Cargoloader and airstairs?

[Staffan 12]

Hi,Could someone please inform us FS9 users (while we wait) if there are visible airstairs and cargoloader on the MD-11, just like the B747?

Staffan[/font size]

http://www.scandicair.com/images/banner_sa_2008_s.gifFlightsimmer since 1987Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 3,33GHz FSB 1333MHz LGA775, Asus P5Q Intel P45 ATX DDR2 PC6400 800MHz 4096MB, Asus Nvidia Geforce 9800GTX+ 512MB DirectX 9.0c, W XP Home with SP3, E171FPb Flat panel monitor 17"Samsung 750GB SATA HDD 8MB, Samsung 250GB ATA , Maxtor 120GB ATA, All 7200rpmLacie 250Gb Extern HD, Cooler Master ATX Chassis, 550W Power supplyBlogg: http://blogg.passagen.se/primeaviFiles: http://library.avsim.net/search.php?CatID=...&Go=Change+View

[Staffan 12]

Hmmm.......Is it possible that noone have noticed if there are any cargoloader and airstairs? :-hmmm ;-)

Staffan[/font size]

http://www.scandicair.com/images/banner_sa_2008_s.gifFlightsimmer since 1987Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 3,33GHz FSB 1333MHz LGA775, Asus P5Q Intel P45 ATX DDR2 PC6400 800MHz 4096MB, Asus Nvidia Geforce 9800GTX+ 512MB DirectX 9.0c, W XP Home with SP3, E171FPb Flat panel monitor 17"Samsung 750GB SATA HDD 8MB, Samsung 250GB ATA , Maxtor 120GB ATA, All 7200rpmLacie 250Gb Extern HD, Cooler Master ATX Chassis, 550W Power supplyBlogg: http://blogg.passagen.se/primeaviFiles: http://library.avsim.net/search.php?CatID=...&Go=Change+View

[Guest BlueRidgeDx]

I haven't seen either. It looks pretty lonely with a full load of cargo, but no K-Loader.I think they said that they had run out of poly's, hence no ground equipment this time.

[Staffan 12]

Thanks. :-wave

Staffan[/font size]

http://www.scandicair.com/images/banner_sa_2008_s.gifFlightsimmer since 1987Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 3,33GHz FSB 1333MHz LGA775, Asus P5Q Intel P45 ATX DDR2 PC6400 800MHz 4096MB, Asus Nvidia Geforce 9800GTX+ 512MB DirectX 9.0c, W XP Home with SP3, E171FPb Flat panel monitor 17"Samsung 750GB SATA HDD 8MB, Samsung 250GB ATA , Maxtor 120GB ATA, All 7200rpmLacie 250Gb Extern HD, Cooler Master ATX Chassis, 550W Power supplyBlogg: http://blogg.passagen.se/primeaviFiles: http://library.avsim.net/search.php?CatID=...&Go=Change+View

[vscimone 16]

The MD11 for FSX is set up to take advantage of default FSX loaders etc...Best,http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/for...er_MD11_Vin.jpg

[Staffan 12]

>The MD11 for FSX is set up to take advantage of default FSX>loaders etc...>So,...does that mean that there will be stairs and loaders in the FS9 version !? :-jumpy

Staffan[/font size]

http://www.scandicair.com/images/banner_sa_2008_s.gifFlightsimmer since 1987Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 3,33GHz FSB 1333MHz LGA775, Asus P5Q Intel P45 ATX DDR2 PC6400 800MHz 4096MB, Asus Nvidia Geforce 9800GTX+ 512MB DirectX 9.0c, W XP Home with SP3, E171FPb Flat panel monitor 17"Samsung 750GB SATA HDD 8MB, Samsung 250GB ATA , Maxtor 120GB ATA, All 7200rpmLacie 250Gb Extern HD, Cooler Master ATX Chassis, 550W Power supplyBlogg: http://blogg.passagen.se/primeaviFiles: http://library.avsim.net/search.php?CatID=...&Go=Change+View

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Probably not. The default FSX loaders are built into the sim. The loaders for the FS9 version of the Queen were associated with the Queen, not the sim. If the FSX MD-11 uses the FSX loaders, there are no loaders associated with the MD-11, as the Queen had.Kyle

[NoahBryant 26]

FSX has default loaders?

[3-2-1-Now 126]

Hi,Yes. Moving jet ways, fuel trucks and loaders. Don't ask me how you get the fuel truck or loaders though! I'd like to know myself... The jet ways are Ctrl+J (default key combination) in FSX.Best regards,Robin.

[Shmiffy 0]

