Sign in to follow this  
carlito777

What am I missing without the GTN mod?

Recommended Posts

Hi everybody,

 

after having successfully avoided all previous Carenado private jet release, I'm now on the fence of buying the CJ2. I do own the GTN750 but I don't like the idea of putting it in the CJ2 simply because it is so unrealistic. So my question is: What are the main flaws I have to live with when I choose not to use the GTN mod? I can use the other mods, right? I just don't want the GTN.

 

Thanks for your help!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

What are the main flaws I have to live with when I choose not to use the GTN mod? I can use the other mods, right? I just don't want the GTN.

 

I hear you regarding the GTN in the CJ2, but its such a great jet that i bought it and banged the GTN in her anyway, fear not the Mod Squad are knee deep in the proverbial as we speak working on the mod for owners who choose not to GTN it. The CJ2 is full of bug`s after the sp1 regarding the ap functions but it`s way better imho than other bizjets they(carenado) released, see the thread i linked.

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/486716-showtime-the-long-awaited-panel-upgrade-and-gtnapmods-are-now-available/page-6#entry3406721

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I don't like the idea nonfunctional proline 21 :) 

 

GTN and older model citation jet .. why not also CJ2 ? :)

 

Garmin_Panel.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I don't like the idea nonfunctional proline 21 :) 

Yeah. EagleSoft Citation X has one for more then 7 years. They (Carenado), I'm sure, can do it but don't want somehow. Maybe it's just a business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

 

after having successfully avoided all previous Carenado private jet release, I'm now on the fence of buying the CJ2. I do own the GTN750 but I don't like the idea of putting it in the CJ2 simply because it is so unrealistic. So my question is: What are the main flaws I have to live with when I choose not to use the GTN mod? I can use the other mods, right? I just don't want the GTN.

 

Thanks for your help!

I h

 

I really can't even comprehend your statement about a GTN being unrealistic in a Citation.

 

I think it is a great improvement and is what Cessna would have installed had they been available. Moving maps, WAAS, integrated coupled approaches. Geez. That is what pilots and operators want and that is why they are installing them. Go to SIJET.com and look around.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I h

 

I really can't even comprehend your statement about a GTN being unrealistic in a Citation.

 

I think it is a great improvement and is what Cessna would have installed had they been available. Moving maps, WAAS, integrated coupled approaches. Geez. That is what pilots and operators want and that is why they are installing them. Go to SIJET.com and look around.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

 

Hi Ray,

 

thanks for your opinion. Of course, you are right. Maybe I should have worded it differently. It's just that I prefer to manage an aircraft through an FMC rather than the touch interface of the GTN. Feels more like an airliner. This is of course my very personal and subjective opinion. But I hear you that the GTN offers more functionality...

 

Best regards

 

Carlo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... is the CJ2 not worth purchasing without the GTN750?  I don't own the GTN.

 

Gerry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand your question .. 

 

CJ2 have default from carenado proline21, GTN 750 for CJ2 is mod (you need purchased GTN750 addon)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

 

after having successfully avoided all previous Carenado private jet release, I'm now on the fence of buying the CJ2. I do own the GTN750 but I don't like the idea of putting it in the CJ2 simply because it is so unrealistic. So my question is: What are the main flaws I have to live with when I choose not to use the GTN mod? I can use the other mods, right? I just don't want the GTN.

 

Thanks for your help!

It's not unrealistic the Citiation CJ my father flies has a Garmin 400 and 500 they haven't even turned the FMC on in like 10 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ray,

 

thanks for your opinion. Of course, you are right. Maybe I should have worded it differently. It's just that I prefer to manage an aircraft through an FMC rather than the touch interface of the GTN. Feels more like an airliner. This is of course my very personal and subjective opinion. But I hear you that the GTN offers more functionality...

 

Best regards

 

Carlo

Carlo,

 

In most cases the GTN is used as a primary navigational instrument and the extras are the built in WAAS availability and the 3,000+ new LPV approaches to add to the already numerous ILS approaches. The moving maps, Taxi charts and more up to date world wide database is important to many flight sim pilots.

