Cessna Citation X: A Slight Irritation

[Bob Scott 7,716]

Bill Leaming wrote:>Let's admit some basic economic realities here: according to>the AVSIM 2004 Survey, 44% of the simmers surveyed are>'heavy/midsize drivers,' and have little or no interest in>light GA or bizjets. In the vast panoply of the flightsim>world, bizjets comprise a very small niche market, so>amortizing development costs for projects has to be a prime>factor in any prudential business decisions made by any>company.>>From the AVSIM Survey, "small passenger jets" account for only>7.1% of the marketplace. It's not difficult to determine>where the greatest potential for return on investment is>likely to occur, when the potential market is nearly>sixteen times as large. >>That is the reality that any business person must face, when>determining how to best allocate human resources. It is my>hope - again, speaking only for myself - that continued>exposure will help drive the potential market growth, and as>that growth occurs, so too can the level of detail and product>development.The assumption here is that this 7.1% of the marketplace is driven by low demand for such products. I am confident that this low percentage is also largely driven by a low supply of good, complete products in this class. I do not fly a business jet in my simming because no add-on yet exists at the kind of quality level one would see, for example, in most PMDG or Flight1 products. When one emerges, I'll buy it.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC

[Guest sbdwag]

"I can certainly pick it up off the plate and eat it, and it'll taste just as good, but every time I tear off a bite I'll know I'm missing something I fundamentally need to make the experience complete."On the other hand..."My myself and I" being the non flying idiot that I am just a simple 50 year old man with a wife, 50hour a week job, and a morgage. I find the CX well to express it in one wordFUN...!Different strokes for different folks !RegardsDennis Waggoner

[N400QW 205]

Bob, thanks for the insight....we certainly listen to all opinions and will continue to do so.As you already know the CX or any of our other aircraft as released were not intended to be 100% fully functional FMC user aircraft. We have never marketed them as such so we wonder what all the fuss is about? We are quite aware of what the sim public demands re: fully functional FMCs and will eventually meet those expectation as we have already stated.In the interim we will continue to provide aircraft that average flightsim enthusiasts appreciate and enjoy:-)Safe flying to you and yours,

[N400QW 205]

Ha Ha, well said Dennis! Perhaps some folks have forgotten that flight simming is intended to be FUN along with it's realism:-) :-)

[Brian Doney 127]

:-roll

[n4gix 4,947]

>The assumption here is that this 7.1% of the marketplace is>driven by low demand for such products. I am confident that>this low percentage is also largely driven by a low supply of>good, complete products in this class. I do not fly a>business jet in my simming because no add-on yet exists at the>kind of quality level one would see, for example, in most PMDG>or Flight1 products. When one emerges, I'll buy it.Bob,Here are some things you may not know, since as far as I know, no one has ever spoken plainly about them.You and many others seem to be under the impression that commercial add-on developers operate the same way that large software companies do, and that the "employees" receive a regular paycheck. This is (mostly) not the case...Most modelers, gauge programmers, graphics artists, and FDE authors who "work" for a development company do so on a contracted, speculative basis as an "independent contractor."What this means is, we might invest hundreds or even thousands of hours into a project, with only the hope that the project will eventually be released and - more importantly - that enough people will buy the final product so that we might, at long last, see some return on our investment of time in the form of a commission percentage of net sales.So, the ultimate reality for me as an individual, is that I have to make prudential decisions on how best to utilize my time and talents.The reality for me isn't my programming ability, because most assuredly, if I were working for a software house that paid a regular salary, or even a modest but steady advance against future sales, then I could reasonably justify spending the time to learn all I needed to know about Flight Managment Computers, and then program and debug the software, and finally reap the accolades.Lamentably, that is not the case for me - nor I suspect many others in this line of work. Fortunately for me, I own a "mostly paid for home" and am a single, retired man with modest requirements. Even so, I must invest my time wisely, with an eye towards maximizing my return on that investment.It is my hope that - since I've stated my position clearly and unequivocally that some of the decisions made may be viewed in a different light. I could just as easily turn my efforts elsewhere and in all probability make a much larger income, but I have made the concious decision to stick with flightsim development because it is something I enjoy immensely, and I frequently derive a great deal of vicarious pleasure and enjoyment when other folks appreciate my efforts.Hopefully, there will never come a day when the negative remarks I occasionally read doesn't outweigh the pleasure I've thus far enjoyed.With respect,BillThe above remarks are my own, and may not necessarily represent the opinion or position of any other company or contract employee.

