I would personally want an MD-80. I know its older but I think it is the coolest plane ever. There really hasn't been any good ones for FSX yet.

Please sign your real name as required for this forum.If you go to http://www.flythemaddog.com/ you will be able to fly it not only in FSX but FS9 too. I can tell you that this is the best MD82 available and certainly not for the 'kick-the-tyres-and-light-the-fires' flyer. this is more hardcore than any other. The Maddog 2008 doesen't suffer short-cutters and is the most satisfying aircraft simulation available at this moment.The FSX version is amazingly clear with beautiful graphics as you can see here. http://vimeo.com/8409337 It's well worth the money, believe me!

Obviously the CRJ, but now there is a turboprop division how about the Embraer 120 Brasilia.-brad...

Airsimmer have not made a mess of it at all. It's just taking longer than they first thought. a-la-MD-11. ;)

I'm sorry but this is bulls**t - we didn't release a buggy half-finished "basic" version of the MD-11 to fund our company, tell customers they'd have to pay full price again later for the full version, and then leave everyone wondering as to whether or not said full version would ever actually materialize. The MD-11 took us a long time, yes, but it was also the most bug free version 1.0 complex airliner addon ever released for FS.

I'm sorry but this is bulls**t - we didn't release a buggy half-finished "basic" version of the MD-11 to fund our company, tell customers they'd have to pay full price again later for the full version, and then leave everyone wondering as to whether or not said full version would ever actually materialize. The MD-11 took us a long time, yes, but it was also the most bug free version 1.0 complex airliner addon ever released for FS.

I don't normally participate in threads like this but I concur with Ryan 100% on this one, The MD 11 is absolutely A1 in functionality and appearance and in my opinion the best aircraft produced for FSX to date!Just my 2 cents worth.

DC8, DC10 and those oldies with retrofitted engines and cockpits :(

I'm sorry but this is bulls**t - we didn't release a buggy half-finished "basic" version of the MD-11 to fund our company, tell customers they'd have to pay full price again later for the full version, and then leave everyone wondering as to whether or not said full version would ever actually materialize. The MD-11 took us a long time, yes, but it was also the most bug free version 1.0 complex airliner addon ever released for FS.

Ryan,You misread and didn't understand the context I was appertaining to. I was defending Airsimmer and the time it's taking to finish and relating to the time it took for the MD-11 as a comparence.Yes, I too agree that the PMDG MD-11 was worth waiting for and it get's more flying hours than any other aircraft in my hanger.Until Airsimmer actually 'throw in the towel' it is wrong to dismiss them or accuse them of fraud.

I would also add, that when I contacted Airsimmer for a review copy they did answer me and respond. When I contacted PMDG for a review copy I was ignored and recieved no reply. Civility cost's nothing and means much more.

I would also add, that when I contacted Airsimmer for a review copy they did answer me and respond. When I contacted PMDG for a review copy I was ignored and recieved no reply. Civility cost's nothing and means much more.

It's not the first time.Greg

A319-320-321Short flights for everyday simming (we leave long-hauls for WEs) ;)I think I could use some Airbusses in PMDG quality!

i could think of a bigger reason why they will never do a airbus...anyone wonder how PMDG is getting all the input on there Boeing products?

I know Boeing has been providing technical assistance to the PMDG developers on the NGX and 777, which is really cool. But would Boeing really care if PMDG did an Airbus, as well? I can't honestly see how PMDG doing an Airbus would make the airlines any more or less likely to buy Boeing aircraft. If it's merely an issue of protecting Boeing's IP, then it would (theoretically) be straightforward enough to hire/assign some different developers to sign the NDAs from Airbus, and not discuss any of Airbus's or Boeing's secrets with anyone not cleared to know them internally or externally. Tech companies do this sort of thing all the time. Maybe I'm missing something here...Oh, and I have to agree with Ryan: the PMDG MD-11 was one of the best 1.0 aircraft I've ever flown. I sincerely hope Airsimmer (or PMDG or somebody, please, Lord, anybody) gets a high-quality Airbus out there to match the PMDG NGX for FSX as soon as possible. I would love to fly these two great workhorses in global aviation with unparalleled realism in FSX.BTW, whom did PMDG have to sign the agreements with to do the Woodpigeon, anyway? :(

BTW, whom did PMDG have to sign the agreements with to do the Woodpigeon, anyway? :(

I'm not sure but it is very possible that the copyright has expired for any need of needing any agreements to model an airborne hollowed out tree trunk :(

I know Boeing has been providing technical assistance to the PMDG developers on the NGX and 777, which is really cool. But would Boeing really care if PMDG did an Airbus, as well? I can't honestly see how PMDG doing an Airbus would make the airlines any more or less likely to buy Boeing aircraft.

You might be surprised. If you take, for example, the Flight 1 ATR 72, ATR provided a great deal of technical assistance to the developers for the sim version, and that was with the specific intention of them being able to hand out copies of the thing as promotional items in the goody bags they present to potential customers, so they had an interest in it being realistic and reflecting the real product (hence the interior detail on the Flight 1 ATR), as it was intended to be a part of their 'shop window'. The Flight 1 ATR-72 is in fact very much a marketing tool as far as ATR sales people are concerned. It's like the high tech version of printing your company name on a pen or a keyring and giving it to potential clients; it's all about keeping your name at the forefront as opposed to that of your competitors.Aircraft companies are well aware that pilots are now using the really high end FS add-ons to supplement their training, and whereas a few years ago, it would have been rare for a professional pilot to own up to using FS when it was little more than an entertaining toy, for FS that is no longer the case now; the products can have a great deal of fidelity. If pilots like an aircraft and become familiar with it, then go on to become someone at an airline who has a say in aircraft procurement, then anything the manufacturer can do to point them in the direction of favouring one type over another is worth doing. It's all part of how forward-looking companies consider the bigger picture, and I would be very surprised if Boeing had not considered this.Al

I know Boeing has been providing technical assistance to the PMDG developers on the NGX and 777, which is really cool. But would Boeing really care if PMDG did an Airbus, as well? I can't honestly see how PMDG doing an Airbus would make the airlines any more or less likely to buy Boeing aircraft. If it's merely an issue of protecting Boeing's IP, then it would (theoretically) be straightforward enough to hire/assign some different developers to sign the NDAs from Airbus, and not discuss any of Airbus's or Boeing's secrets with anyone not cleared to know them internally or externally. Tech companies do this sort of thing all the time. Maybe I'm missing something here...BTW, whom did PMDG have to sign the agreements with to do the Woodpigeon, anyway? :(

It goes a little further than just providing tech assistance, PMDG (if im correct) is partnered with Boeing. So designing a Airbus aircraft may not be the best thing to do in the kind of partnership that PMDG has, but i do not know much about it. (yet again, IF PMDG is still partnered with Boeing. So dont quote me on this if im wrong.)

How about a proper 787? Someone already made a really bad one, so why not make a really amazing one that will not go out of style for a long time...Cody B

How about a proper 787? Someone already made a really bad one

Aaaw it's not that bad, I think Boeing did an okay job. Just so long as it doesn't ever put more than a one point one gee load on the wing box, it'll be fine :( Al