 

Although the GTN is a touchscreen in real world airplanes, I would guess a great majority of flight sim pilots are using mouse clicks to use the gauge just exactly as you do your FMS. Cllck for click there is not much difference in the use of the FMS or GTN. So when one says they prefer the realism of the FMS over the GTN makes we wonder how realistic all those mouse clicks to use the FMS really is.

 

The biggest difference I see is the almost total 'head down in cockpit' time required to use a mouse to click on the FMS, whereas the GTN is a 'head up in the cockpit' panel mounted instrument with handy click and choose SIDs, STAR, approaches, etc and the ability to store and recall, invert and modify flight plans using airways etc.

 

The final point if you are comparing Carenado products is that if you use the FMS that Carenado designed you cannot fly VATSIM or Pilotedge due to not having a Direct To feature whereas it works perfectly in the GTN. ATC shortcuts makes common use of the Direct feature to cut off doglegs for better flow of overall traffic with mixed speeds.

 

Best Regards,

 

Ray

So... is the CJ2 not worth purchasing without the GTN750?  I don't own the GTN.

 

Gerry

Gerry,

 

That is not a true statement. It is just that the GTN adds a lot more to the enjoyment and adds more flight sim features.

The CJ2 will fly the same with or without the GTN installed. It is in the navigation and approaches that the GTN equipped CJ2 excels. They climb and cruise at the same speeds.

 

Regards,

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ray,

 

Other than the lack of Direct To with the Carenado FMS,  what navigation or approach deficiencies are there with the FMS?  Also, since I don't have the GTN750 and probably will not purchase for the foreseeable future, could I use my Reality XP GNS 530 WAAS to overcome the navigation and approach deficiencies?

 

Finally, is there anything in the Non-GTN mod that makes the default FMS more usable?

 

Regards, Gerry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The final point if you are comparing Carenado products is that if you use the FMS that Carenado designed you cannot fly VATSIM or Pilotedge due to not having a Direct To feature whereas it works perfectly in the GTN.

 

Not being able to fly on-line / Pilot Edge would apply to .. possibly to many Carenado (and other developer's) aircraft ?

Been a long time (years) since I flew on line ... lack of controllers for my routes and time of day ... anyway...

 

When flying on line or Pilot Edge ... with Carenado CJ2 or other aircraft .. couple questions.

 

When issued a direct to .. if the controllers initial instructions do not include initial vectors to on-course to the fix:

Is it possible to ask the controller for on course vectors to the fix?

 

Or, knowing the current equipment is not doing DTO 100% (various Carenado aircraft), to include a note/remark/message with the filed flight plan about DTO current limitation?

 

Or, downgrade the current aircraft equipment code when you file the plan with ATC? Like to make it a steaam  gauge flight (Twin baron or Real air duke ATC gauges/Equip Type)?

 

Or, enter the DTO fix twice in the CDU (Carenado CJ2 or any aircraft with FMS/CDU DTO capable FMS) to establish on course?

 

BTW, I do have the GTN750 but prefer to fly the CJ2 V1.1 in the default configuration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's *almost* more unrealistic to use an FMS style computer than a Garmin unit on something like a CJ. We had a Citation Ultra where I used to work that had an ancient KLN90a. The pilots never even touched the Universal FMS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our CJ2 when it was built from 2002 - 2004 had a choice of 4 different FMS type devices. That KLN90a was in standard install and the others were all priced as upgrades with the Universal Ul1 being the most expensive. GPS units were just starting to show up and most of them were installed by the Owner/Operators and not the Cessna Factory.

At somewhere near the 100 mark of delivered CJ2 aircraft Cessna replaced the huge radio bank with one or two stand alone nav/coms and made a place for a Garmin unit. This is what the Carenado CX90 panel is patterned after.

 

This was also the base case panel for the CJ2+ that came with a Collins FMS that was a lot more tightly integrated with all the other avionics.

