I don't mean to hijack this thread, but can someone tell me exactly what aircraft the maddog is? It looks like an MD-88... Is that close?

Yes it's the MD8.. series. See here for the AVSIM review and here for the list of features.

All the planes from your list are top quality addons.Absolutely all. It's just a list of the best of all, so the choice is extremely hard. :( IMHO, I'd try Maddog 2008. If you like learning, discovering, being surprised, extreme realism, etc, you won't regret it.That's if you want just one. If you can afford two, take also Level-D for long-hauling.But again: none of the listed aircraft will disappoint you, so no missed hits possible here.

My opinion? Maddog 2008. I can't find a single flaw with it besides the occasional FPS dip. But yeah, it's seriously good. Mind you, the LDS767 and PMDG MD-11 are also great, but for me the LDS767 is showing its age in its visuals. The PMDG MD-11 is by all means a great plane, but I like the feel of the Maddog better. I find it one of the most satisfying planes to fly, although I can't give any objective reason for it.I'd say take the Maddog. I have never seen this kind of functionality in a FS plane, not even in a PMDG plane. The detail is absolutely great.

Any of you guys ever flown a real 727? I have. The plane is a horrible simulation. The main trim is way too sensitive and the plane is impossible to trim out when hand flying. IMPOSSIBLE. Makes shooting an approach very difficult. This is an injustice.By EPR indicaton when the throttles are firewalled the plane does not even produce max TO power. Max TO power (which is not firewall power) at SL ISA is about 2.12 EPR. The CS 727 will give you at most 1.93 firewalled. Climb EPR is about 1.94. When you go to set climb EPR upon flap retraction your already below 1.94 and the throttles are firewalled. So in essence you can't even set climb power.Aircraft acceleration down the runway is unrealistically slow at MGTOW. I use up almost all of rnwy 13R at JFK before the plane is airborne.There is no OAT gauge so no EPR charts (even if you have them) can even be used. There is no operating comm panel on the captains side. You have to use the engineers comm panel to ident anything. There is no performance info.... TO stab trim settings, v speeds, min flap manouvering speeds. A TOLD card would be nice.When you pull the power off in the 727 to descend the nose drops and there is little fluctuation in airspeed as you start descending. When you pull the power off in the CS 727 you have too dramatic of an airspeed drop and not enough of a descent rate. It's not realistic at all.This is what I remember being wrong. I haven't flown it in a while.

My opinion? Maddog 2008. I can't find a single flaw with it besides the occasional FPS dip.

Respectfully, you are a reviewer for AVSIM but don't consider it being a FS9 portover a flaw? (low FPS is a problem that portovers have though)*facepalm*

Any of you guys ever flown a real 727? I have. ...This is what I remember being wrong. I haven't flown it in a while.

:( Thank you, you saved me the time.As far as the C-130 bugs, the rudder animation is still screwed up and the bugs on the HSI will only move by 5's. Also, the sound is totally screwed up. Someone had released a sound update/fix for it on AVSIM, but with the library crash, the file was lost and never uploaded again.

Just be carefull about the Maddog. U need a really powerfull computer if u plan on using the VC when flying. It has horrible frame rates. And I have had nothing but bad luck with anything Captain Sim makes. It just amazes me that they release there products so unfinished and after 2 or 3 service packs they are still horrible. Despite aging graphics the Level D 767 is about as good as it gets.

Respectfully, you are a reviewer for AVSIM but don't consider it being a FS9 portover a flaw? (low FPS is a problem that portovers have though)*facepalm*:( Thank you, you saved me the time.As far as the C-130 bugs, the rudder animation is still screwed up and the bugs on the HSI will only move by 5's. Also, the sound is totally screwed up. Someone had released a sound update/fix for it on AVSIM, but with the library crash, the file was lost and never uploaded again.

+1I'd avoid the CS C130.... bad FDE again.... I work them daily as an ATCer and what I can do with my FSX version is NOT EVEN CLOSE to what the real guys can do with those things.I recommend the LevelD 767p.s. Errr I might have the soundfix on my HDD. However, I used a different sound file because the default is garbage.

