I'm sure this question has been asked a million times, but I was wondering if the MD-11 is an FS9 native aircraft ported to FSX, or is it an FSX native aircraft backported to FS9? I am wondering, because FSX native aircraft seem to be better optimized to run on FSX than the FS9 ports which seem to suffer a bit performance wise. Also, I was wondering what kind of FPS I might see with the MD-11 (how does it compare to default aircraft? My specs are in my signature. Thanks! PS I remember when the MD-11 was released, I believe it was for FSX first, so that's a good sign.

The MD-11 has pretty good performance. I can't really answer with respect to default aircraft, since comparing the MD-11 to default aircraft is like comparing a kite with an A380.

The MD-11 has pretty good performance. I can't really answer with respect to default aircraft, since comparing the MD-11 to default aircraft is like comparing a kite with an A380.

LOL. Good analogy.

I get it, but what I was looking for was for someone to say something like, "Well, I get 65-70 FPS on the default 747 at KLAS, and then when I switch over to the MD-11 I get XX-XX FPS." That's all I was asking.Thanks

It runs fine for me 18-35 FPS, and I've got a system nowhere near as good as yours.

The MD-11 is native FSX - the two versions are different as far as the models, both are native for their respective sim. We don't do "ports" here, never have.

i dont want to open a new thread. can somebody tell me perhaps how the md11 in fsx compares to the leveld 767 in fps?thanks you, nicolas reich

Since you are abstracting and leaving out all of the details of system spec and other running add-ons, the Level-D will have better FPS on most systems. This is primarily due to the much better graphics on the MD-11. Not to mention the fact that while both are very accurate representations, in real life, the MD-11 is a whole lot more advanced than the 767. If one were to accurately simulate both AC's, the MD-11 would be more resource intensive.With all of that said, on my system I experience very little FPS hit when compared to other add-ons by either plane. The MD-11 by PMDG was designed to be lighter on frames than the 747X while providing a fantastic experience.

AWACSI have never compared the MD-11 to the 747-400 or the FSX default aircraft only to the CS 757-200. With FSX in unlimited FPS I get 90-110 FPS at cruise and 25-35 at addon airports with the MD-11. Heavy weather and scenery seem to make little difference. With the CS 757-200 I get 30-40 FPS at cruise and 15-25 at addon airports. Michael Cubine

Sounds good thanks, now I have to decide if it's worth the $80 price tag, for a guy going to school and living off the GI Bill. If it was $54.95 which is about the average these days, I would have no problem, but $80, whoa. I'll have to think about it.

Sounds good thanks, now I have to decide if it's worth the $80 price tag, for a guy going to school and living off the GI Bill. If it was $54.95 which is about the average these days, I would have no problem, but $80, whoa. I'll have to think about it.

It is priced above the "average" because it is far and away the best aircraft package made to date. After purchasing the MD-11 on its day of release and having spendt thousand(s) of hours reading into it and flying it, I can honestly say that $80 is a bargain for what you get.