 

If the GTN had been available for the CJ2+ I would bet dollars to donuts that would be the avionics package of choice along with the follow on Cj3. The area between the MFD and the copilot's PFD is a perfect fit for the GTN750/650 combo that give you full electronic charts in cockpit, full backup for Nav/Coms, Safe Taxi, and a much better panel for single pilot operation.

 

Regards,

Ray

Not being able to fly on-line / Pilot Edge would apply to .. possibly to many Carenado (and other developer's) aircraft ?

Been a long time (years) since I flew on line ... lack of controllers for my routes and time of day ... anyway...

 

When flying on line or Pilot Edge ... with Carenado CJ2 or other aircraft .. couple questions.

 

When issued a direct to .. if the controllers initial instructions do not include initial vectors to on-course to the fix:

Is it possible to ask the controller for on course vectors to the fix?

 

Or, knowing the current equipment is not doing DTO 100% (various Carenado aircraft), to include a note/remark/message with the filed flight plan about DTO current limitation?

 

Or, downgrade the current aircraft equipment code when you file the plan with ATC? Like to make it a steaam  gauge flight (Twin baron or Real air duke ATC gauges/Equip Type)?

 

Or, enter the DTO fix twice in the CDU (Carenado CJ2 or any aircraft with FMS/CDU DTO capable FMS) to establish on course?

 

BTW, I do have the GTN750 but prefer to fly the CJ2 V1.1 in the default configuration.

I'm not your guy to address all these questions. I don't fly Vatsim, PilotEdge, or with the Carenado FMS. Sorry.

 

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the two big, more like huge, improvements to the base FMS CJ2 from Carenado is the GTN installed in the VC in the MFD frame and the new FLT INFO box from Janek. This FLT INFO box will eventually find its way into many other flight sim aircraft and will end up being a community supported product with Checklists, Performance Tables, Active Flight Plan progress info, Fuel Management, and things that I haven't even considered.

 

All of the community added clickspot and unique xml code is largely a result of flight sim pilots (and us real world pilots) that see the opportunity to basically redesign the view and actions from the pilot's seat and fly the CJ2 as a single pilot.

 

When I was flying Citations and we only used Flight Safety for training, I was always carrying the flag and writing letters to Cessna and FSI that their Citation designs had too much head down time. I always based my letters as a Safety Issue, to make sure someone actually read them.

 

At one time the FMS was so far back from the panel that a passenger could update it better than a pilot flying. It eventually moved forward, inch by inch, until the XLS+ has dual FMS on the base of the panel and slanted to the pilots eye like the Environmental panel on our CJ2.

 

Also, the standard Citation placement of the CRS, ALT, HDG knobs make a lot more sense in a real cockpit where you are looking at the results on the PFD and using feel and shape of the knobs to know that you are adjusting the correct one. In the flight sim it is just the opposite. Tying to use a mouse pointer to adjust anything on the center console is not realistic by any stretch.

 

So for all these flight simmers that prefer the FMS because it is more airliner real type flying - go ride in the right seat of a citation and try to find the mouse or Ezdok for clicking that FMS.

 

 

Regards,

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ray,

 

When you mentioned:

"The final point if you are comparing Carenado products is that if you use the FMS that Carenado designed you cannot fly VATSIM or Pilotedge due to not having a Direct To feature whereas it works perfectly in the GTN."

 

I thought you were flying on-line or Pilot Edge.

 

"I'm not your guy to address all these questions. I don't fly Vatsim, PilotEdge, or with the Carenado FMS. Sorry."

 

 

Ok, maybe a pilot currently flying on-line or with Pilot Edge could give some background information on my previous questions .. Can Carenado aircraft fly on-line or Pilot Edge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ray,

 

Other than the lack of Direct To with the Carenado FMS,  what navigation or approach deficiencies are there with the FMS?  Also, since I don't have the GTN750 and probably will not purchase for the foreseeable future, could I use my Reality XP GNS 530 WAAS to overcome the navigation and approach deficiencies?

 

Finally, is there anything in the Non-GTN mod that makes the default FMS more usable?

