I don

Hey Bruce,I think it has more to do with the disproportionate workload you experience in FSX without an FO to help you out. I imagine that in your experience with the "real" simulator, your PNF did almost everything else while you flew the jet, right? I think that's the inherent flaw in Flight Simulator, the lack of a PNF to handle all of the things you don't have to do in reality. Thankfully, there are other addons that can put a significant dent in that, though.As far as automation and display philosophy, I don't think the MD-11 is appreciably more difficult, just different. The delta between Boeing and Douglas is approximatley the same as between Boeing and Airbus or Embraer. Once you get used to it, it's just as intuitive as the 737 or 747, in my opinion.

Don't short change your instrument time in the C172. Those are some of the most difficult IFR times I've logged when I was a single pilot with charts all over the cockpit using a hand mic to talk to ATC and listening through the cabin speaker (very similar to a PC speaker but with more noise). Most of my solid IMC time in the past ten years has been with the same other fellow and we've got crew resource management down to an art.

Don't short change your instrument time in the C172. Those are some of the most difficult IFR times I've logged when I was a single pilot with charts all over the cockpit using a hand mic to talk to ATC and listening through the cabin speaker (very similar to a PC speaker but with more noise). Most of my solid IMC time in the past ten years has been with the same other fellow and we've got crew resource management down to an art.

I hear you Dan ! :) Yes, it gets intense alright.Bruce.

Hey Bruce,I think it has more to do with the disproportionate workload you experience in FSX without an FO to help you out. I imagine that in your experience with the "real" simulator, your PNF did almost everything else while you flew the jet, right? I think that's the inherent flaw in Flight Simulator, the lack of a PNF to handle all of the things you don't have to do in reality. Thankfully, there are other addons that can put a significant dent in that, though.As far as automation and display philosophy, I don't think the MD-11 is appreciably more difficult, just different. The delta between Boeing and Douglas is approximatley the same as between Boeing and Airbus or Embraer. Once you get used to it, it's just as intuitive as the 737 or 747, in my opinion.

Thanks Nick, Actually I see quite a similarity between the MD11 and the A320/330/340 philosophy, such as the need to re-activate the ALT and HDG knobs when changing them (whereas with the Boeing once you activate HDG or ALT you can change their values and there is no need to re-activate them). Even the TOC and TOD icons look similar on the ND.I'll keep trying :)Thanks, Bruce.

Of all the sim planes that I fly the MD11 is the only one that I have complete conidence in to pull off an autoflight and autoland. How did I get this confidence? It was either going to autoland or crash. There was nothing I could do but lower the gear and flaps and set in the cockpit and watch. And it always landed unless I intervened and somehow got the controls screwed up. Just tonight I did something wrong on a ILS approach and the GS was never captured. So I had to stabilize the plane, do a 180, go out about 15 miles do another 180 and try again. During this time my mind was full of questions: what do I have control of - speed, heading, altitude, do I left click or right click to go up or down left or right, is the ILS still tuned, will this plane still autoland after turning the AP off, the PFD and ND have so much info in different colors, boxed, flashing. What is going on here? Anyway, the MD11 landed like it always does. Something like this in a 737, 744, 757 or 767 is like falling off a cliff. But they will not autoland. At some point in time I always have to switch from VNAV to V/S and Alt HOLD because they get messed up by starting down to late, confused at the 10000 transition, and don't calculate speeds all the way to TD.The MD11 is great plane if the computer is done correctly and it can perform an autoflight from TO to TD. Get it outside of that envelope and you have complex machine to handle.Thank youMichael Cubine

Of all the sim planes that I fly the MD11 is the only one that I have complete conidence in to pull off an autoflight and autoland. How did I get this confidence? It was either going to autoland or crash. There was nothing I could do but lower the gear and flaps and set in the cockpit and watch. And it always landed unless I intervened and somehow got the controls screwed up. Just tonight I did something wrong on a ILS approach and the GS was never captured. So I had to stabilize the plane, do a 180, go out about 15 miles do another 180 and try again. During this time my mind was full of questions: what do I have control of - speed, heading, altitude, do I left click or right click to go up or down left or right, is the ILS still tuned, will this plane still autoland after turning the AP off, the PFD and ND have so much info in different colors, boxed, flashing. What is going on here? Anyway, the MD11 landed like it always does. Something like this in a 737, 744, 757 or 767 is like falling off a cliff. But they will not autoland. At some point in time I always have to switch from VNAV to V/S and Alt HOLD because they get messed up by starting down to late, confused at the 10000 transition, and don't calculate speeds all the way to TD.The MD11 is great plane if the computer is done correctly and it can perform an autoflight from TO to TD. Get it outside of that envelope and you have complex machine to handle.Thank youMichael Cubine

Hi Michael,Yes, it's those "non-normal" times that I'm talking about. That's what real flying means to me- I don't seem to have the trouble auto-landing that you do with the (PMDG) B744 or the (LD) B763, although it may be that the MD11 does a more accurate and measured approach speed to TD than the others, after all it is a "thorough-bred".Thanks, Bruce (Knight)

Quite the contrary. Of all heavy airliner simulations, I've found the MD-11 to be the most relaxed one.The autoflight system is quite good, and thanks to the auto mode you have the aircraft set up with a few mouse clicks.If you then have the proper SIDs and STARs, you can let go of the controls once you're airborne and the rest is done by the MD11's computers.Other airliners require a much higher workload, both to get all systems up and running correctly and during flight, approach and landing.

