Well... more power to PMDG for putting out another large airliner on their schedule. I just wish it was a smaller selection. The 737 is spectacular, and I believe all the other non-express releases will be as well. I just have little use for an airliner that flies for a dozen plus hours at a time :-/Can't wait to see some full-realism regionals or 757s and smaller out of you guys!~Nate(Editors Note: Nate: I changed your title for this post due to some complaints from the owners of the site....)

Actually, the 747-400 is not only used for long-haul flights.The product comes with a complete flight schedule database covering all major and some minor operators, where there are specific categories for domestic, short- and medium-haul flights. This will make it easy to find and select a short flight that suits your needs.Cheers!

Wow, Marc!That's an option i never saw comming with a FS Addon!It's great!Cheers,Ian Udingahttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/800driver.jpg

I gotta say, I definately see where your coming from. I'd love to see PMDG do something a little smaller next. MD-80??? Finally after years and years could we mad dog fans finally get a worthy representation of this jet to cruise around in? Wishful thinking I know, the Mad Dog community has been pleading for years now and the closest we've gotten is a DC-9 panel from Flight 1. Haha. But I gotta try. The heavies are nice and I'm sure both the 747 and MD11 will be fantastic, but hopefully after that maybe something for shorter hops! Thanks guys and great to hear there's still more talent coming onboard.-john

>Can't wait to see some full-realism regionals or 757s and>smaller out of you guys!Are 757 that smaller then an MD11???

>I gotta say, I definately see where your coming from. I'd>love to see PMDG do something a little smaller next. MD-80???Mhhh.... must admit this would sound too good to be true...With the luck of Mad Dog fans, this would be the only project from PMDG never to see the light ;) :(Joke :DBut i'd be happy to see the MDog in the official PMDG wishlist (hint hint!) :)

Well... the 757-300 MGTOW is listed at 270,000 lbs.MGTOW of the smallest MD-11 variant is 602,555 lbs.Yes, I'd consider the 757 much smaller than the MD-11.~Nate

This definintely appears to be a friendly development.I dont want to come off sounding like a crab... I was just very excited to see PMDG focus on a ubiquitous airliner of medium to "small" size such as the 737. I can understand the want to develop a fully operational 747. Two successive large, heavy airliners, however, just wasn't what I was hoping for.I have never seen a solid model of a Dornier 328 (jet or prop) for instance. I'm not talking express-style either. A decent Brazilia hasn't been around since FS2000 as I recall. It would be neat to see PMDG throw into the ring with the CRJ series even. I'm just wishing that the 1900 Express isn't an indication that all future regional releases will be "express" (and yes, I purchased the 1900).Outside the regionals, I suppose the A320 series has been covered, though I'd love to see what PMDG could do with it. The B717 or the B757 series would be lovely to see fully modeled... the 717 in my view being severely neglected by multiple development "firms." Even mentioned was a rendition of the MD-80 series and/or the DC-9's, which still peek around in significant numbers.Oh well... I know there was a thread on suggestions for what be next a while back. As the decision had been made, debating it now is useless. I was looking forward to the idea of "alternating" sizes with PMDG. It looks like my next purchase will simply be delayed a little. Good luck with the MD-11 guys!~Nate

My own personal feeling is that ultra modern glass cockpit airliners are in ways boring. For me it feels like going back in time. Sure the graphics are better in FS2004 than in Fly2 or the original 8bit and 16bit flight sims, but the number of systems you have control over dwindles to nearly none.Anyone know what Im saying? It's like I remember wishing that a sim would include lots of the buttons and knobs and things that would make it more of a challange to fly the thing, like in reality, but today airliners are flown with computer aids and LCD displays that remind me more of aging PC simulators than aeroplanes.I have Altitude Concorde which is 60/70s technology, 3 man crew, lots of things to do and only about 60% is implemented at this time. It's real handfull and very intense an experience.It looks like the MD11 (not to mention the 744) will just be another glass cockpit affair. Feed the dog and say "Nice doggie" the whole flight. Sit back and watch the computer fly for you. What about something like an older bird where us pilots have to do something?

>It looks like the MD11 (not to mention the 744) will just be>another glass cockpit affair. Feed the dog and say "Nice>doggie" the whole flight. Sit back and watch the computer fly>for you. The MD11 is aged, it's not a modern glass plane.Its technology, while nontheless modern, is old compared to NGs or 744 and 773.There has never been a full simulation of an MD11 so i can't really say what it is like to, but my idea is that it's not like a 774.

Hi Paul,I agree with you up to a point; what simmers here want is realism. The problem with modelling an old 3+ crew airliner like the 707 say with a high degree of completeness is that you need three people to fly it! So really making modern boring glass cockpit airliners is the only way to go otherwise there

While on the other side of the boat, many look foward to the 744 and MD11 and hint, hint...777.

I whould love to see the Avro RJ family!/ Captain Jonny, flying Malm

>>It looks like the MD11 (not to mention the 744) will just>be another glass cockpit affair.Well let me say no. It is not "another" glass cockpit, it is Douglas! What I mean is Douglas is completely different from Airbus AND Boeing regarding Cockpit/Systems Philosophy. Trust me, you will like it!>The MD11 is aged, it's not a modern glass plane.>Its technology, while nontheless modern, is old compared to>NGs or 744 and 773.It is aged yes, but it is nevertheless a modern flight deck and has about the same age as the early A340 airplanes which had their first flight only one year after the MD11.Oh and since you are comparing to 737NG:The MD-11 has a much more modern flight deck then the 737NG, much more systems are automated. Douglas had its own autmatic system controller for every major system like Hydraulics, Electrical, Air and Fuel... That is all automated but can also be switched to manual if needed.To make it short: The MD11 is a unique airplane reagrding its avionics and systems. You will see next year what I am talking about. It is completely different to Airbus and Boeing...Regards,Markus

Being the realist I am, I find extensive time and effort devoted to modeling old, retired, non-flying planes kind of silly. Note, not absolutely silly... I understand there's a demand for them and others are interested.I love realism... and it's fun to play with knobs and switches that are fully modeled. There is a point of diminishing returns though. As was mentioned... a plane that really truly required a 3 man crew to fly would be ludicrious to fully model system-wise. It's not realistic to believe you're not only handling the flying, but tweaking everything at the engineer's station simultaneously.System's-wise, I think the MD-11 would be fine. I'm not concerned about systems modeling nearly as much as the generalized aircraft selection. I find it hard to justify flying routes that last more than a couple or a few hours. This essentially disqualifies the very large airliners save for maybe cargo routes. I'd much rather be able to follow domestic timetables for flights, using airliners commonly in use today.As technology moves forward, planes are inherently easier to fly in terms of pilot workload. This is fine my be to model. I'm more interested in finding out what's really going on up front in the aircraft I actually fly in. I suppose a modern B735 is the "closest" I've gotten to the NG... but I know NGs are out there and growing in numbers. I've been on A32Xs', I've been on CRJs, B773, MD80 (or MD88/90/similar), 717, B190, E120's, D328, B757, and B763s.I'd say, for FS2004, I've only flown, encountered, or heard of 3 of those aircraft (32X, CRJ, 763) being modeled to any fair degree. Sure, yes, my worldly experience is limited. It is, though, how I view the domestic airline transport system in the US. I am not trying to slam the development of any model, MD-11 included... I'm sure they will all be great and become greater. It just appears that there are an awful lot of real-life, highly-used airline transport planes that are continually overlooked for development by the quality manufacturers.Zees iz mai opeenyun. :-D~Nate