One Of The Most Immersive Add-ons Ever Released

[michal 44]

I would certainly hope that the PMDG MD-11 is way more complex than the Flight1 Mustang given that's how it is in the real world.

MD-11 has certainly more "items" therefore has opportunity to be way more complex however I don't think it is what -BeNt- had in mind, "complex" is not a game about how many buttons are in the cockpit. It is simply the PMDG's implementation of every single item, degree of fidelity, even the most fundamental one (turning radius, GS hold, crosswind-handling, etc) that is second to none. No one at their forum will camouflage issues by telling you that "one dot off" is OK for the autopilot or that if you fly faster by 5 kts their product won't work.

[Tabs 2,790]

Did I lose the ability to speak my mind independently of a company somewhere?I agree, but I think some of the problem comes from your user identity (And all other commercial developers ID's). While you say you are speaking for yourself, your user ID states your from PMDG Support and are a commercial user. Maybe Avsim can assign a second ID (regular member) for the Commercial developers, that they could use when posting on something unrelated to what they are working on. This way it won't give the impression that they are speaking for the commercial entity themselves.

If you're referring to the thing on the left side of the screen, that's just my custom "title" I put in the forum settings and I don't think that can be selectively turned off. If you've noticed, I turn off my big PMDG logo signature etc when participating in threads outside of our forum since the new forum system went online.Please understand too, I run PMDG's support forum and wiki, I'm not on the programming team, running the business of the company, etc - it's a very minor job in the grand scheme of what we do.Ryan

[virtualstuff 758]

If you're referring to the thing on the left side of the screen, that's just my custom "title" I put in the forum settings and I don't think that can be selectively turned off. If you've noticed, I turn off my big PMDG logo signature etc when participating in threads outside of our forum since the new forum system went online.Please understand too, I run PMDG's support forum and wiki, I'm not on the programming team, running the business of the company, etc - it's a very minor job in the grand scheme of what we do.Ryan

Ryan just speak and vote your personal opinion that has nothing to do with a company you work for two different things...Cheers,

[Guest JIMJAM]

This is why I do not even bother reading the forums anymore.You all sound like kids on the shooter forums.Halo rules pwns halflife dude! Nahh way gibbs and headshot city beats campers yo! :( I wouldnt let you sit in my jet for $55 let alone fly it.Its like ,ahhh, a game!And cant you like aahhh,get your money back?BTW- I have added a GPS to the MD-11. Ohhh the horror!Did a barrel roll with it and currently trying to get her shoehorned into FlyTampa's St Barts.FMC- You gotta be kiddin me. I got bettter thngs to do.I sometime make a point to try and break every rule the Faa has ever made.Be glad you have em at all,can afford them and then for Gods sake, enjoy them.

[Guest dougwells]

Have you tried the Mindstar G1000? About as close as you get to click for click accuracy of the G1000. I view it as the G1000 that Reality XP would have done if they had decided to tackle such a project (I mean that as a huge compliment for both companies). Love both the Mindstar G1000 and the Reality XP Garmin 430.===

That being said-it isn't perfect-the g1000 isn't 100% simulated. For the price I didn't really expect that-check out some of the rw prices on software to just learn how to use a g1000. . The Mustang g1000 is pretty close though-and will save me quite a bit of real $$ learning how to use most of its functions on my desktop.....I haven't found anything closer right now..and saving rw $$ using my desktop is very valuable to me.

[Geofa 108]

Have you tried the Mindstar G1000? About as close as you get to click for click accuracy of the G1000. I view it as the G1000 that Reality XP would have done if they had decided to tackle such a project (I mean that as a huge compliment for both companies). Love both the Mindstar G1000 and the Reality XP Garmin 430.===Yep-I've got the Mindstar G1000 also, in addition to the Reality Xp Garmin 430. Now if we could only get an xm weather simulation..

[brucek 38]

.......... and the fact that it is a very flyable aircraft (e.g. autopilot not needed which to me relegates me to the role of a passenger-not a pilot-I have a nice one in my real bird and only use it as a last resort for the same reason) makes this one a must have for me. I find it handles very close to a Baron's numbers-except it goes higher and therefore faster-........

