HOT NEWS!

[KenG 492]

 

 

 

Don't forget too that the MilViz UNS-1F is the ISG UNS-1 repackaged as Ernie did the programming for both. 

 

I have the ISG1 package version 1.80 and there are only two FMSs available, a Boeing 737 style Smiths Industries and a Honeywell GNS-XLs.

 

Am I missing an update that provides an ISG1 Universal UNS-1 FMS?

 

The Milviz UNS-1F seems to be locked to their 737-200 and I have yet to find a way to make it work outside of the 737. If it is an ISG1 version it should be a simple lift of a gauge to make work?!?

[twharrell 38]

KenG, you are correct. There is no Universal FMS in the ISG package. Only the Smith-style FMS and GNS-XLs. The Milviz Universal FMS is the exact same unit found in the Eaglesoft Citation CJ1+ - same coder (not Erie Alston, by the way, who is on the Quality Wings development team).

 

Cheers,

 

Todd

[KenG 492]

Considering the CJ1+ is a Proline 21 avionics I am betting the FMS is tied to the aircraft as well. But, that is good news for the Milviz B350i if the same gauge programmer was on the CJ1+. That means the coder already has experience doing a Universal UNS-1F and Proline 21 combo.

[CAPFlyer 2]

Sorry, I think I got myself mixed up this morning...

 

Anyway, you're right that Fr. Bill is the coder on the UNS-1F.  My confusion was furthered by the fact that I've found that the GNS-XLS is actually more prevalent in Citation II upgrades than the UNS-1F, making the GNS a much better fit (and why I was in the process of replacing the "Universal" for my personal use before Janek did a much, much better job of it).

[~Craig~ 10]

Trust me, I don't normally pitch in and defend Carenado but in this case, I will definitely be happy to pay $9.95 for the Navigraph update, just to get SIDS, STARS and APP data - which is exactly what Carenado have said the addon delivers.   (Rather than extra features to the FMC as such).

[CoolP 283]

Craig, would it be safe to assume that you will write one of the first reports regarding the functionality and stability of the new FMC addon?

 

Would be interesting to know how the lines are drawn, how stable route edits are flown and how corners get cut (literally).

[JB3DG 225]

Sorry, I think I got myself mixed up this morning...

 

Anyway, you're right that Fr. Bill is the coder on the UNS-1F.  My confusion was furthered by the fact that I've found that the GNS-XLS is actually more prevalent in Citation II upgrades than the UNS-1F, making the GNS a much better fit (and why I was in the process of replacing the "Universal" for my personal use before Janek did a much, much better job of it).

 

Not Fr. Bill. It is another guy who worked for them.

[CAPFlyer 2]

Trust me, I don't normally pitch in and defend Carenado but in this case, I will definitely be happy to pay $9.95 for the Navigraph update, just to get SIDS, STARS and APP data - which is exactly what Carenado have said the addon delivers.   (Rather than extra features to the FMC as such).

 

Here's the thing though - I already pay Navigraph for that data.  Now I'm paying Carenado to add it after they (in my opinion) lied about having an FMS and not a GPS skin.  What they delivered was not an FMS.  It was a performance calculator (partial) with the default GPS.  It wasn't capable of flying *any* RNAV procedures as FSX isn't capable of doing LPV, something that the UNS-1F is capable of doing.

[KenG 492]

 

 

Specifically Carenado's website states, "Universal Flight Management System (FMS)." In their documentation they show photos of the 4" Universal CDU with SCN 802.0. So one would expect to have the functionality of an UNS-1 with SCN 802.x. However, in the sim the SCN is 1 and not 802.0. Regardless, the customer is not getting anything near a Universal Flight Management System (FMS) in this product. Having lots of experience with Universal Avionics both attending training specifically in 802/902 SCN FMSs and teaching the UNS-1F for my company, I feel that I am a fairly good person to judge if something is a Universal Flight Management System.