 

Regards, Gerry

Let's start off by comparing the FMS to the GTN by saying the FMS is a manual typewriter and the GTN is a Touch Screen iPad Air. Now the Reality XP 530 is going to fall somewhere between these two, but will not work at all in P3D. There is also not a community support group for adding the 530 to the VC panel so it would be a popup.

 

I have the Reality XP units with cross-fill but they are not installed because I use P3D so much so I can't really tell you how they would work for you.

 

Sorry.

 

Regards,

Ray

Can Carenado aircraft fly on-line or Pilot Edge?

Not if you expect to be able to execute ATC instructions. Wandering around the sky, 10 - 15 miles off course will get you a "Citation Blah Blah Romeo Mike, are you experiencing navigational difficulties, please return to your assigned course, immediately".

 

What then, I ask?

 

duh, you could try for a temporary equipment failure and request a radar vector and then depend on your HDG selections to keep you close enough to the assigned course to get you to that next waypoint. ATC usually does not give you the option of refusing an instruction because of lack of effective navigational devices on board.

 

Regards,

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Not if you expect to be able to execute ATC instructions. Wandering around the sky, 10 - 15 miles off course will get you a "Citation Blah Blah Romeo Mike, are you experiencing navigational difficulties, please return to your assigned course, immediately".

What then, I ask?
 

I thought that entering the DTO waypoint twice in the CJ2 CDU (or any real world CDU) would get you direct to the fix?

If not perfect .. possibly good enough for on-line (flight sim) or Pilot Edge flights ... maybe someone will reply to my previous ATC DTO questions (listed again below) for the answer.

 

****

Not being able to fly on-line / Pilot Edge would apply to .. possibly to many Carenado (and other developer's) aircraft ?

Been a long time (years) since I flew on line ... lack of controllers for my routes and time of day ... anyway...

 

When flying on line or Pilot Edge ... with Carenado CJ2 or other aircraft .. couple questions.

When issued a direct to .. if the controllers initial instructions do not include initial vectors to on-course to the fix:
Is it possible to ask the controller for on course vectors to the fix?

Or, knowing the current equipment is not doing DTO 100% (various Carenado aircraft), to include a note/remark/message with the filed flight plan about DTO current limitation?

Or, downgrade the current aircraft equipment code when you file the plan with ATC? Like to make it a steaam  gauge flight (Twin baron or Real air duke ATC gauges/Equip Type)?

Or, enter the DTO fix twice in the CDU (Carenado CJ2 or any aircraft with FMS/CDU DTO capable FMS) to establish on course?

 

BTW, I do have the GTN750 but prefer to fly the CJ2 V1.1 in the default configuration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ray,

 

 

Finally, is there anything in the Non-GTN mod that makes the default FMS more usable?

 

Regards, Gerry

Frist, the Non GTN mod is not completed so we are talking about something that don't exist except for a couple of beta tests.

 

All the clickspots that do get carried over from the GTN version will be a huge boost to helping with single pilot flight sim type flying. Lots of new clickspot identifiers on the PFD frame along with active tooltips and speed and rate adjustments. New conveniently placed and identified popup hotspots like for the AP and ALT knob on the VC. How about a popup Annun Panel to enlarge it for old tired eyes?

 

If I did fly with the FMS, you can bet I would only be using it in the Popup 2d mode.

 

The addition of Janek's new FLT INFO box might be the largest boost for the FMS user version. The active Flght Info screen, Checklist, Safety Speeds, REF speeds, Climb Charts, etc will be like getting your first Teddy Bear for Christmas or your first bicycle or whatever. It is really that good.

 

The community mod does absolutely nothing to the FMS when used as an FMS. I am using the top half of the box for a temporary test of the next update of the FLT INFO Box (FIB) with the LSK buttons being used to call up 12 screens of available info.

So, yea. big improvement, when available. and FREEEEEEEE for the asking.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

Capture4.JPG

Capture1.JPG

Capture2.JPG

Capture3.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry and the FMS gang.

