I don't have the FT Citation, but I'd say that fuzzy screen shots aren't really representative. Quite frankly I'm not really sure what you're trying to show by putting them up either. If one person had said the ES VC was poor, you could ignore them. If two people say it, tell them to stop causing trouble. If lots of people say it, well, perhaps time to stop getting defensive and actually take on board what your customers are saying.

They're both fuzzy shots because of image limitations. If you have issues with that, you'll have to take it up with Mr. Allensworth. :( I'd post full widescreen images at 1680x1050 if I were allowed.Someone stated that our aircraft had no 'texture' in the VC and that the Feelthere does. Well, there's both aircraft... both VCs... what texture are we missing? If you're going to make a claim (not YOU, the person who said there was no texture in ours but was in Feelthere's)... be prepared to back it up with facts and evidence.

Hello,just try to stay focus on the subject please. We do not want another ERJv2 closed thread. Thanks. I might be interested in that CX v2 but something is annoying me. I noticed that "a registered version of FSUIPC" is mandatory for a proper FADEC operation. I don't have FSUIPC, not a registered one, just the free version of it, and I don't want to pay 30 more euros to be able to use the CXv2 completly.Am I right ??(still waiting for some screens of that VC)

Eaglesoft is in no position to tell people they should use an unregistered version of Pete Dowsons utility therefore we suggest a registered copy be used.There are any number of valuable and valid reasons for simmers to own a registered version. I think Bill Leaming has called it the "Swiis Army Knife" of FS Tools.The challenge for any developer who wants to build a sweet FADEC system is that FS provides no interface to allow a gauge to "see" the actual position of a hardware throttle lever except sim connect which is for us at least a bit clumsy for our goals.The FSUIPC interface to a gauge does allow the guage to "see" a users hardware throttle position and return proper values on a curve. The result is a sweet FADEC system that is enjoyable to use.Finally, if a user does not have a registered FSUIPC the system reverts to default type throttle behaviour and FADEC is, in effect, inop for that user.Hope this helps. :(

the original review at the start of this thread is excellent. it really covers what i also believe about this product which my son bought for me but which i got refunded for under the flight 1 guarantee.what is very frustrating is how ron hamilton feels that people are not entitled to criticize this product on this forum. i am not saying that hundreds of people are unhappy with it but obviously a fair amount are as a number of posts talk of refunds.ron is being almost respectful on this thread now as i think there are 2 or maybe 3 modertaors involved on this thread!but in past discussions his conduct has been abusive and i have complained to avsim on that effect.sorry for any bad english,Magne.

Magne, I can't think of any more criticism than has already been posted. What becomes objectionable is the "piling on" mentality of some who wish to repeat the same criticism loud and long when once or twice is surely enough for reasonable people to get the point.In addition, personality conflicts come into play as well. Finally, it had, until recently become a "sport" to attack devs personally.You may not have noticed, but there are a few new sherrifs in town and they've pledged to enforce forum rules and stop some of the less than savoury behaviour in these forums.Complaint noted. :(

I don't have the FT Citation, but I'd say that fuzzy screen shots aren't really representative. Quite frankly I'm not really sure what you're trying to show by putting them up either. If one person had said the ES VC was poor, you could ignore them. If two people say it, tell them to stop causing trouble. If lots of people say it, well, perhaps time to stop getting defensive and actually take on board what your customers are saying.

Squirrel, I thought you had returned the product for a refund. If so, are you still flying the aircraft contrary to the refund agreement?A simple yes or no will suffice. If you've received a refund and are still flying the plane contrary to the refund agreement why come here a preach to us?We handle our development decisons based on large numbers, not just a few peoples feedback. And this is certainly not a defensive posture. :(

Just to compare.......I find the VC very functional,easy to read gauges and great on FPS.

Thanks Patrick. Glad to see that you are enjoying her and that you have great FPS. :(

"You may not have noticed, but there are a few new sherrifs in town and they've pledged to enforce forum rules and stop some of the less than savoury behaviour in these forums."There are? Send them this way because we could sure use the help.I wanted to point out that Ed makes quite a point in his screenshot comparison, which I'm sure will get my aft end handed to me for letting it stay. I'd be interested in hearing a response to that point because I see very similiar texturing.

I agree that the gauges are generally easy to read (but far off the state of the art gauges we're seeing in the likes of the PMDG MD-11 and J41).My criticism of the VC is the lack of texturing in the grey panelling that forms most of the VC. It's not necessarily about a 'weathered' or worn look, there just isn't any attempt to texture the panel to make it look real. No shading, no illusion of dimension. It just looks coloured in.I agree that generally the screen shots look ok for the VC but my experience was that the real plane, in my FSX, did not look as attractive. (all subjective). As the original reviewer in this thread stated, moving from the feelThere Citation to this version felt like a 'downgrade'. I can think of a lot of features I lost (key assignments, configurability, fsx camera views in the original release) but nothing I gained.

David, the CXE V2.0 gauges are state of the art and far from substandard as you falsley imply. On what truthful basis do you make such such assertions?A few direct comparisons with MD11 and J41 will do. Provide deatails to explain for us all to see. They use GDI+ and we use GDI+ with our own Hypergauge TechnologyThe beuaty of our approach is that FPS hit on five CRTs is greatly reduced using our own Technology.We'll repeat here. ALL Citation Jet panels are flat grey paint on flat metal panels. Again, real world pilots do not want panels to glare.In addition, the simulator handles grey textures very poorly but that is another discussion for another day.