Just for the reference: my FPS with the Maddog are closely the same with PMDG MD-11.MD-11 is a little better, 747 I belive it's worse. LVD 767 will give you the best frames.Of course, the VC quality of the maddog is a lower standart then the PMDGs. At the end, it's all about witch plane do you prefer: long haul? short flight? Mcdonnel or Boeing?As someone already said, the a/c you listed are great. Just be careful with CS tough.Cheers!

I don't really mind if its long or short haul. I mean sometimes I'll use the PMDG 747 for short 1 and a half hour flights and sometimes for many hours.I think I have crossed the C130 off my list (not ultimately, but this time) because I want a more complex aircraft this time. The Maddog seems to be that, and for now sits on top of the pile.That said, I think from what I have read that all 5 options could be mine over the next 5 purchases.I don't suppose there is a decent concorde sim for FSX yet?

There is a very promising Concorde on final stage of development, but this could mean another half a year before release: http://www.flightsimlabs.com/

Thanks Mike, I'll keep an eye on the concorde!I agree with what you said about the 767 being similar to 747 which is why it dropped down the list.Hardly anyone has mentioned the Fokker 70/100 though.Yes the MD11 is expensive, and after I print the manual it'll be more (I can't afford 170 dollars for the ones they print!). I do think, after the 747, that it'd be worth it though.I have decided to get the Maddog first, however it should only be a month before I get the MD-11 as well. The Maddog sounds perfect for getting to grips with when I have a lot of time.

I have decided to get the Maddog first, however it should only be a month before I get the MD-11 as well. The Maddog sounds perfect for getting to grips with when I have a lot of time.

Enjoy your FS9 aircraft *and* slide show! :( 2 for 1, what a deal.

Enjoy your FS9 aircraft *and* slide show! :( 2 for 1, what a deal.

Well said. FS9 port overs suck in FSX. Dated graphics, bad frame rates, full price= rip off.Have u looked at the Coolsky Super 80? It has 2 versions, very complex, and probably the best frames for any addon airliner.

Well if you want realistic long haul flight, much like the 747-400x, I would go with the MD-11. It's very similar to the 747 as far as going from cold and dark to a full on flight, but the systems are another challenge all together. I've been very impressed with it. But if you are like me and already have a hangar full of long haul planes you need something challenging and shorter. I would personally suggest the new J41, it's extremely detailed, good performance, a dream to fly by hand, and a challenge to learn to slow it down and land. It has all the complex systems and nice VC we all like to see and an fms. But has the old school styled autopilot where it requires some pilot dead reckoning, skill, practice, and knowledge to fly properly. It's one of those aircraft it would take a week off work to get it right. Very nice plane.If you still want a long hauler, compared to the other aircraft out there, the LDS 767 is getting long in the tooth and really showing it's age in the VC compared to the PMDG solutions. Still a fine aircraft but isn't something you would have to retrain on totally since you already have the 747 and the systems are pretty close. So if you want to learn something new I would stick with the J41 if you want shorter flights or the MD-11 if you want longer flights.The maddog a lot of people love. I own both the Super-80 from Coolsky/Flight1 and it and I prefer the Coolsky variant. I had WAY to many performance and systems issues with the Maddog but your mileage may vary. I just found the Coolsky pro version much more enjoyable to fly and the price is right.So my short list would be the Coolsky MD-80 pro, PMDG MD-11, or the PMDG J41. With preference being more towards the J41. Just keep in mind that the J41 does have a realatively steep learning curve so don't get frustrated like many and lay it down, just keep at it and you will be well rewarded.

Well said. FS9 port overs suck in FSX. Dated graphics, bad frame rates, full price= rip off.Have u looked at the Coolsky Super 80? It has 2 versions, very complex, and probably the best frames for any addon airliner.

+1 on the Coolsky birds. I have both the Coolsky Classic and the Professional (the Professional is FSX native). I find both of these to be outstanding and well worth the money. Also, they come with a great support forum full of helpful folks over at Flight 1. As was said earlier, these jets offer the best frame rates around. Another great feature is the automatic aircraft configuration and training center which will help you get up and running quickly. Finally, there is no shortage of addon liveries available (many on Avsim if you search under Coolsky). Cheers, Pete