A few post ago there was a conversation about PMDG's future plans concerning FS9 and FSX. The MD11 came up quite a bit as to it's viability in FS9 compared to other requested aircraft. Many of us stated that it was a long hauler and not in real use anymore in the real world. It's choice was odd and therefore was part of the reason it didn't sell well in FS9. My current beliefs on that is a totally different subject but I will say this, we have a few among us that are buying FS products and giving their products/keys away for free. These people need to be found and prosecuted. I implore all add-on developers to get away from the one serial number fits all concept. Assign serial numbers specific to each purchase. Then we can track who's giving products away for free and possibly shut the serial number access code down if it's been compromised so unofficial installs can no longer happen... FS9 pirating will only lead to FSX exclusive pirating down the road if we don't get a handle on this (plus I don't want this excuse to halt FS9 development, let it be something more legitimate than this).Now back to the MD11. I decided after the forum conversation to finally dive into this add-on which I've had installed since it came out for FS9, I am truly glade I did. First let me debunk the myth that the MD11 isn't viable for all sorts of flying styles. Here we have a heavy that flies routes shorter that commuter routes in the real world. MD11's will fly routes out of Memphis to places like KIND which takes a little more than 30 minutes. It's truly a unique place for a heavy to be in in the real world. For those of us with limited time that crave realism you couldn't ask for a more versatile airliner (especially if your into flying real world routes). Another thing that amazed me is gone are the days of manually putting in whole flight plans in the FMC. You put in your departure and destination and the FMC can find the corresponding flight plane you built in FS9'a default Planner and input that into the FMC. For those with very limited time this aircraft can function with an accelerated sim time of 8X allowing a flight from KMEM to KEWR in 10 minutes give or take SID/STAR or standard departure and approach considerations.Now this is the tip of the iceberg for this add-on. It's been mentioned over and over again about the amazing realism of this add-on so I won't go into that. The all time most realistic add-on that offers the most challenge (and I think this holds true in the real world) is the MD-80 (for us Leonardo's MD80 project, the best ever made for FS9). Just the same PMDG's MD11 is neck and neck with it because everything outside of a working weather radar is simulated. I used to work for FedEx back in the days when they let you jumpseat (pre-9/11) and PMDG nailed this one... I flew many times in the cockpit and watched how the pilots had to lean forward with the yoke in their chest on final approach to see over the nose (a little detail for those checking if I really flew in the cockpit :( ). Everything from the sounds of this add-on to what's required to operate this beast is simulated for the most part...So in short Ryan stated I said some things concerning them and this add-on that ruffled feathers. I have to set things straight and applaud this add-on choice and effort because the MD11's real world use is so versatile especially when you consider time in the air. Seeing that most cargo fly is at night, the night atmosphere of this add-on is second to none (self illuminating LCD screens for dusk flying, cockpit lighting that illuminates longer than comparable add-ons during dusk/dawn hours, etc. The add-on it reminded me of is Airsimmer's A320 concerning it's VC lighting). The MD11 is just an outstanding choice all around that can only be appreciated up close meaning installed. For those with limited time this add-on is for you, for those that have time to fly this add-on is for you, for those that want to fly long routes with limited time this add-on is for you as it can be ran at 8x, and last but not least those requiring the the utmost in realism you can't beat this effort. In short I can't think of any heavy flier that wouldn't be a good fit for this add-on... This effort was truly a sleeper for me as I didn't see it's potential at first. The MD11 is not a 744 but it's a heavy just the same that flies to almost all major cities around the world. I can't begin to say what a great choice this was bringing it to FS in all it's unique detail for both FSX and FS9. I'm looking forward to the NGX hopefully for FS9 but for right now I'm enjoying this bird (finally). I just did a 30 minute flight from KMEM to KMSY landing on runway 01 in a storm. No other bird in FS has a better full CAT3 ILS simulation than this bird (even Leonardo can't touch this bird in this area)...I actually forgot to mention this... :( Outside of Ready for Pushback's 742, PMDG's MD11 has the best autoland of any FS add-on out there. I usually don't let the AP do a full landing but I happened to have no choice last night as I couldn't click the AP 'off' switch fast enough on the yoke (it was moving all over the place as I was on final). Visibility was down to 2 miles... I was treated to a smooth flare just above the runway with the autothrottle kicking off just before touch down, I manually deployed the speed brake, and watched the autobrake smoothly slow down this bird on a runway that was short for this type of aircraft (takeoffs are a blast as well). Outstanding job and great choice for an add-on PMDG. :( I take back whatever I said about long haul and short haul aircraft concerning the MD11 as this is not your typical heavy...

All i can say is...YOU ARE DAMN RIGHT!!!Just look at this bird landing without ANY help from me...sweet!

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>&">

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350" />

Agreed, it rocks. Quickly becoming one of my favorites and I find myslef flying her again and again. Besides robotic ######ing Betty is fun to listen to. :(

All i can say is...YOU ARE DAMN RIGHT!!!Just look at this bird landing without ANY help from me...sweet!

Just wandering what did you use to get that video done. Is this with FSX?Bat

Nope! FS2004, recorded with FRAPS and rendered in Sony Vegas Video.