"You may not have noticed, but there are a few new sherrifs in town and they've pledged to enforce forum rules and stop some of the less than savoury behaviour in these forums."There are? Send them this way because we could sure use the help.I wanted to point out that Ed makes quite a point in his screenshot comparison, which I'm sure will get my aft end handed to me for letting it stay. I'd be interested in hearing a response to that point because I see very similiar texturing.

Ha Ha, I'm sure you've got all the deputies you need. For the record, we have no objection to direct comparison shots since some here seem to have a bias toward another product.Put their screenshots where their mouths are doesn't seem to be unreasonable policy. :(

Ha Ha, I'm sure you've got all the deputies you need. For the record, we have no objection to direct comparison shots since some here seem to have a bias toward another product.Put their screenshots where their mouths are doesn't seem to be unreasonable. :(

Yes, but we do have rules to enforce regarding self-advertising. I am well aware that I have encouraged the comparison, though I may regret it. Not blaming anyone but myself, so no need for anyone to defend the screenshots. I might end up pulling them down after a consultation with my fellow mods.Those who don't realize how difficult it is to keep the forums balanced can use this thread as an example. Some could call it advertising for Eaglesoft. Others would say it's just them defending accusations they claim to be baseless. I call it a fairly productive thread that I'll have no problem pulling the plug on if anyone (developer or member) gets out of line. That last sentence directed towards those thinking mods are more favorable to developers, or more so to regular members, which we most certainly are not. I've already banned two developers from AVSIM permanently for not abiding by the rules, which percentage wise is probably equal to how many members I've tossed.

Let me be very clear, for all. It is not my intent to advertise anything. A statement was made regarding differences betweeen the Feelthere VC and ours. I posted comparison images and am asking the person who made the statement to point out what they mean. I don't see what they are saying, and I've yet to see anyone agree since I posted.

Yes, but we do have rules to enforce regarding self-advertising. I am well aware that I have encouraged the comparison, though I may regret it. Not blaming anyone but myself, so no need for anyone to defend the screenshots. I might end up pulling them down after a consultation with my fellow mods.Those who don't realize how difficult it is to keep the forums balanced can use this thread as an example. Some could call it advertising for Eaglesoft. Others would say it's just them defending accusations they claim to be baseless. I call it a fairly productive thread that I'll have no problem pulling the plug on if anyone (developer or member) gets out of line. That last sentence directed towards those thinking mods are more favorable to developers, or more so to regular members, which we most certainly are not. I've already banned two developers from AVSIM permanently for not abiding by the rules, which percentage wise is probably equal to how many members I've tossed.

And we respect those rules and have no intent to sidestep or advertise.Our view is that direct comparison shots provide a basis for any observer to think for themselves and make decisions accordingly. :(

The challenge for any developer who wants to build a sweet FADEC system is that FS provides no interface to allow a gauge to "see" the actual position of a hardware throttle lever except sim connect which is for us at least a bit clumsy for our goals.

Not more "clumsy" than advicing customers to use registered FSUIPC to get that functionality. :( SimConnect is the interface specially buid for that (and other nice things) but you have to stop thinking FS9 way when making gauges.

Not more "clumsy" than advicing customers to use registered FSUIPC to get that functionality. SimConnect is the interface specially buid for that (and other nice things) but you have to stop thinking FS9 way when making gauges.

We could have opted to pay for a license for FSUIPC ourselves (as example PMDG does, I believe)... but would have to raise the price of the aircraft accordingly, and that license would only be valid for our aircraft alone. So, you would have had to get FSUIPC, install it... without a license, and then it only is used for one aircraft. By purchasing your own license, you can use FSUIPC features... of which there are a great deal more than what we're using it for... with all your aircraft.Regarding FSUIPC vs SimConnect, I completely disagree. I was part of the FSX beta and can assure you that implementing FADEC with SimConnect would be anything but easy. This isn't about FS9 vs FSX, though you clearly believe it is. It's about ease of functionality and SimConnect is not the way to go.

Well I don't think the VC is exactly 'stunning' but it sure isn't 'terrible' or 'inexcusable' More importantly to me at least, is the depth of systems that ES is getting into these days, it really paints a bright future for biz jet lovers. I was really excited to receive an update for the Citation II a while back that really brought it forward and now the 750X!Looking at whats coming, an XLS a 328 plus an updated CJ, I assume these will all be developed with same attention to detail.

Well I don't think the VC is exactly 'stunning' but it sure isn't 'terrible' or 'inexcusable' More importantly to me at least, is the depth of systems that ES is getting into these days, it really paints a bright future for biz jet lovers. I was really excited to receive an update for the Citation II a while back that really brought it forward and now the 750X!Looking at whats coming, an XLS a 328 plus an updated CJ, I assume these will all be developed with same attention to detail.

You assume correctly John, we have a lot in our development hanger and each will need to go through an even more stringent filter given the feedback we hear about not only ourselves but other devs as well.No promises as to perfection but we will make efforts toward that end of the spectrum. :(

Not more "clumsy" than advicing customers to use registered FSUIPC to get that functionality. :( SimConnect is the interface specially buid for that (and other nice things) but you have to stop thinking FS9 way when making gauges.

Since we build for both sim versions that would seem to mean that you see no value in supporting FS9. We hold to the opposite position.We do know what we are doing and for what sim version we are doing it. :(