On 8/4/2023 at 11:39 PM, UKflyer said:

All good here, what do you have lurking behind those buildings?? 🙂

 

The usual x-world and global forests, no traffic.

Same story on a vanilla install:

On 8/4/2023 at 7:07 AM, ryanbatc said:

(AKD v2 just came out!)

 

How do you like it?

My dad was an IP on G IV & G V, so I've long been looking for a good sim representation. Looks like they've done a LOT of work to it...

7 minutes ago, bogdansrb said:

The usual x-world and global forests, no traffic.

Same story on a vanilla install:

oh thats not good without any addons yeh probably same bug then

1 hour ago, UKflyer said:

oh thats not good without any addons yeh probably same bug then

Reported to Laminar

30 minutes ago, bogdansrb said:

Reported to Laminar

Whaf traffic are you talking about.

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

How do you like it?

My dad was an IP on G IV & G V, so I've long been looking for a good sim representation. Looks like they've done a LOT of work to it...

I'd wait.  It feels like a beta and the price tag isn't cheap. 

Pros:  visually a nice model exterior.  Interior really needs some texture work though.

Cons: a lot of navigational bugs, and flaky autopilot issues.  I couldn't get FLCH to work without auto throttle (I couldn't get AT engaged at times).. half the time the plane won't respect the ALT SEL and blow through it.  VS mode doesnt always engage on the MCP.  (It does seem to show on the PFD though).

I couldn't load a STAR with a transition...maybe a navigraph issue but I have the latest version.  I couldn't enter the same airport in departure and destination without a CTD.

Also the displays are pretty basic.  Very few options work on the MFD for overlays.  Exterior cameras work though hehe.  The glass displays are also blurry but that might be Laminar's issue - glass displays are very blurry for me unless I zoom way up.

There's no mcdu/fms documentation yet - apparently they're doing some YouTube tutorial videos soon though.  Speaking of the MCDU - there's no little white line to point to LSK/RSK so it's hard to tell what you're clicking.

It's very very unpolished.  At that price tag I expect most of these issues to be non existent.

1 minute ago, mjrhealth said:

Whaf traffic are you talking about.

I have the WorldTraffic plugin but it was disabled. It can cause FPS drops.

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

How do you like it?

My dad was an IP on G IV & G V, so I've long been looking for a good sim representation. Looks like they've done a LOT of work to it...

I'd wait.  It feels like a beta and the price tag isn't cheap. 

Pros:  visually a nice model exterior.  Interior really needs some texture work though.

Cons: a lot of navigational bugs, and flaky autopilot issues.  I couldn't get FLCH to work without auto throttle (I couldn't get AT engaged at times).. half the time the plane won't respect the ALT SEL and blow through it.  VS mode doesnt always engage on the MCP.  (It does seem to show on the PFD though).

I couldn't load a STAR with a transition...maybe a navigraph issue but I have the latest version.  I couldn't enter the same airport in departure and destination without a CTD.

Also the displays are pretty basic.  Very few options work on the MFD for overlays.  Exterior cameras work though hehe.  The glass displays are also blurry but that might be Laminar's issue - glass displays are very blurry for me unless I zoom way up.

There's no mcdu/fms documentation yet - apparently they're doing some YouTube tutorial videos soon though.  Speaking of the MCDU - there's no little white line to point to LSK/RSK so it's hard to tell what you're clicking.

It's very very unpolished.  At that price tag I expect most of these issues to be non existent.

On 8/4/2023 at 7:07 PM, ryanbatc said:

I have to admit the sky is looking really close to real life 90% of the time.  Well done Laminar.

I admit sky is still looking strange more than 10% of the time, not so well done Laminar. and this nearly a year after first xpl12?

yes we have seen some nice cloud pics in xplane12, but even fsx and P3D could produce excellent clouds at times. what is required is consistently "plausible" clouds. x-plane is still far from that. there is not a single flight where I don't get some strange clouds sooner rather than later.

as usual: must be user error, non-study level aircraft or some such.

x-plane.exe v12.0.6.8, no weather tools etc.

Edited August 7, 20232 yr by turbomax

I have seem some kinda shelfs like that in the distance but it looked pretty good.  I haven't seen those up close yet.

14 minutes ago, turbomax said:

x-plane.exe v12.0.6.8, no weather tools etc.

😲

We ordinary mortals are only on 12.06 b4. How did you get 12.0.6.8?

must be an Alaska thing 😀, route: PAYA-PAGS, FL 370

House of the rising blue corona sun:

Edited August 7, 20232 yr by turbomax

On 8/2/2023 at 1:19 PM, Murmur said:

is if you use them while letting the aircraft to start moving backward. This powerback is definitely not approved on the real Citation.

Don't blame a sim which is too realistic for you, if the real culprit is your lack of skills in operating an aircraft.

the reason most operators don't approve use of reverse thrust to taxi back from the gate is NOT to keep the airplane from falling back over on its butt 🤣, but to avoid damage to the engines ( FOD ingesting) and hazards to particles, carts, baggage etc.

the aircraft manuals from Bombardier not only explicitly approve backing up with the reversers, there is an AFM supplement detailing how to do it, in all the variants (200,700,900) .

P&W engines on the 747 were relatively tolerant of compressor stalls brought on by using too much reverse power at too slow a speed. GE engines, however, were not so tolerant.

iow: this is a problem with the flight model of the Citation X that ships per default with x-plane 12, irrespective of any SOPs etc.

 

Edited August 7, 20232 yr by turbomax

1 hour ago, turbomax said:

the reason most operators don't approve use of reverse thrust to taxi back from the gate is NOT to keep the airplane from falling back over on its butt 🤣, but to avoid damage to the engines ( FOD ingesting) and hazards to particles, carts, baggage etc.

I know that well. Still, you're operating the virtual aircraft outside its limitations.

1 hour ago, turbomax said:

the aircraft manuals from Bombardier not only explicitly approve backing up with the reversers, there is an AFM supplement detailing how to do it, in all the variants (200,700,900) .

That's interesting. Do you have some sources?

Quote

iow: this is a problem with the flight model of the Citation X that ships per default with x-plane 12, irrespective of any SOPs etc.

As I wrote in my first reply, that could very well be:

Quote

If this it actually the case for the real Citation, or if the Citation in X-Plane maybe has a default c.g. that is shifted a bit rearward compared to the real one, I don't know. As it has been said, you should not expect 100% accuracy from a default aircraft.

I just don't think that it's a particularly serious issue (like you made it appear) if a default aircraft has unusual behaviour outside its operating limitations.

Edited August 7, 20232 yr by Murmur

@turbomax there is a very long thread on this plane on the org. Started when people started flying it. Not one single post on this "bug". Now if you are so serious about this "bug", file a bug report.