[Guest B52Drivr]

Bill,Well, maybe it's because I never had to 'learn' FMC LOL, and the VOR needles are much more familiar..LOL. But you are right, you can use the FMC as much or little as you like, and I do use them for navigation, (backup for the VOR needle, of course). .On a modern jet, they have become a necessity and anyone who does not understand them is quickly becoming a dinosaur - (there I go dating myself again). As for the age of the veneral 'Buff', well, I've been around as long as they have been in service, that's for sure. I can remember my first flight in the right seat of a 52. I was a pup of 21, fresh out of the Academy and the aircraft was older than I was, and I actually made an instant enemy of the training crew chief by asking 'how old is this aircraft'. So, without telling my age, I'm getting up there and I hope you are not so close behind, however, I fear you are somewhat closer than you desire, because you don't get to drive an expensive biz-jet of the Gulf's caliber without a bit of seasoning, and that means hours in the air and that sometimes takes many years of driving lesser aircraft.I think this has proved one item more than anything, FS is FS, and not real flying,(however it can be every bit as challenging if one wants to do it by the numbers and for many, the reset button is a 'real' life saver. LOL, but if that's all you can do, (myself, after a quintuple bypass a few years ago, the FAA and I didn't see eye to eye), it sure beats the dickens out of anything else . . . and I still have a few 'younger' friends who fly some pretty impressive equipment that let me play occasionally.All in all, I think us 'older guys' are probably a wee bit envious of you 'pups' (said with a smile) who get to play with all these really neat aircraft and modern technology. And, I'll have to admit, on those long flights from Andersen in Guam, to Vietnam, many years ago, an FMC would have been mighty welcome. So, guess I've really told on myslef LOL.Nice conversing with you, and excuse my envy! Clay

[michal 44]

I certainly would see a day when a fully "functional" business jet will hit the market. Right now to paraphrase Marthin Luther King "I have a dream". And I am not dreaming about Citation X, something as prosaic as Citation CJ1/2 or Raytheon Premier would be just fine. Well done cockpit with practically everything working. But maybe (just maybe) such day won't arrive soon. If some people are right here there is a major market dosconnect - those that want such product are few since most of those who crave for a "complete" simulation want only a heavy aircraft. I have no clue why. Anyway the upcoming Flight1's ATR fits this market niche nicely - it is not a jet, weight below 23 tons but represents a fairly full featured product.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2, Omega 2.7.90 (4xAA 16xAF)

[Brian Doney 127]

Yep.And I don't buy it. The market as a whole is too small.If someone wants a complex, all glass aircraft, as of right now, they have one choice. We don't have a wide selection of well-done, complete packages to choose form, in ANY size range.To say that so many simmers are heavy drivers by choice, well, actually, not if they're after any sort of futionalty, then they have very few choices to make.Bill,"What this means is, we might invest hundreds or even thousands of hours into a project, with only the hope that the project will eventually be released and - more importantly - that enough people will buy the final product so that we might, at long last, see some return on our investment of time in the form of a commission percentage of net sales."So, do you operate with guarantees in place now ? No. So what's the difference ? Sounds like a synopsis of EVERY product contemplated for FS, to me. Don't program an FMS, do whatever you wnat. Just don't make excuses for it that are unbased. THAT is the point where this whole discussion turned."The reality for me isn't my programming ability, because most assuredly, if I were working for a software house that paid a regular salary, or even a modest but steady advance against future sales, then I could reasonably justify spending the time to learn all I needed to know about Flight Managment Computers, and then program and debug the software, and finally reap the accolades."Hmm, thought you already knew how ? That's what Ron says ? Another point of the discussion that WOULD NOT be here, if you two weren't so worried about defending your pride, and just told the truth."It is my hope that - since I've stated my position clearly and unequivocally that some of the decisions made may be viewed in a different light. I could just as easily turn my efforts elsewhere and in all probability make a much larger income, but I have made the concious decision to stick with flightsim development because it is something I enjoy immensely, and I frequently derive a great deal of vicarious pleasure and enjoyment when other folks appreciate my efforts."Huh ? Would you like a tissue ? What is your point here, are you trying to hold it over our heads that you could be elsewhere making lots more money ? As a customer of your business, I don't care about you personally....really, we don't know each other. This oft repeated story of the trials of the life of an FS developer, is becoming quite nauseating:"I work so hard, for so little, just to make people happy, and for my love of the sim..."Your decisions to do what you do are just that, not happy with them, change them. Don't whine about it as a defense for not finishing the job.

