Eaglesoft vs. Wilco's Citation X?

[Flaps30 3]

I'm soon ready to convert over to FSX as soon as I get some new hardware around Christmas. I fly the Eaglesoft Citation X a lot in FS9 and am thinking of making the new Wilco CX one of my first addons for FSX. In the AVSIM review, the biggest complaint seems to be ground handling and taxi speed. Should I jump over to Wilco or stick with Eaglesoft, although their FMS is not fully functional.? Any feedback on how they compare would be appreciated. Thanks. Tom

[aerdt 0]

If you cannot wait, I would say go for the Wilco, because of the simple fact that v1 of the Citation X from Eaglesoft is not supported on FSX and even if would work, I would choose the Wilco one, because it features an FMC whereas the Eaglesoft Citation does not.If you have some patience then you might want to wait for the Eaglesoft Citation X v2, which looks *excellent*, will be FSX-compatible and has an FMC.Pat

[blave 0]

I have both, although I haven't flown the ESDG one in a long time, and haven't flown the Wilco one since a few days after I got it - probably three months ago.My experience is that the Wilco version is bugged. I spent a LONG time (approximately an afternoon!) trying to get both engines started... I read the forums... etc. etc. and then got distracted by something or another. Haven't tried it since, but I have to say I mostly regret the purchase. It seemed unfinished to me.Others have had better luck, but that's my story an' I'm stickin' to it.I believe that ESDG is supposed to release an updated version with a functional FMS but they've been pretty quiet about it recently as far as I know.Ron, any comments? 8^) Dave Blevins

[Dougal 165]

Absolutely no contest IMO.... wait for Ron's v2!

[McCrash 3]

>Absolutely no contest IMO.... wait for Ron's v2!What he say!

[N400QW 205]

>>Absolutely no contest IMO.... wait for Ron's v2!>>What he say!>Thanks for the vote of confidence guys. We are taking all the time needed to make our CX 2.0 project the finest CX 750 available. While we can't give a time frame, we can say that she is progressing well and we thank you all for your patience.We believe the wait will worthwhile...:-)

[rhodges 6]

Hello Tom:For what it is worth, even though it is not supported the Eaglesoft FS9 version flys fine in FSX. About the only thing of any significance if you are a purest is that in the spot view some of the window posts are missing and the windows display a bit differently. No biggy in my book, and in fact I did not notice it until someone pointed it out to me. I fly it often in FSX while waiting for the new version (which looks like it will be a prize to me).I don't know if there are any VC issues or not as I am a 2D man personally. It should probably be clarified that I DO NOT have the acceleration pack, or SP2 and am waiting for the release of SP2 by itself.Respectfully:RTH

[N400QW 205]

We are hearing user feedback from those who have Acelleration/SP2/under DX9.0c that our FS9 CX1.0 is flying well in FSX and the windows have majically returned.:-roll

[rhodges 6]

Thanks Ron:That will temper my anticipation (along with my apprehension) for when SP2 is available, although I really am happy with the Citation X as is.Regards:RTH

[albar965 1,038]

Tom, I was sick of waiting and bought it weeks ago. With all these negative comments in the forum I thought a long time about it.Of course the CX has an impact on frames. So you better have a real machine or you are willing to turn stuff down.What is true is that the manual really sucks, which is a shame because this jet has a complexity and system simulation similar to the LDS 767 as far as I can see.An example: The real world manual states that the leading edge flaps are automatically deployed near stall speed. I was just curious and tried it out and guess what: That really worked.Ground handling is OK IMO. You have to step on the brakes quite often, coz she starts to taxi on her own quite fast.The flight characteristics are convincing to me. But you should apply some modifications posted in their forum otherwise she feels too much like a rocket.I cannot comment on the support from Wilco because I did not need it.The autopilot tries to do funny things on climb and descent sometimes, but I don't care because I use it only on cruise level.Starting the engines is no problem here. For me it was worth the money.Now flying and waiting for LDS 757...Alex

[CPEPE 0]

>We are hearing user feedback from those who have>Acelleration/SP2/under DX9.0c that our FS9 CX1.0 is flying>well in FSX and the windows have majically returned.:-roll Ron, After reading the above I reinstalled your CX V 1.0 but sad to say I don't get any of the instrumantation on the blank panels only. But the aircraft does indeed fly !!! Is there a special tweak I missed ?Thanks Tony

[N400QW 205]

>>We are hearing user feedback from those who have>>Acelleration/SP2/under DX9.0c that our FS9 CX1.0 is flying>>well in FSX and the windows have majically returned.:-roll >>>>Ron,>> After reading the above I reinstalled your CX V 1.0 but>sad to say I don't get any of the instrumantation on the>blank panels only. But the aircraft does indeed fly !!!>> Is there a special tweak I missed ?>>Thanks >>TonySorry, we can only report the user feedback and the users say the avionics work. Haven't tested or approved the FSX port so really can't help there.

[rhodges 6]

Tony:Something is definitely wrong in the installation as to my knowledge all gauges work just fine.Be sure all of your gauges are present either in the root gauge folder, or it might be prefered to be in the Eaglesoft Citation X Panel folder. On at least one aircraft I had trouble with them being in both, so I would hesitate to have them in both folders. Try either location one by one and see if your panel becomes filled.If that doesn't work, I would suggest that you post your panel folder, and panel.cfg in a reply on this thread.Good luck:RTH

[Flaps30 3]

Thanks for all the feedback guys. Looks like I may wait for the ECX v2 per your suggestions. Sounds worth the wait! Regards, Tom