and no fuel then  eagerly followed instructions to buy CX2 from ES with coupon I reported earlier as expired....and at the final purchase screen got this...

 

http://i.imgur.com/P3lrbDb.jpg

 

 

Well guess Im back waiting for the PMDG activation server to get online so I can fly the J41 I purchased 2 days ago....

 

Im still a newbie to these forums so Id hate to get a reputation as whiney...but I report simple facts as I see them and am very polite. BUT...I research my info BEFORE I post...so please

have patience with me..

Regards

Sloppy

Just a quick note to say that the Flight1 Cessna Citation Mustang can get in and out of very small airfields. I can operate it from 600 metres (2000 feet) hard runways with a 50 per cent fuel load.

Thanks for that Chris.. How does that compare with the cx? Looks like I might have to quit being lazy and start reading more real world data sheets!

 

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk 2

The Citation X wants 5000' runways... longer at higher elevations.

wow really? why is that I wonder...I can land the NGX 600/700 safely on sub-4000 runways doesn't make sense a much smaller lighter plane needs such lengths...indeed I can get the MD-11 safely down at under 5000 with accurate pre-flight fuel calcs (although my brake pad/tire maintenance cost is higher)..

 

 

oh just checked its the takeoff distance (presumably fully loaded) that needs over 5200.

Performance (CX)

• Maximum speed: Mach 0.92 (MMO)
• Cruise speed: 525 knots (604 mph, 972 km/h) at 35,000 ft (10,700 m)
• Range: 3,216 nmi (3,700 mi, 5,956 km)
• Service ceiling: 51,000 ft (15,545 m)
• Rate of climb: 3,650 ft/min (18.6 m/s)
• Takeoff distance: 5,140 ft (1,567 m)
• Landing distance: 3,400 ft (1,036 m)
• Fuel capacity: 1,926 US gallons, 7,291 L

Performance (Mustang)

• Maximum speed: Mach 0.63
• Cruise speed: 340 ktas (630 km/h)
• Range: 1167 nmi (at max. takeoff weight) (2161 km)
• Service ceiling: 41000 ft (12500 m)
• Rate of climb: 3010 fpm (917 mpm)
• Thrust/weight: 0.337 (at max. takeoff weight)

• Takeoff distance: 3,110 ft (948 m)
• Landing distance: 2,380 ft (729 m)

 

wow really? why is that I wonder...I can land the NGX 600/700 safely on sub-4000 runways doesn't make sense a much smaller lighter plane needs such lengths...indeed I can get the MD-11 safely down at under 5000 with accurate pre-flight fuel calcs (although my brake pad/tire maintenance cost is higher)..

 

Because a smart pilot doesn't fly into an airport with absolute minimum runway lengths... that's asking for trouble.  In a sim, you can get away with murder... in the real world... you only make the mistake once.

 

5000' is the minimum length a real Citation X pilot is comfy with.  I'm also willing to bet those other jetliners don't seek out short runways you're landing on.

Yes, that's why I can fly my FSX Citation Mustang in and out of airfields with runways only 2000 feet in length. I don't have to pay the bill if I make a mistake, or ask Gabriel for the keycode combination to the pearly gates.

I definitely agree on the real world lunacy of such behavior, but do it myself regularly in the sim as I believe its excellent practice for correct landings. I HAVE to get the fuel right and the aircraft

stabilized on final or I wont make it and will need go around (more good practice) or worse. I believe its too easy for a simmer like myself fast tracking from a C172 to a 747 in only a few months to get

very lazy and sloppy(!) with regard to correct flying technique when all Im doing is going from 12000 footer to 12000 footer. I read a pilot say a firm landing on the threshold is better than a soft one half way down the runway and that changed my attitude. With these small landings my technique is vastly improved and my desire for knowledge of the aircraft, their performance limits and systems behavior keeps me reading every word of the manuals looking for ways to improve. 

For instance I learned that the 2 seconds it takes for the A/T to disconnect on landing with the NGX translates to several hundred feet on the runway. Therefore I now do all my landings manual with manual throttle (unless IFR when a divert would now be a mandatory option), which itself has also taught me the feel of the plane and how subtle throttle movements can improve my landings.

I admit I didn't really care about fuel levels before I switched to shorter landings, just loading up full or a 1/3 or whatever..now having to watch every pound of fuel from take off to landing (including dumping if necessary)  I appreciate much more how the planes efficiency and power in T/O climb and cruise is affected (and im saving my imaginary airline tons of fuel!).

I could go on but I think I made my point. Oh one last one...I now read EVERY word on the approach charts as those minimums, elevations, lengths, obstructions are ESSENTIAL if Im to get the aircraft down safely, even though its 'just' a sim

Under ISA conditions (which you won't fly very often):

Landing Distance:
Weight 	Flaps15	FlapsFull
22000 	2800 	2580
36100 	4950 	4300
Takeoff Distance:
Weight	Flaps5	Flaps15
23000	3470	3400
36100	6050	5140