Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Wells

  1. On 8/23/2020 at 10:08 AM, KenG said:

    Well make sure you are flying the right airplane. The Citation Longitude is not the same as the Citation CJ4. The CJ4 is standard business jet and represents the Cessna Citation model C525C. The Citation Longitude is a "premium" airplane and is a updated version of the Sovereign as the Cessna Citation model C700.  

    The Longitude as Asobo built is is at best utter garbage. There is so many things just wrong with this airplane and paying for the premium edition to get this is a rip off. The flight dynamics are wrong, stall speeds are off, cruise speeds at FL400 is way off, the G5000 is basically the TBM's G3000 without any of the features needed for the C700. 

    I am sorry but this looks like something Abacus would have spit out for a money grab and not a premium aircraft that we paid extra for. 

    I am not expecting PMDG quality here, but even for default this sets a whole new low. The fact Asobo has not immediately acknowledges this is disturbing. They owe us a public apology for releasing an aircraft that was nowhere near ready for prime time. They have a group of paid pilot testers, how did those guys miss all of these issues?

    I'm not impressed with the encrypted configs.  Models, textures, sounds, sure, but a text file that would allow us to change/correct the "behaviour" of the model, is not cool.

  2. From what I can tell, if the 1400 sections are in the air file, then autorotations are possible, but no other helicopter things work, like tail rotor translation, torque vs collective, mast tilt, etc.  If the 1400 sections are absent, and the aircraft config file contains all the updated ( since FSX:A ) entries, then everything except autorotations will work.  So, either way, you are screwed, unless you have external code, such as HTR or something else ( dodosim? ).  Unlike aircraft, the config does not overwrite the air file, if the 1400 sections are present.

  3. On 12/31/2019 at 9:07 PM, Doug47 said:

    I never said its littered with problems. Not sure where you get that from. 

    Out of curiosity, how does its performance numbers match the real work POH? I love KA's, but like someone mentioned, I DO like products that are 'perfectly realistic without any problems'. i think that's an acceptable requirement for a 5 year long development add-on? Is it not>? 

    The drag curve is near perfect.  The best glide is 135 knots at 15000 lbs with a ratio of 14.1.  The book says 2.3 nm for every 1000 ft ( 14 to 1 ratio ).  So, we're off by 0.1

    The stall speeds clean and with flaps are within 1 knot, as is the Vmca.  The rudder boost function works

    The normal/max cruise performance is also within a couple of knots, using 100% torque and 1500 rpm

    The pitch stability was determined by analyzing the wing/tail combination, using CFD, so I believe that the trim speed vs weight and CG is also very accurate.

  4. An update has been posted in the Milviz B55 support forum.  If you don't have access, contact Oisin and he'll hook you up!


    - Corrected weight and balance for 6 seat configuration

    - Corrected engine power output and fuel consumption for given power setting ( power and fuel consumption were high )

    - Corrected cruise speeds for a given power setting ( the airplane was 5-10 knots fast )

     - Changed the zero lift angle of the wing by 1° and raised the viewpoint by 1.2 inches

    - Added a bunch of extra internal and external views

    • Like 1

  5. 14 hours ago, scottb613 said:


    I don't have the B55 v4 update - unfortunately I believe I bought the aircraft from that Australian reseller that has gone MIA recently - is there anyway I can update my model to v4 from MilViz - that way we can be on the same page while discussing it ?

    Again folks - appreciate the interest...




    Hi Scott,

    The update to v4 is available from the Milviz support forum for the B55.  That is also where the FDE update will be posted in the not too distant future.

  6. I know from researching Beechcraft airplanes in the past, that they do not provide as much information as other manufacturers do, with regard to aerodynamic particulars, and so it is understandable that it would be more difficult to make a flight model for such an airplane.  Also, it has been several years now, and there are perhaps more resources available online than there were back then.  I did fly it and I see what you mean.  I was able to find the POH and service manuals.  There are two things to look at,

    1.  Viewpoint - I was able to improve forward vision by just raising the viewpoint a little bit

    2.  The zero lift angle needs to be verified, given the incidence, airfoil sections and twist/washout of the wing design

    • Like 1

  7. On 10/10/2018 at 7:53 AM, Milviz said:

    That would be Wells Sullivan.  Very good and a canadian to boot.

    That would be me.  I love the twin comanche.  It was/is a pleasure to research and make this airplane fly according to what aerodynamics/physics predicts and to match pilot accounts of flying it.  Our beta testers seemed quite pleased with it.  Of course, we will continue to support it and correct any problems as they occur.  On that note, I am willing to review the B55 as well.

    • Like 1
  • Create New...