 

If I knew that I was never going to have a GTN unit for whatever reason and I also knew that I had to depend on the FMS for all my flight plans and navigation, then I would be begging Janek or someone like him to explore putting the FMS in the MFD frame as an active unit and put the Flight Info box in its place on the console. (Or adding that old Reality XP blank plate to cover up where it used to be).

 

That might not make the 'simulated Airliner Pilots happy' because they have never seen one in a photo or advertisement, but it would sure the heck make flying the Carenado CJ2 a lot more fun and enjoyable. But, then again, that is just me and I am busy flying my CJ2 and enjoying it more every day.

 

My logic is that in this earliest of the Proline 21 installations there is not much info on the MFD that you can't duplicate on the bottom of the PFD, except the Engine and Fuel status info. This could be put up dead center just under the glareshield like we did with the GTN mod. The Annunciator panel and Engiine and Fuel panel are cycled with a single mouse click. We can also zoom up either or both so while on the ground and getting ready to go you could zoom up the Annun panel and slide it up and away from the engine instruments. Might make a good panel if one was more interested in having a practical easy to fly single pilot CJ2 with only FMS. Naw, the Airliner types are too set in their ways to go for something like this.

 

For those that actually use the FMS on the console in the VC without ever using the popup feature (cause that is the way my Daddy did it) then surely it would be easier to read and use the FMS in the VC MFD location (even if you also never used the popup feature).

 

Best Regards,

 

Ray

 

But, it might look something like this.

FMS mod 1a_1024.jpg

FMS mod 2_1024.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a Citation Ultra where I used to work that had an ancient KLN90a. The pilots never even touched the Universal FMS

Cessna have dropped the FMS completely now in favor of the G5000 suite, which coincidentally looks amazingly like the GTN regarding the flight-planning unit... amazing how bizjets seem to lead the way with total glass cockpits in the aviation world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cessna have dropped the FMS completely now in favor of the G5000 suite, which coincidentally looks amazingly like the GTN regarding the flight-planning unit... amazing how bizjets seem to lead the way with total glass cockpits in the aviation world.

I got a tour of a new Phenom 300 about 2 months ago with the two small touch screens - it is instantly obvious they came out of the GTN shop. The interesting thing is how much data is in those things. They must be 5 or 6 levels deep but you don't get lost because things stay in context to what you are doing or calculating. Most everything that is done manually with the FMS is automated and handed to you on a plate with those touch screens. They are tied to the larger panels, of course, so it even makes using our GTN750 old fashioned.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...  love all the work you guys (The MOD Squad) are doing to improve this plane. 

If Carenado put even half this effort into fixing the DTO problem then everybody would be so much happier... the GTN users would be able to switch between both variants from their hangar and the non GTN ers would have a more capable aircraft for online ATC flying with the added ease of the extra clickspots and info pages...  

 

Come on Carenado ,  listen to what your customers want and pull your finger...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     I think it is safe to say, that all the aircraft that they have put out fall way short in avionics. I myself have a hanger full of them now. Every time I have bought one, with "Pro line" it doesn't even come close. The Autopilot fails, to perform as it should. I don't know if it is lack of knowledge or they plain just don't care. I have made it a policy to not buy, it doesn't matter how good they look. If it will not fly, what is the point.

     With all of the aircraft they are pushing out they should do like any of the other developers, and Hire someone that knows how to program. We have all been plagued with the buggy airplanes since they have been doing them. I thought it would be nice to a few Slowtations in the hanger. That is were they are. Collecting dust.  I am waiting on the Shrike to come out and see how it fairs. With steam gauges, they shouldn't be able to mess it up too bad. The bottom line is if you want true to form avionics, go over to eaglesoft and pick up the Citation X. It is spot on and deserves props for getting it right. The graphic are a little dated, but she flies true to form. By the numbers is what most die hard simmers are looking for these days. If we continue to buy the junk, they will continue to push it out. I guess this is my rant for the year. It makes me mad to have to mod an aircraft that should be able to fly on its on accord form the developer. Otherwise why charge for it. I think the last good plane I bought was the AZTEC. Steam gauges and it does pretty good in my book. Nuff said, Cpt, Out.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this