 

I don't think Carenado ever states if it is a UNS-1L or an UNS-1F but, that really does not matter. The 1L is a lighter version than the 1F and the 1F has a little more storage room. However, both FMS operate the same.

 

One of the key concepts of the Universal UNS-1 is that it manages the flight through providing one best computed position. An FMS is not a GPS. It uses GPS as part of its computed position, but it is much smarter than that. It knows when you are flying different types of approaches and can weight other sensors appropriately. It can even fly RNAV using Rho/Rho/Rho (DME/DME) or Rho/Theta (DME/IRU) logic when GPS is not available.

 

The UNS-1L and UNS-1F are not WAAS (SBAS) capable systems. While Universal Avionics did experiment with adding WAAS to SCN 802.x the company felt it was better to build specific hardware for this capability. Thus to fly LPV with a UNS-1 you must have a UNS-1Lw, UNS-1Ew, or UNS-1Fw. The SCN on these FMSs will be SCN 1000 or SCN 1100. What the UNS-1 can do is LNAV/VNAV. Universal calls it Psudo Glide Slope (PGS) and it is a Baro VNAV capability. The FMS uses inputs from the ADC to provide a glideslope. While this is similar to LNAV+V realize that this capability is not based on GPS solution but based on aircraft barometric altimeter. The FMS can provide a PGS on any approach in its database, however it will not provide a PGS when a more accurate sensor is available. Such as the glideslope on an ILS.

 

The Universal FMS has some expected capabilities to assist the pilots in managing a flight to include maneuvers during the flight, such as holding, inputting flight plans, storing and recalling flight plans, and departure / arrival procedures.

 

Carenado sold the S550 with a Universal Flight Management System (FMS) that cannot:

 

* Load airways into the flightplan

* Load a Departure Procedure

* Load an Arrival

* Store and Recall Flight Plans

* Hold

 

In my opinion Carenado's marketing strategy in this case is like buying a car that includes an infotainment and navigation system to find out the system only tunes in AM radio stations and whose route data is a decade old. Then charge you extra for updated route map but, sorry you will still only get to listen to AM radio stations.

 

To be clear Carenado does not offer a "Universal Flight Management System" in the S550. What they offer is nice looking but poor functioning system currently based on the default gps database with a fuel calculator. Time will tell what the $10 update will bring, but IMHO Carenado has allot of code left before the Universal Flight Management System (FMS) is a good enough facsimile to truly be called a UNS-1.

 

Does the lack of a functioning FMS completely distract from the product? In my opinion no. Some people just don't want to be tied down to highly accurate avionics. Carenado has always been beautiful looking but, simple airplanes. There are just some developers that we know don't offer highly detailed systems. Careando is one of those developers. You don't buy a Carenado product expecting every switch to work correctly. What you have is something that is more than a light the fires product but does not take hours of studying avionics and systems just to get it off the ground. It is a fun little jet.

[Nuno Pinto 1,397]

Comic.

[CoolP 283]

It is a fun little jet.

Seems like, yes. Another good read on the pros and cons re: FMC upgrade. Hoping I find the time to try/fly some more with my SP2 base.

 

Apart from the extra purchase aspect of the upcoming upgrade (which I, erm, didn't applaud to), I'd say that Carenado is on the right track of offering some more detailed navigation gauges. Might set the path for various fancy planes (when compared to older releases) coming up.

 

And the Navigraph feature shouldn't be underestimated since it's an inexpensive way of allowing for realistic routes and the use of somehow rw approach data. I like it, except for the price tag.

[n4gix 4,947]

Don't forget too that the MilViz UNS-1F is the ISG UNS-1 repackaged as Ernie did the programming for both.  Again I wonder why Carenado didn't just simply contact Ernie and license the technology for their own as the ISG FMS is already Navigraph compliant as well.

No. David Drouin programmed the UNS-1F units used in Eaglesoft's CJ1+, Milviz's 737-200C, KingAir 350i, and KingAir 300.