Hi Geof,I too like to control my a/c manually, at least on approach and landings / take-offs. Have you come up with any numbers for the Mustang yet for stabilized approaches at level flight (putside the FAF), and precison and NP approaches? I don't have this bird yet but assume that it has an approach speed of >120 KTAS. Having pitch stability to be able to set the power (if required), drop the gear and add some flaps, and maintain an airspeed on a 3 degree approach from level flight, to me, is the ultimate.When I did my IR in a C172, where approaches are flown at 90 KIAS, I was amazed when my CFII showed me how to achieve a stablized approach from level flight just by reducing RPM from 2200 to 1800 at 90 knots. If I can get a straight-in approach when VFR I always use this method now and have found that the phrase "a good approach leads to a good landing" really is correct! :)Thanks, Bruce.

[Geofa 108]

Hi Geof,I too like to control my a/c manually, at least on approach and landings / take-offs. Have you come up with any numbers for the Mustang yet for stabilized approaches at level flight (putside the FAF), and precison and NP approaches? I don't have this bird yet but assume that it has an approach speed of >120 KTAS. Having pitch stability to be able to set the power (if required), drop the gear and add some flaps, and maintain an airspeed on a 3 degree approach from level flight, to me, is the ultimate.When I did my IR in a C172, where approaches are flown at 90 KIAS, I was amazed when my CFII showed me how to achieve a stablized approach from level flight just by reducing RPM from 2200 to 1800 at 90 knots. If I can get a straight-in approach when VFR I always use this method now and have found that the phrase "a good approach leads to a good landing" really is correct! :)Thanks, Bruce.

I have been using Baron numbers and it seems to work out great. 120 outside the Faf (17"-15" on a Baron/Bonanza-1700-1500 rpm on a fixed pitch aircraft depending on season), then gear at the faf causing a 500 fpm descent by the drag of the gear and then down to 100 knts with flaps when runway made (I really should read the specs on the Mustang but this works so good I am just using it). Agree with your cfii-Every 100 reduction while trimmed(rpm in fixed and manifold in constant speed)= 100 fpm descent-pretty easy to do approaches when numbers/power settings are followed. I always use 17" in the summer and 15" in the winter-gives the right air speeds (120) and the gear down gives the appropriate descent of about 500 fpm at the faf (the down button is the gear-a way of not forgetting it) -a no brainer. I am of the school of staying right there (120-just in flap range) and not putting the flaps out till landing is assured. One less thing to put up if missed is called for.I agree-there is almost nothing more satisfying than hand flying a good approach.I have a friend that flies cargo on old Convairs converted to turboprops. Aside from the fact that his job is stable and he is making much more than his friends who went to the airlines, he loves the fact that the autopilots are ancient, don't work well, and he has to hand fly every approach.

[Noel 4,494]

I bought the Mustang 10 days ago and have not been able to tear myself away from it since. It has the best staying power I've seen in any add-on. It just gets better the more one flies it.I felt this needed to be said.A big congratulations and thanks to Jim and the team, for bringing this revolutionary aircraft to our sims.Regards,David RogersDurham, England.

Hi David,Super Dittos! It's hard to be in my house without migrating over to take the "Stang" out for a quick shot along the coast! I was really hoping someone would produce a truly first rate light jet, and this thing fills the bill in spades. I am looking forward to the coming nav data update. The Christmas patch solved 90% of my minor complaints. It IS a bit of a resource hog, and understandably, so I don't always get to use Bloom as I had previous to this bird. I also really am disappointed with how FSX's SP2 changed how BLOOM displays: the sun loses it's effect a half hour or so after sunrise. Maybe there is a better default sun I can find . . .Noel

[Guest Astradan]

Don't listen to the people out there who are picking at ridiculously small and insignificant things that 'annoy' them about this add-on.I just have to call you on this. You call the lack of VNAV systems, and a NAVAID DB that lacks ILS's and terminal procedures, when other "Payware" addons of the same caliber include them "small and insignificant?" To me those are pretty significant and appropriate criticism for this product. It is still a very good model, visually and performance wise, but lacking these items, it is not without fault.

The picky part is that F1 have said (again and again) that the DB will be added in a future update. I never said it was not without fault, but the unprecedented qualities far outweigh any perceived 'issues'. Have you tried the WAAS approaches?