Les, do you have a 64-bit OS? Just curious if you had any OOM problems with the MD-11.

The PMDG MD-11 is my favourite FS9 purchase. Autoland? Never use it :-)

That seals the deal then. I will buy this plane after I get the PMDG 747 (have it for FSX, performance there is not what I really wanted it to be, loved it, now getting it for FS9 too). Should be fun flying the MD-11 into St. Maarten :-) What can I say? I'm so happy KLM still has some of these birds lying around!

Les, do you have a 64-bit OS? Just curious if you had any OOM problems with the MD-11.

I use XP 32bit and get OOM errors in places like NY and ATL if too much traffic is around. I'm kind of thinking there's a combination with scenery textures as I've gotten OOM errors coming into FSDT's KORD and KJFK with high airliner add-ons. What's funny is I was landing the MD11 today at Mach1's KSAT and had a crash. The right textures combined with a high end airliner can give you an OOM (at least that's the case on my system).I'll add my machine specs to my signature...

The PMDG MD-11 is my favourite FS9 purchase. Autoland? Never use it :-)

Neither do I but what a surprise... I thought it couldn't get any better than Ready For Pushback...

That seals the deal then. I will buy this plane after I get the PMDG 747 (have it for FSX, performance there is not what I really wanted it to be, loved it, now getting it for FS9 too). Should be fun flying the MD-11 into St. Maarten :-) What can I say? I'm so happy KLM still has some of these birds lying around!

Wow PMDG an FS9 sale (from an FSX user at that, go figure).... :( :(Conventional wisdom states this should be the other way around let Aerosoft tell it... :( :(

Weird huh? Well, I have a problem now with FS9 too. I have basically followed all the advice of Nick Needham on setting up FS9. I have GEPro and FSGenesis installed (I have UT Europe, but my test was conducted at Seattle, so...). I took off with the default Cessna at default Seattle, without any extra AI addons, airport sceneries or whatever. While I was flying facing either the airport or downtown, I get between 18 and 22 FPS. I'm sorry, but what the hell?! I was hoping to get more than that... Somebody have any idea what the problem is? If this is what I get, I really don't see any reason to use FS9 when FSX gives comparable frame rates and has much nicer visuals. I know I must be doing something wrong, but I really wouldn't know what the problem could be. Somebody have any idea?

Weird huh? Well, I have a problem now with FS9 too. I have basically followed all the advice of Nick Needham on setting up FS9. I have GEPro and FSGenesis installed (I have UT Europe, but my test was conducted at Seattle, so...). I took off with the default Cessna at default Seattle, without any extra AI addons, airport sceneries or whatever. While I was flying facing either the airport or downtown, I get between 18 and 22 FPS. I'm sorry, but what the hell?! I was hoping to get more than that... Somebody have any idea what the problem is? If this is what I get, I really don't see any reason to use FS9 when FSX gives comparable frame rates and has much nicer visuals. I know I must be doing something wrong, but I really wouldn't know what the problem could be. Somebody have any idea?

Make sure you have AA turned off within the sim if it's setup in your video card settings. Having AA turned on twice depending on the video card has been known to cause problems.

I forgot to mention there's a cool feature on the MD11 VC that allows you to open any of the doors you'd like. Gone are the days as was the case with the 744 that one had to remember key strokes. You also get a pushback feature in the FMC and options to connect various external power options. There was some real thought put into this thing this time around. The NGX should be a blast with options like these... :(

Weird huh? Well, I have a problem now with FS9 too. I have basically followed all the advice of Nick Needham on setting up FS9. I have GEPro and FSGenesis installed (I have UT Europe, but my test was conducted at Seattle, so...). I took off with the default Cessna at default Seattle, without any extra AI addons, airport sceneries or whatever. While I was flying facing either the airport or downtown, I get between 18 and 22 FPS. I'm sorry, but what the hell?! I was hoping to get more than that... Somebody have any idea what the problem is? If this is what I get, I really don't see any reason to use FS9 when FSX gives comparable frame rates and has much nicer visuals. I know I must be doing something wrong, but I really wouldn't know what the problem could be. Somebody have any idea?

I have been having very similar issues as you and the solution I have found is the one I am using now .It is in your add remove programs :( Probably not what you wanted to read ,but It sure is making me feel a lot better deleting a program that has given me nothing but woes all week .Mark

All i can say is...YOU ARE DAMN RIGHT!!!Just look at this bird landing without ANY help from me...sweet!

Sweet, what a greaser :)

I use XP 32bit and get OOM errors in places like NY and ATL if too much traffic is around. I'm kind of thinking there's a combination with scenery textures as I've gotten OOM errors coming into FSDT's KORD and KJFK with high airliner add-ons. What's funny is I was landing the MD11 today at Mach1's KSAT and had a crash. The right textures combined with a high end airliner can give you an OOM (at least that's the case on my system).

Well, that's consistent with what I've been reading about this a/c on the forums since its release, which is one big reason I haven't bought it yet. Not quite ready to upgrade to Win 7 64-bit (and reinstall 62 gig of FS9 in the process) for a few more months, so I think I'll wait to buy this until then. Good post, though. Thanks for the info.