I've been looking forward to this since they announced it. 

I thought this one wasn't going to have a Navigraph FMS? Their hawker should though.

Ryan, I fully expect the S550 S/II to support up-datable Navdata, just not sure it will be Navigraph.

 

atcdavey,

 

I am also looking forward to the ESDG offerings. One is suppose to be an XLS+ which is a totally different airplane than the earlier S/II. We don't have to wait another year or so, we can have both.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

I thought this one wasn't going to have a Navigraph FMS? Their hawker should though.

Ryan,

 

Here is a pic of the very first S/II off the line in 1984. It looks like it has the UNS-1 FMS in the console. I think this was still being used in the CJ & CJ1 Citations 20+ years later. It is a very capable and easy to use FMS.

 

Of course, it could be just about any of the basic FMS units. Some of the S/II upgraded to Honeywell GNS-XLS units early on. I suppose it will depend on the exact S/II Carenado is using for their design.

 

Regards,

Ray

Here is a pic of the very first S/II off the line in 1984. It looks like it has the UNS-1 FMS in the console. I think this was still being used in the CJ1+ Citations 20+ years later. It is a very capable and easy to use FMS.

 

 

Pretty sure that UNS-1 in that aircraft in the pic will be retro-fit.  The aircraft's showing an EADI and EHSI too and they definitely weren't used in the aircraft as they came off the line in '84;  it used a standard (steam) ADI and HSI, as per the Eaglesoft offering.

 

I thought I saw on Carenado's FB page that this release (the SII) wasn't going to have updatable nav data, and would use a standard 'mask FMS' (masked standard GPS), and that the Hawker will be their first NavData release.

 

Then again, things do change, and the release of this SII does seem a little delayed as they released 'final, pre-release screenies' well over a week ago now.  (Release normally follows 24-72 hours after those pics) ....... so who knows, maybe they're working on a better FMS representation.    Fingers crossed.

I don't want to be too negative with Carenado, but the not all fps-friendly is really starting to bother me. They should really work on that. The latest exemple is the Phenom 100. I have to use one trick mentioned in this site to have very low and just acceptable fps (around 10fps in 3Dsurround at San Francisco: rename and therefore desactivate two files that came with it). They are the worst (Pmdg 737, VRS with Tacpack, M2000C, M2M F-15E are much more fps friendly). So I just can be afraid of what the new Citation could be....

I don't want to be too negative with Carenado, but the not all fps-friendly is really starting to bother me. They should really work on that. The latest exemple is the Phenom 100. I have to use one trick mentioned in this site to have very low and just acceptable fps (around 10fps in 3Dsurround at San Francisco: rename and therefore desactivate two files that came with it). They are the worst (Pmdg 737, VRS with Tacpack, M2000C, M2M F-15E are much more fps friendly). So I just can be afraid of what the new Citation could be....

Hello Segal

 

I suspect the FPS issue with the Phenom 100 has more to do with the 'Carenado Glass Panels' than anything else. The Citation S550 II/S will not have the similar glass panels so I don't expect any FPS issues.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

I think this was still being used in the CJ1+ Citations 20+ years later

No. The CJ1+ is equipped with the Rockwell Collins Pro Line 21 Avionics suite and thus uses the Rockwell Collins FMS. The whole concept of the '+' was the updated avionics suite.

As Ed mentioned the CJ1+ from our shop was a "compromise" project in that it used a PL21 suite along with a UNS1 FMS and Navigraph data.

Original design had the Rockwell Collins FMS...

No. The CJ1+ is equipped with the Rockwell Collins Pro Line 21 Avionics suite and thus uses the Rockwell Collins FMS. The whole concept of the '+' was the updated avionics suite.

Yep. That is correct. I meant to say CJ1, which I did in the edit to the post. The CJ1 had the UNS-1 FMS along with the ProLine 21 options.

 

Regards,

Ray

As Ed mentioned the CJ1+ from our shop was a "compromise" project in that it used a PL21 suite along with a UNS1 FMS and Navigraph data.

Original design had the Rockwell Collins FMS...

Hello Ron,

 

Jep, and it works just fine with that combo. Hey, got any progress screenshots on any of the in-work Citations in your shop?

 

Regards,

Ray

Sure do in case you've been busy B): http://www.eaglesoftdg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=754

 

 

Sure do in case you've been busy B): http://www.eaglesoft....php?f=10&t=754

 

Have to say, those shots look extremely good.  If I can figure out how to program my hardware I'll be happy as a clam.

Have to say, those shots look extremely good.  If I can figure out how to program my hardware I'll be happy as a clam.

Greg, it will utilize FSUIPC so..... B)

Sure do in case you've been busy B): http://www.eaglesoftdg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=754

I guess I should have specified any "recent in-work progress screenshots", Ron. Those in the link are from July. I was hoping for some Year-end 2014 progress shots. I'm still curious to see some close ups of the text and textures in the VC of the new v3.0 Extreme edition.

 

Regards,

Ray

 

 

Greg, it will utilize FSUIPC so..... B)

 

That'd work if the controls are accessible.  I can script as needed. 

Greg, it will utilize FSUIPC so..... B)

Will the Payware edition of FSUIPC be a requirement to fly? Nor maybe just for better simulation of the FADEC.

 

Regards,

Ray

I guess I should have specified any "recent in-work progress screenshots", Ron. Those in the link are from July. I was hoping for some Year-end 2014 progress shots. I'm still curious to see some close ups of the text and textures in the VC of the new v3.0 Extreme edition.

 

Regards,

Ray

All in due time Ray...oh the most recent is October. B)

Understood Greg.

Will the Payware edition of FSUIPC be a requirement to fly? Nor maybe just for better simulation of the FADEC.

 

Regards,

Ray

Undecided at this time but likely. Paid FSUIPC is not a requirement to fly, only for FADEC operation since you are refering to our CX2.0.

In our view FSUIPC should be in every simmers toolbox anyway. B)