DISCLAIMER! This post is not meant to be offensive to anyone - this is purely an observation that i beleive many people are not considering - thanks...Guys:Consider this;One of the key factors in ensuring that an aircraft is smooth within the sim is polygon count, among other things. The MD11, is a very well optimised aircraft, and i see a lot of people asking for features that will do little other than slow the sim down.I appreciate that many of these requests have come from users that have extremely well performing machines, but understand that the majority of the users simply do not have the available resources to handle this. As you will notice from the system spec below, my machine is no slouch. However, i have the ability to run ALL of my FSX sliders to the right, and fully enjoy the visual effects and 'eye candy' that FSX has to offer, and am capable of acheiving about 40FPS in the air, and in a busy ground traffic scenario. About 14 to 18 FPS on the ground at a complex add-on airport with a couple of exceptions.I am not willing to compromise on the majority of my slider settings. Most users, i beleive, are in search of the 'as real as it gets' holy grail. That is, a $4,000,000.00 Full motion sim, for less than $1,000.00. Hey; if i could afford a full motion sim. I would be on the phone to CAE asking them to send one round. And having seen the graphics on a full sim. I would be asking if they could incorporate FSX! :)Now. Considering the above, PMDG have to make some choices. Choices such as;1. What do we leave in2. What do we take out3. What can we really not live without4. What is wasting processor power5. Of the stuff that is wasting processor power, can we really live without it?6. (ref above) do we really use it often enough to bother with it7. What are our users expecting (high quality AIRCRAFT sim - not ground traffic sim)8. And the all important question for ANY business. How will this affect the bottom line?I beleive that with the MD11, PMDG have finally acheived what i was hoping for with the 747-X. A smooth Add On Aircraft, that will allow me to fly online in a Complex Airliner, and enjoy the benefits and eye candy that FSX brings.I, and i am sure many others, am extremely happy with the result. And although i expect to see a service pack or two. I sincerely hope that the team at PMDG dont go running around to try and please all of the people all of the time, and slow the sim down by adding things like cargo loaders to the model, that lets be honest, i think most of us (yes i know you like it) used twice and then forgot about except for the occasional screenshot.It all comes back to the polygons at some point, and so i use Carho loaders in this instance as that was the gist of the first post.When on the ground (and probably when in the air, i couldnt say for certain) the 747's cargo loaders are still with you. You might not be able to see them, but they are there. They are part of the model to all intents and purposes, and they require system resources to model and generate. On or off. As a 3D model, the soft drinks can on the flightdeck is a hit on the system resources. Its a separate 3D object with its own texture call, and still has to be processed.Opening the 747's Flight Deck Door reveals the upper deck of the fat girl. Seats, all there, all the time, all needing to be processed, have their textures rendered and mapped. just in case you want to go and 'meet the pax'.I For one would rather dispense with all of that, and get better frame rates from the 747-X. And keep my slider settings to the right.How about you?Okay then Paul. But i have so much power on my machine. That NASA use it during the week for complext theoretical calculations about warp speed and Shuttle lavatories. Couldnt PMDG just give us the option to have the 'in-plane eye candy' on?Why should they? Thats a whole lot more programming, another user interface menu or two, a lot more graphics work, more beta testing, a whole host of additional cfg's. All of that of course means more potential bugs, and then you have to worry about who'se going to do all that. And more importantly. At what cost?I did some rough maths on the cost of the product, deducted a guesstimate of overhead, and then divided what was left up between about 5 people. The figures were not stunning. Certainly not enough for me to justify 4 years of my life. But yet this product was still produced. and guess what, it works. it works well.If PMDG were to say today. Okay, thats it guys were starting work on the 73X and never touching the MD11 again. I would be quite happy.Why?Well. I have a complex addon airliner for FSX that doesnt kill my system. It flies well, the systems work, and (touch wood) i havent had any issues yet that i havent been able to put down to external influences.Do i need cargo loaders? Not really. The flight is the thing. For the sake of performance, i dont need poloygons that i look at once in a while to make me happy.Do i need a virtual coke can? Not really. I can go to my fridge and get a real one. Do i need to open the flight deck door? not really. If i look away from the screen, i'm not in an aircraft but my home.I made a post a couple of weeks ago with a few stupid questions about FPS in the real world vs FSX and so on, that was intended to be a bit of a light hearted dig at the 'realists', but it seems that many are forgetting that for better or worse, FSX is a GAME, and PMDG are a COMPANY. There are limitations that relate to each of those things, individually and combined, and while they may be hard to swallow. Thats just the way life is.I'll close with one thought. Its a line from a movie, i think, but one of my clients says it to me all the time...'you can't please all of the people all of the time. And last night all of those people were at my show' - she's a smart cookie that one...CheersPaul;)

[Headley 26]

Fot those FS9-pilots (like me), just head for the airports who are AES-capable and there you have everything you want, stairs, cargo loaders, fuel trucks, ... How about that ?

[Shmiffy 0]

>Fot those FS9-pilots (like me), just head for the airports>who are AES-capable and there you have everything you want,>stairs, cargo loaders, fuel trucks, ... >>How about that ?Give that man a cookie! ;)Exactly the answer i was hoping for. In time, i am pretty sure that the AES guys will work out how to get into FSX, and then, lets be honest, who will want to use the static cargo loaders and what have you?I like the jetways, dont get me wrong, but for many, after a 13 hour VHHX/EGLL trip, we are just like the real world pilots. We want to file the pirep and go home.CheersPaul

[pilotpm 0]

Hi,> RE: Cargoloader and airstairs? Fot those FS9-pilots (like me), just head for the airports who are AES-capable and there you have everything you want, stairs, cargo loaders, fuel trucks, ... How about that ?*************************You shure can use that with FS 9.1 .....you just have to wait forthe PMDG MD 11 for FS 9.1!And for shure AES is coming to FSX soon; so we have the needed loaders ( they yet not seen in FSX )there .....hopefully !!cheersMario

[Staffan 12]

>Probably not. The default FSX loaders are built into the>sim. The loaders for the FS9 version of the Queen were>associated with the Queen, not the sim. If the FSX MD-11 uses>the FSX loaders, there are no loaders associated with the>MD-11, as the Queen had.>>KyleHi,I am well aware how these things work. And I am sure that even if the MD-11 should have the stairs and cargoloader built in the FS9 polygon model, it wouldn

[tfm 169]

> a $4,000,000.00 Full motion simWow: if you can find one of these with modern graphics for an MD-11 for $4m, give me a call! The nearest I could find was this - http://www.alibaba.com/catalog/101532961/F...Simulators.html- which is cheap(er) than $4m but ancient - practically clockwork.TimPS: for the avoidance of doubt, I'm only kidding about giving me a call: even if I had $4m - which I don't - I think my wife would kill me if I spent it on a toy. My survival from day to day is already quite doubtful now that I have a new PMDG MD-11 to play with.