[Guest Astradan]

Eh now, if we are going to start nominating Payware A/C of the year I'mma have to give it up to the PMDG team for the MD-11. The complexity of that aircraft versus the Flight1 Mustang is way more advanced. Besides compairing anything PMDG does with this release is not even equivalent. Not even the same class. Not even competing here! The mustang is a nice bird a visually stunning, but I think some people expected more than they got, hence some of the threads here. I know 100 times over the nav database has been talked about and will eventually get fixed, but that was a major burn on my part, once everything comes up to snuff I will fly it. Right now it basically does the same thing my CJ1 does, maybe better, maybe worse, that's all on user tastes.

Firstly, to demonstrate that I did not start this post as a 'Flight 1 over PMDG' assertion, I too would vote the PMDG MD-11 as release of the year. It is stunning. But you are miles off the mark by stating that the F1 Mustang is not as complex. The G1000 is an extremely complex rendition. Just because the Mustang is a general aviation aircraft does not mean that the product is less complex. And finally..... now I am a HUGE fan of Eaglesoft and have been for years, but if you are comparing the Mustang to the ESDG CJ1 (which even the guys at Eaglesoft would agree is an old product). and deducting that the Mustang offers nothing additional over the CJ1, you have fell way off the page for me pal !!!!! :(

[virtualstuff 758]

Firstly, to demonstrate that I did not start this post as a 'Flight 1 over PMDG' assertion, I too would vote the PMDG MD-11 as release of the year. It is stunning. But you are miles off the mark by stating that the F1 Mustang is not as complex. The G1000 is an extremely complex rendition. Just because the Mustang is a general aviation aircraft does not mean that the product is less complex. And finally..... now I am a HUGE fan of Eaglesoft and have been for years, but if you are comparing the Mustang to the ESDG CJ1 (which even the guys at Eaglesoft would agree is an old product). and deducting that the Mustang offers nothing additional over the CJ1, you have fell way off the page for me pal !!!!! :(

Don't bother with the message of BeNT because it's waist of your effort to respond.Because his message it's clearly just nonsense and he has no clue at all...

[tf51d 284]

The picky part is that F1 have said (again and again) that the DB will be added in a future update. I never said it was not without fault, but the unprecedented qualities far outweigh any perceived 'issues'. Have you tried the WAAS approaches?

I may be wrong, but I think the only thing Flight1 has committed to was fixing the missing NAVAIDs inadvertently left out at release, I don't believe the ILS's were part of that, although, I have heard them say they would look into it. I'm not really concerned about this, as I'm sure F1 will fix missing Navaids, and will try to work out the other issues with it. The lack of VNAV though, is not a "perceived issue", it's a real one for me and was a conscious design choice by them to leave it out. This to me is a major system that I have come to expect and use in high quality payware addon aircraft. All the major players (PMDG, LDS, Wilco, even Captain Sim) includes this. It surprised me when I saw F1 chose not to implement it. Especially when they have implemented FLCH, which is pretty much the same thing except it's not based on the flightplan data, only the settings of the AP.

[jrhoads 6]

I may be wrong, but I think the only thing Flight1 has committed to was fixing the missing NAVAIDs inadvertently left out at release, I don't believe the ILS's were part of that,

Yes you were wrong about that.Jim Rhoads

[Noel 4,494]

I may be wrong, but I think the only thing Flight1 has committed to was fixing the missing NAVAIDs inadvertently left out at release, I don't believe the ILS's were part of that, although, I have heard them say they would look into it. I'm not really concerned about this, as I'm sure F1 will fix missing Navaids, and will try to work out the other issues with it. The lack of VNAV though, is not a "perceived issue", it's a real one for me and was a conscious design choice by them to leave it out. This to me is a major system that I have come to expect and use in high quality payware addon aircraft. All the major players (PMDG, LDS, Wilco, even Captain Sim) includes this. It surprised me when I saw F1 chose not to implement it. Especially when they have implemented FLCH, which is pretty much the same thing except it's not based on the flightplan data, only the settings of the AP.

An odd thing, leaving VNAV out. As very complete as the package is (esp after navaids are updated) it seems an odd decision. I wonder how difficult the programming for that piece becomes. Must be quite signficant.