6 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

Pretty sure you're just seeing the heated leading edge strip.

Pretty sure you haven't read their advertising text which says: accurate animation of slats

Edited November 18, 20196 yr by FDEdev

2 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

Pretty sure you haven't read their advertising text which says: accurate animation of slats

Yeah, must have missed that. Probably a typo...though it would be pretty funny if they were actually modelled, but not on the real a/c.

 

DB

The excel + doesn't have them?  Thought the newer wing did.

 

7 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

The excel + doesn't have them?  Thought the newer wing did.

Don't know what's 'new' about the 560 wing and why would you need slats on a straight low speed wing? 

Edited November 18, 20196 yr by FDEdev

Thought they redesigned the wing on the C56X (FAA code for excel+)...original was C560

• New detailed flyable plane released for P3Dv3
• New update for FSX : Steam Edition
• New ORBx airports with less detail than products released years ago

Are we travelling backwards in time?

11 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

Thought they redesigned the wing on the C56X (FAA code for excel+)...original was C560

I could be wrong but I believe C560 is for the Citation V (Ultra/Encore) and that the Excel/XLS/XLS+ has always been C56X. As far as I know, none of the C56X models have slats. 

The 32-bit version of this product was announced before a 64-bit sim existed.  The 32-bit version was released because Eaglesoft said they were making it.  The 64-bit version is literally just around the corner.

I'm curious to know how many are still using the 32-bit version.

6 minutes ago, WarpD said:

The 32-bit version of this product was announced before a 64-bit sim existed.  The 32-bit version was released because Eaglesoft said they were making it.  The 64-bit version is literally just around the corner.

Well that's good to know!

This seems a bit tonedeaf. Hopefully the 64-bit follows very, very shortly and I'm not talking months.

1 minute ago, Sethos said:

This seems a bit tonedeaf. Hopefully the 64-bit follows very, very shortly and I'm not talking months.

How so?  The product was announced before 64-bit sim was around.  There are still 32-bit users out there.  Heck, there are still FS2004 users out there.  A 64-bit version is not very far away from release.  I think the only thing tonedeaf is the group that thinks other groups should be ignored or are less than worthy for some reason.  That's truly not the AVSIM way and it's not nice to see that behavior here.

As far as I can tell the modelling looks good, not so the cockpit textures. I don't have the 32bit sims installed anymore, but I'm curious about this airplane. Would like to see some more screenshots and a video showcasing the cockpit, displays and sounds.

Edited November 18, 20196 yr by MauB

Apologies to the Eaglesoft team if this question has been answered elsewhere - will a credit be offered to 32-bit users to upgrade to the 64-bit or will they be two separate purchases? I am a v4 user but am strongly considering purchasing and re-downloading v3 until the 64-bit version comes out. 

2 minutes ago, WarpD said:

How so?  The product was announced before 64-bit sim was around.  There are still 32-bit users out there.  Heck, there are still FS2004 users out there.  A 64-bit version is not very far away from release.  I think the only thing tonedeaf is the group that thinks other groups should be ignored or are less than worthy for some reason.  That's truly not the AVSIM way and it's not nice to see that behavior here.

It's announced before the 64-bit sim was around, so what? That's now over 2 years ago that was a thing, so it's not like it snuck up on them or didn't allow any shift in development or rollout plans. You're even saying the 64-bit version is not very far from release, so that means they did build a 64-bit version simultaneously. So the tonedeaf part comes in when you announce a product, from a fairly well-recognized developer, that isn't compatible with the current relevant platforms, even when you have a compatible one around the corner? That's just poor marketing because right now, there's a thread on the biggest flight sim enthusiast forum with lots of people shaking their head, also saw a thread on Reddit mocking the decision. That's when you push the relevant product first, then add the cherry on top with 'legacy' support.

The other tonedeaf part comes in when you require a different paid-for nav source than the most commonly used.

And all that wrapped up in a $120 price-tag + $40 a year for the RealNav source.

People here on Avsim are customers, just like everybody else, there's no need to sugarcoat that many bad decisions.