 

Further, one cannot simply "add Navigraph" functionality to any gauge (XML or C). It needs to be a complete replacement that was coded from the ground up to use the Navigraph database.

 

For the modest price being promoted, that seems very fair., IMHO.

[JB3DG 225]

Indeed....I think a lil perspective is needed for those who think it is too much to ask. There is a reason why the number of developers who provide Navigraph support are so low with relatively few newcomers. The programming involved in making use of such a database is immense. For starters XML (which if I mistake not has been the primary means of coding for Carenado) can only support the FSX GPS database, unless a custom module is developed to interlink with XML, which is quite frankly a programming nightmare. Vastly easier to do it using C++ only. But then again easier is a relative term. C++ offers great power and potential....But that's in proportion to the work. Simple things which XML can do are simpler in C++. But take a step up beyond those simple things and it becomes a whole new ballgame.

 

And I believe there are multiple reasons for why it has taken Carenado so long to come up to this point. Programmers like Ernie or many others capable of doing such a task aren't cheap. They are professional software engineers. And their cost is in proportion.

 

Secondly they aren't easy to find. Even if you can afford one of them they are most often tied up already with full workloads. I myself am an example. I am far below the level of these engineers despite my groundbreaking advances made with DX11 in FSX (which incidentally are built on foundations laid for me by my many mentors so its not something I can claim as my own), and as such, I consider myself more affordable. But even so my workload is extremely high simply because the moment someone appears with such skills they get snapped up very quickly. I started out not knowing anything about programming and it has taken almost 5 years to get to where I am now. But I had the advantage of being trained on the job with many professionals guiding me as I worked and I had plenty of time to myself as a teenager out of school(back then).

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Carenado has had a steep uphill battle to get to this point. This slight increase in cost is actually quite fair with the above picture in mind

[Guest JustanotherPilot]

I hope Carenado haven't employed their usual marketing ploy with this and "wet your appetite" with promises only to keep you waiting months (if at all) for it's release - the Hawker 850 comes to  mind. I look at this upgrade like this, I spent more than I normally would on a GA aircraft and I'm TRYING to like the Citation with it's current Navigation setup, particularly flying IFR. I might as well spend the extra to get the aircraft to something I WILL like.

[CAPFlyer 2]

No. David Drouin programmed the UNS-1F units used in Eaglesoft's CJ1+, Milviz's 737-200C, KingAir 350i, and KingAir 300.

 

Further, one cannot simply "add Navigraph" functionality to any gauge (XML or C). It needs to be a complete replacement that was coded from the ground up to use the Navigraph database.

 

For the modest price being promoted, that seems very fair., IMHO.

 

 

Indeed....I think a lil perspective is needed for those who think it is too much to ask. There is a reason why the number of developers who provide Navigraph support are so low with relatively few newcomers. The programming involved in making use of such a database is immense. For starters XML (which if I mistake not has been the primary means of coding for Carenado) can only support the FSX GPS database, unless a custom module is developed to interlink with XML, which is quite frankly a programming nightmare. Vastly easier to do it using C++ only. But then again easier is a relative term. C++ offers great power and potential....But that's in proportion to the work. Simple things which XML can do are simpler in C++. But take a step up beyond those simple things and it becomes a whole new ballgame.

 

FIrst - Fr. Bill, again, my mistake.  I didn't see David's name in the credits for the MilViz 737 documentation and thought you were the one who did it.

 

Second for both Bill & Narutokun - I actually do understand on a general level the kind of effort that Carenado has gone through to make a Navigraph-compliant FMS.  I don't discount it one bit.  What I discount is charging an additional fee to the users who've already paid for a product that was advertised to have an FMS and wasn't delivered with an FMS.  If this addon covers more than just the Citation S550, then I'll happily pay the money because the "update" isn't a fix for a missing piece of the S550 by itself.  I will hesitate paying for what I was led to believe was part of what I paid for in the first place as it's CLEARLY advertised on their page to be included.  That is the only thing I have been negative about and it is what most of those who've responded on Facebook have expressed as well.