Most planes don't calculate for the "deceleration segment". An A320 series does, as does the MD-11. I guess there isn't (yet) a good enough A320 for FSX that would do that right. So, that's why you can let the MD-11 do all on automatics right after take off until autoland/rollout.Other planes have good automatism as well, but it needs more "think ahead" work and manual intervenience to get the vertical profile and speed right, but you can fly them on automatics alone like the MD-11 if you're cautious enough.I for my part enjoy hand flying and difficult maneuvers more. It's rather boring for me to let the plane do a straight in autoland. A more "risky" hand flown circling approach or "non charted" approaches doing localizer intercepts at 3NM with 180 degree turns are more after my taste (have experienced this myself on one of my vacation flights where the pilots did an approach that's on no chart). That's why hand flight characteristics are so important for me.All in all the PMDG MD-11 is an absolute favorite of mine and I use it for shortest distances as well (and for airports that have never seen an MD-11 in real life).Andreas

Most planes don't calculate for the "deceleration segment". An A320 series does, as does the MD-11. I guess there isn't (yet) a good enough A320 for FSX that would do that right. So, that's why you can let the MD-11 do all on automatics right after take off until autoland/rollout.Other planes have good automatism as well, but it needs more "think ahead" work and manual intervenience to get the vertical profile and speed right, but you can fly them on automatics alone like the MD-11 if you're cautious enough.I for my part enjoy hand flying and difficult maneuvers more. It's rather boring for me to let the plane do a straight in autoland. A more "risky" hand flown circling approach or "non charted" approaches doing localizer intercepts at 3NM with 180 degree turns are more after my taste (have experienced this myself on one of my vacation flights where the pilots did an approach that's on no chart). That's why hand flight characteristics are so important for me.All in all the PMDG MD-11 is an absolute favorite of mine and I use it for shortest distances as well (and for airports that have never seen an MD-11 in real life).Andreas

AndreasTry this for hand flying and a difficult maneuver. In 1978 I was a pax on an Eastern DC9-30 from KATL to KTPA. The plane was on a south approach for a ILS on 36L. So the deal was he would go south for another 7-8 miles, turn left, intercept the LOC and G/S and come back north and land. At about 4000' and opposite the airport the tower must have cleared him for a visual to 36L. He went into a 180 degree turn to the left, started extending the flaps, used speed brakes, lowered the gear, and bleed off speed, rolled right to wings level at about 300-400 feet, 1/2 mile out and landed. 32 years later I remember it like it was yesterday. I still can't do it in the simulator. It was truly excellent flying.Mike Cubine

Most planes don't calculate for the "deceleration segment". An A320 series does, as does the MD-11. I guess there isn't (yet) a good enough A320 for FSX that would do that right. So, that's why you can let the MD-11 do all on automatics right after take off until autoland/rollout.Other planes have good automatism as well, but it needs more "think ahead" work and manual intervenience to get the vertical profile and speed right, but you can fly them on automatics alone like the MD-11 if you're cautious enough.I for my part enjoy hand flying and difficult maneuvers more. It's rather boring for me to let the plane do a straight in autoland. A more "risky" hand flown circling approach or "non charted" approaches doing localizer intercepts at 3NM with 180 degree turns are more after my taste (have experienced this myself on one of my vacation flights where the pilots did an approach that's on no chart). That's why hand flight characteristics are so important for me.All in all the PMDG MD-11 is an absolute favorite of mine and I use it for shortest distances as well (and for airports that have never seen an MD-11 in real life).Andreas

Thanks Dave and Andreas,I agree with the automatics- this bird has so much that can be automated and seems to do it very well, I've even heard that (not unlike some military high performance jets) this aircraft needs some automated help with elevator / CG management, which goes back to the early days where MD was trying to get getter fuel burn figures and played with the pitch attitude stability to achieve that (I know only enough to be dangerous on this matter :) ). This in turn was the result of a very limited re-design of the original (DC9) wing as MD were very cost conscious, but it back-fired in the end when many potential customers went elsewhere- also combined with the fact that big twins were on the horizon and ETOPS was being extended.But even with the limited FSX ATC (which is not all that bad), I like to manually fly a descent, approach and landing, and find that much harder in the MD11 than in the (say) PMDG B744 or LDS B763. I think I just need more practice :)Thanks, Bruce.

Bruce, many will overcontrol the pitch in the MD11 during the few first flights. As in all turbojets, you fly this honey by the numbers including pitch adjustment. I am lucky to have had the beta testing experience in her, and I think she is my favorite jet (until the NG2.0 comes out). My simplistic controls require that I keep ATS on until flare.

.......... I am lucky to have had the beta testing experience in her, and I think she is my favorite jet (until the NG2.0 comes out). ...........

Thanks- and that comment about the NG2.0 is so enticing :)Bruce (Knight)