Per the topic,

 

Been flying the S550 with a Flight1 GTN750 integration (thx Bert), and actually find I have been enjoying it quite a bit, but I am curious if folks who now own both think the CJ2 is really worth getting as well - I know this will vary from person to person, so I understand it will depend on your individual perception of the additional "value"...

 

...but, what say you?

 

Regards,

 

Chris B - aka "Flapsdown"

Not a fan of GTN - that said enjoying the CJ2 can speak to 550 - FMS in CJ2 well all of those carenado fms are easy to setup a plan takes no time and follows them perfectly in CJ2 I have not been using flc instead just using VS and it goes right to your designated alt perfectly may not be the correct way of doing it but it works - pretty easy to fly this CJ2 - need to revisit Hawker to try same process and see if it does the same thing

 

CJ2 here = happy camper - thing is very fast - Hawker felt sluggish compared to CJ2 - watch your speeds

Well, "my other jet is a PMDG",  to ripoff  err, pay homage to the well known bumper-sticker, so using the GTN was not my first choice for the 550, but the FMS add-on Carenado put out after the 550 was so crippled/horrible that it ruined the plane for me for a while, so I was hoping that perhaps there were enough improvements in that area alone to justify adding the Cj2 - guess I will continue to ponder the purchase for a while - thx...

Well, "my other jet is a PMDG",  to ripoff  err, pay homage to the well known bumper-sticker, so using the GTN was not my first choice for the 550, but the FMS add-on Carenado put out after the 550 was so crippled/horrible that it ruined the plane for me for a while, so I was hoping that perhaps there were enough improvements in that area alone to justify adding the Cj2 - guess I will continue to ponder the purchase for a while - thx...

 

No FMS changes in operation same as all the others - bare bones but I actually like the simplicity - I use PMDG for non simplistic fun

 

You still cant save a flt plan nor import as someone has stated here - its not possible

Same thoughts here, why change the Hawker for the CJ2. For more adventurous flying I have the Lear 35. Still pondering. Can't get why the folks at Carenado are unwilling to implement a few missing features that sure not few people would like to have. Their Phenom 100 reads all stored flight plans, and when it doesn't recognize a current AIRAC one it calls it just waypoint 1 and uses it. The 300, the Hawker and now the CJ2 can't do the same which is beyond me. I am hopeful for the next Eaglesoft release to combine the good of both providers. 

Same thoughts here, why change the Hawker for the CJ2. For more adventurous flying I have the Lear 35. Still pondering. Can't get why the folks at Carenado are unwilling to implement a few missing features that sure not few people would like to have. Their Phenom 100 reads all stored flight plans, and when it doesn't recognize a current AIRAC one it calls it just waypoint 1 and uses it. The 300, the Hawker and now the CJ2 can't do the same which is beyond me. I am hopeful for the next Eaglesoft release to combine the good of both providers. 

 

Yes following new Eaglesoft offering closely - just cant get myself to buy the outdated citation x version - I will wait for the new offerings

I own the S555 a la Bert and enjoy it immensely. Still a bit squirrelly here and there on the AP but certainly manageable when accompanied by the GTN. I'm sure the new CJ2 is a beautiful model but I cried so much blood and tears with the Navigraph stuff I just can't see going back. If the GTN were available in the CJ2 I'd probably buy it but otherwise, no deal.

Yes following new Eaglesoft offering closely - just cant get myself to buy the outdated citation x version - I will wait for the new offerings

 

Good aircraft despite being old. Cockpit looks cartoonish by today's standards. Textures are 1024x1024 as opposed to HD standards but do come with spec and bump mapping. Systems are mostly correct and FDE seems very good. (Well at least it was back when I still had Windows XP and could run it.) For a 2008 airplane it is one of the best in class. 

 

Not so sure about their latest offerings, using Real NavData means database updates will be more expensive and for those with Navigraph aircraft means paying 2 providers for AIRINC data. If you want all 13 cycles Real Navdata will cost you $1,000 per year, a little rich for the home hobbyist.  https://www.realnavdata.com/buy.asp (link provided only to show cost of Real NavData - not intended to support a commercial site.)

ESDG' s new XLS+ has promise. Just not available yet.

 

Ray

I see $40 for 4 navdata cycles - doesn't seem too costly

Still twice as expensive for 1/4 of the updates. You can't use Real Navdata on Navigraph based products or vice versa. 

I know, but you also can't do RNAV (GPS) approaches with LPV minimums using navigraph data either, which is why ES chose RealNavdata.

I know, but you also can't do RNAV (GPS) approaches with LPV minimums using navigraph data either, which is why ES chose RealNavdata.

Interesting Ryan, can you explain a bit more in detail what data Navigraph has missing and how this affects the approaches depending on the equipment used? Thanks in advance. 

No I can't - I only heard this from Ed at ES. It's the reason the old WIP MV King air couldn't do approaches with WAAS minimums, i.e. GPS approaches with vertical guidance.... They used navigraph.

I know, but you also can't do RNAV (GPS) approaches with LPV minimums using navigraph data either, which is why ES chose RealNavdata.

 

Some one must of forgot to tell that to PMDG. I just flew the 737NGX to LPV minima at KAPA RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 35R fully coupled.

 

As long as the MAP altitude is correctly programmed in it works just fine.