[n4gix 4,947]

>So, do you operate with guarantees in place now ? No. So>what's the difference ? Sounds like a synopsis of EVERY>product contemplated for FS, to me. Don't program an FMS, do>whatever you wnat. Just don't make excuses for it that are>unbased. THAT is the point where this whole discussion>turned.No, that's where you brought the "discussion." Prior to you sticking your nose in the tent, the air was fairly pleasant. You hijacked this thread and subverted the discussion to your own purpose.Brian, is has become pointless to even attempt a rational and intelligent discussion with you, since you're apparently determined to be argumentative.'Nuff said Brian, you may have the final word. I'll not make the mistake of ever replying to any of your inanities again. It's obvious that you have an axe to grind. This is the game you play. And it is a game, make no mistake.Difference is, some of us have been around long enough, and seen otherfolks like you come storming in here doing the same thing, torecognize that it's a game. And the rules of the game are as follows:"I can say anything I want, and that's great, but if you get upset inresponse, then that's wrong, and bad." You want to believe that you're the Last Bastion of Persecuted Truth, the only person who can look at things calmly, so you get other people upset to prove your point...it's a very nice, self-contained little mobius loop designed specifically to reinforce your own self-image. Because the universe of "Brian" is just big enough to contain"Brian," and nothing much more than that. Your messages areintended for the greater glorification of "Brian," to elicitpersecution for the poor, embattled "Brian," so that you may becrucified on a cross of your own making because you need the pain andthe glory and most of all you need to be right. But you are none of those. You are, simply ill-mannered, insulting and purile, and in the final analysis utterly irrelevant. The only thing more irrelevant than you, is your opinion. But only because it rides into this forum stapled to a horse's rear.Have a good life.BillThe above are words from a human being, and are intended to convey my own, personal opinion, and not that of anyone else other than fellow human beings who will not abide the insulting, abrading and inflammatory rhetoric of a self-proclaimed "Hero of the People."

[Brian Doney 127]

Wow.A little emotional, Bill ?"No, that's where you brought the "discussion." Prior to you sticking your nose in the tent, the air was fairly pleasant. You hijacked this thread and subverted the discussion to your own purpose."I've been in this thread since page one....hmmm. It was only after Ron decided to join us here, that things turned. As to the rest of your rant, I won't go there. Ad Hom all you want, you'll be doing it alone.

[michal 44]

>According to Bob Randazzo, PMDG invested around>39,000 man hours just on the 737-NG product line! I would have hard time believing such a claim. It would mean 5 people working for 2 years 10+ hours every day of the year, every Saturday, Sunday, every holiday. Sorry, it sounds like hyperbole. 20,000 hours would be a LOT.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2, Omega 2.7.90 (4xAA 16xAF)

[n4gix 4,947]

Here's an interesting database:FAA Pilot Registry, Airmen Certification Inquiryhttp://162.58.35.241/aadatabase/login.aspIt's interesting to see who's listed... and not.

[Guest photon]

Hey Bill...I'm sure I speak for lots of people when I say the CX is wonderful. I fly nothing else in FS anymore. A real joy to fly, and just so darn pretty to look at.I would consider myself to be an intermediate flight sim user. As such I am just starting to get into a little more depth in my aircraft. The default aircraft weren't cutting it anymore and I found the Eaglesoft Citation to be that leap forward I was looking for. Not too advanced that I couldn't get the thing off the ground, and yet with enough complexity to really add some depth to what I was getting with the default aircraft.I for one have never used a fully functional FMC so I guess I don't know what I'm missing. Keep up the great work Eaglesoft!

[robert young 2,897]

Thank You! Rob YoungEaglesoft Flight Dynamics