MD-11 vs 737NGX experience

[JD396 38]

The FMS on the MD-11 will give you headaches at first, but once you get in the flow of it and have read the manual for it, you will call the NGX FMC a stoneage computer with a lot less logic.

 

 

It was a lot of fun to learn how to fly her. There's a little bit of a learning curve to the FMS if you're familiar with Boeings, but that's because Boeings can make you overthink what you're trying to do sometimes. The MD FMS is much more intuitive in my opinion.

[bpcw001 22]

As owner of both aircraft, I wonder why the MD-11 wasnt more successful. I am pretty comfortable flying the MD-11 ( I did the angle of attack training) and I have to say compared to the 737ngx , MD-11 is a dream to fly. So highly automated. Why didnt companies want this bird. Flys beautifully.

 

Dont get me wrong , the NGX is awesome aircraft and pmdg did an outstanding job on it. Just saying for comparison purposes the workload is night and day. Well for us single pilots anyhow in FSX. Perhaps thats a different story in the real world with two pilots.

 

When i worked for Canadian Airlines on the ramp, I had the opportunity to go to the DC-10 simulator at the time where my uncle was a captain and watch one of his test sessions. The workload was quite high. The MD-11 automates so much of that. I suppose compared to todays twins the 11 is not as efficient, but for an operational standpoint, its great. And the FMC is awesome to use.

 

Just my 2 cents worth for anyone who wants to consider purchasing these aircraft, go with the MD-11 first and understand it. Then when you do the NGX you will have a greater understanding of it. It helped with using the FMC despite the differences.

 

Happy flying and thanks PMDG for the awesome aircraft. Look forward the 777 and 747.

 

I flew the PMDG MD-11 a lot when it came out, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

 

However, in my opinion the NGX tops the MD-11. Better graphics and fidelity for me, plus the fact that the NGX fits my short/medium haul preference a lot better than the long-range MD-11.

I recently installed the MD-11 again, but it could not drag me away from the NGX.

 

While I agree that the level of automation taking away pilot workload is a concern in the real-world, I love the fact that the NGX lets me do enough to keep myself interested.

I've never understood how people could gain fun from using fs2crew and such (all great products without doubt) and having a virtual FO do all the work while just watching.

[Loren Larsa 9]

The fun of the automation is seeing your programming in action.

In short, it is the same way those who build automated factories in Minecraft derive their fun, it is seeing the end result of your actions.

[SirStiggie 63]

The fun of the automation is seeing your programming in action.

 

This is so true. I completed my first long haul trip from Hawaii to Japan and it was immensely gratifying to see the MD-11 line up with the runway at Narita and execute a perfect landing. Even though its older than the -NGX, I am really getting to like this plane and haven't flown the NGX since I got it. This is definitely more fun to fly.

[Loren Larsa 9]

I have to admit though, for the MD-11, I haven't spend a single flight hour on the weaker GE engined one, same for the 747 actually, it has been all Pratt & Whitney and it is very addictive with all that thrust.

The reason this bird didn't sell well with PMDG is probably a combination of price and secondly and most importantly the small number of these planes sold in real life.

Most of the simmers here prefer to fly reincarnations of real world aircraft, a group that I do not fit into (Have kinda built my own, and roll with my own repaints) and since there aren't that many of this one out there compared to the way more popular 737, it won't sell as much.

[MMartinov 48]

Being flown the PMDG MD11 for quite some time I loved it so much and was wondering why the RL airlines don't like it.

One day I met a RL captain of MD11 transferred to B767. On my question why the MD11 is being phased out he mentioned two things:

1. Higher landing speeds compared to other similar aircraft. Tricky crosswind landings; in particular the pilot must exercise extreme caution to straighten the plane before touchdown, as the main lading gear is sensitive to twisting and might fail. The sad prove to the last are two recent accidents with cargo MD11s.

2. Economic reasons - 3 engines against 2. 2 engined plane of a similar size and pax seating is cheaper to run and now are getting ETOPS certifications not available in the past.

[HighTowers 1,436]

Being flown the PMDG MD11 for quite some time I loved it so much and was wondering why the RL airlines don't like it.

One day I met a RL captain of MD11 transferred to B767. On my question why the MD11 is being phased out he mentioned two things:

1. Higher landing speeds compared to other similar aircraft. Tricky crosswind landings; in particular the pilot must exercise extreme caution to straighten the plane before touchdown, as the main lading gear is sensitive to twisting and might fail. The sad prove to the last are two recent accidents with cargo MD11s.

2. Economic reasons - 3 engines against 2. 2 engined plane of a similar size and pax seating is cheaper to run and now are getting ETOPS certifications not available in the past.

 

Thanks for that post. Interesting perspective as that came from an MD11 pilot. Thats too bad but makes sense now that you mention it all.

Still it has a big cool factor flying it in FSX and thankfully if any of those things happen above in a landing, its a simulation and not real life.

And Thankfully fuel does not cost either in FSX.

[oneproudaussie 4]

If it aint boeing.. i aint going

[Loren Larsa 9]

Fuel costs with 3 vs 2 engines isn't the biggest downer actually, but maintaining 3 engines over 2 is a different matter, runway length isn't such a premium anymore either that you need all that extra thrust.

Which is also a reason for the demise of the Dash 7 and Dash 8 100 series.

[gman1986 14]

If it aint boeing.. i aint going

good job it is boeing then!

[SirStiggie 63]

If it aint boeing.. i aint going

 

I used to say that with Airbus and yet look at me now B)

[HighTowers 1,436]

Fuel costs with 3 vs 2 engines isn't the biggest downer actually, but maintaining 3 engines over 2 is a different matter, runway length isn't such a premium anymore either that you need all that extra thrust.

Which is also a reason for the demise of the Dash 7 and Dash 8 100 series.

 

I struggle to think that 3 engines was the demise actually. 747 and A340 among others have 4 engines and are successful.

[Anxu00 176]

I offer another reason: it's much less work to go from 737 to 777 or 747. MD-11 pilots are few, and if you are a starting out your career would you want to start with MD-11? In the sim world, I have limited times, if I would invest on 737NG first, I am pretty sure the stuffs I learn can be applied to the 777 as well. Then I would spend more times flying. I am fairly new to this type of simulation. I just got Mike Ray book on the 700s, I will see if I have the staying power.

[737guy 0]

I struggle to think that 3 engines was the demise actually. 747 and A340 among others have 4 engines and are successful.

 

I can assure you at my airline it was exactly the 3 engine dilema that caused it's demise. In the end, the 777 and 767 offered better economics overall.

[HighTowers 1,436]

I can assure you at my airline it was exactly the 3 engine dilema that caused it's demise. In the end, the 777 and 767 offered better economics overall.

 

Then Fedex better get thier act together. As per wiki, they still h ave 64 MD-11s with only 14 leaving in the next 8 years. 69 DC-10s although scheduled replacement is B767. 36 are leaving in the next 8 years.

Their MD-11 is still a flagship aircraft with only 757 and A300s beings a few more in number.

Not picking on Fedex but they still use the MD-11 frequently. Its synonymous with being on the Fedex fleet.