Espen said he is looking at flexing wings as a possible upgrade in the future for the DC-9.

 

 

http://www.coolsky.no/index.php/the-news/279-dc-9-classic-screenshots42

 

I don't see it as being much of an issue. The DC-9 had such little flex even if it were added, you would be hard-pressed to actually see it. It has fairly short rigid wings, less flex than a 727 and much less then the MD-80.

Great AC i actually had to seat down on my kitchen table pull out some charts and my ipad to plan a short flight . i dont have alot to say or anything at all about the exterior view since i was busy inside . About the low FPS some guys are reporting it may be related to particular settings but i would like to put some more time on this plane to see if anything comes up and goes the wrong way ......

Where do you set that?

 

google "texture max load" and install

"It's a 100% winner"...??? Where? in what aspect?

Its a shame to release such a poor aircraft, when I pay 45.95 USD I excpect someting more than just fancy instruments to look at...

The rest is... "freeware quality", good quality maybe, but NOT worth 45.95 USD!

disappointed!

 

P.

"It's a 100% winner"...??? Where? in what aspect?

Its a shame to release such a poor aircraft, when I pay 45.95 USD I excpect someting more than just fancy instruments to look at...

The rest is... "freeware quality", good quality maybe, but NOT worth 45.95 USD!

disappointed!

 

P.

 

I disagree. The systems programming is excellent, the VC is really nice, the flight dynamics are very good, the NavSim is an awesome feature, the checklists are great, the schematics are helpful, the load manager is good, and so on. I think the visual model looks good with nice texturing, and overall I think this is one of the best "steam gauge" aircraft available for FSX. My only real gripe as of now is that there does appear to be an issue with the dome light at night. For the price, this is a lot of aircraft in my opinion.

Flight One has a 30 day no questions asked refund policy...

 

Its a shame to release such a poor aircraft, when I pay 45.95 USD I excpect someting more than just fancy instruments to look at...

The rest is... "freeware quality", good quality maybe, but NOT worth 45.95 USD!

disappointed!

 

 

This is exactly what I was afraid of. - Their "super" 80 was far less than super in my eyes...

This is exactly what I was afraid of. - Their "super" 80 was far less than super in my eyes...

 

McPhat didn't do the VC or External model of the Super 80.

In later 2012 I am expecting a lof of super high quality payware aircraft for FSX. I will buy some and not others. 50.00 is a lot to ask for an addon aircraft that is not creme of the crop graphically, system-wise, and feature-wise. I realize it's a lot of work and talent involved in creating these projects but I hope they follow the example of the recent QualityWings BAE 146...it seems like they really delivered a nice product for a reasonable price. As far as the DC9 goes I'm gonna wait for more opinions and videos! I can't buy everything. It's starting to look like I'll pass here and pick it up on sale next year or whenever. Also, if I wanted no frame rates I could just get in my CaptainSim 727 (great aircraft though ironically)

This is exactly what I was afraid of. - Their "super" 80 was far less than super in my eyes...

 

A bunch of vague nonsense from pellebus is convincing to you?

In later 2012 I am expecting a lof of super high quality payware aircraft for FSX. I will buy some and not others. 50.00 is a lot to ask for an addon aircraft that is not creme of the crop graphically, system-wise, and feature-wise. I realize it's a lot of work and talent involved in creating these projects but I hope they follow the example of the recent QualityWings BAE 146...it seems like they really delivered a nice product for a reasonable price. As far as the DC9 goes I'm gonna wait for more opinions and videos! I can't buy everything. It's starting to look like I'll pass here and pick it up on sale next year or whenever. Also, if I wanted no frame rates I could just get in my CaptainSim 727 (great aircraft though ironically)

#

OK let me break this down for you.

I have the QW BAE 146, The DC-9 is better, If you set this plane in C&D see how far you get, system-wise its all there higher than the QW 146 by a long way.

"creme of the crop graphically", when set to 4096 show be a better one.

 

feature-wise Well how about a check list your FO talks to you(reads off) a dummy walk though for anything you want to do e.g how to start the engines, full moving map and with you can click on the vor to enter in your NAV radio, the list goes on and on.

 

O BTW I've deleted the QW 146 as imo it needs a SP1, this so far IMHO is much better and there forums are reporting very little problems, the only one is dome lighting at night...well that's not a big thing is it.

 

CS 727(I had it and its now deleted) over this...........your kiddy me. :LMAO: How many people say there FPS are bad 2-3 and many say its got good FPS, well I say its around the same as the NGX for me, if it was bad I would say. It might be 2-3 FPS lower than the NGX no more for me.

 

I have spend countless hours in the NGX and it's the best out there. I set up as I always do, a C&D start and the first time after 1 hour finding everything I still had not started a engine, well it would not start. user error.

I used the "training" that gives 2D pop ups and walks you thought and I ended up with engines started.

If you want a plane you really have to work to get to know or just set to a state you want this has it all, if you want to pull it down so bad please try it first not just make wild comments that are not true.

 

If you or anyone does not like this type of aircraft, fine but if you want this type I could not name one better and I've had them all.

 

That's it am not replying any-more to this, try it and see yourself you have 30 day to get a refund what more could you ask for?

 

Your loss not mine :biggrin:

The rest is... "freeware quality", good quality maybe, but NOT worth 45.95 USD!

disappointed!

 

"Freeware quality" does not necessarily mean bad quality. Very often it's the opposite.

 

50.00 is a lot to ask for an addon aircraft that is not creme of the crop graphically,

 

My thought exactly.But then again value is in the eyes of the buyer.I was actually wondering how come he made a nice plane with such "pffffff" VC. Maybe he is targeting a particular customer.I mean the customer who is more into system fidelity than visuals and is willing to put up with such a VC ? Just saying...

This is exactly what I was afraid of. - Their "super" 80 was far less than super in my eyes...

 

I agree with you here as well especially compared to the maddog. I think that espen makes nice planes but his Vcs all suck (this is mild) for the price.

 

Your loss not mine

 

 

Or gain...depending on the opinion :-)

I have been provided with a late beta model of the aeroplane for an upcoming article on Cooksky and the DC9.

 

The aeroplane runs fine on my rig, fps around the 20 mark at night in heavy scenery. I did have the issue of the blurry overhead but it was fixed when i moved my texture max load to 4096 as it states in the manual. During the day and in the cruise i get steady 30fps (as per my limiter).

 

If you are having frame problems, i suggest there may be other issues in your system??

 

A bunch of vague nonsense from pellebus is convincing to you?

 

This is not a praise-only forum.

"It's a 100% winner"...??? Where? in what aspect?

Its a shame to release such a poor aircraft, when I pay 45.95 USD I excpect someting more than just fancy instruments to look at...

The rest is... "freeware quality", good quality maybe, but NOT worth 45.95 USD!

disappointed!

 

P.

Have you even tried actually flying this aircraft? Under the hood it seems to have a lot of systems very well simulated. Sure graphically it's not that impressive but so what, I rather fly an aircraft with systems and flight dynamics well simulated than just fancy looking model with nothing in it.

 

Or okay it's freeware quality if we compare to Project Tupolev TU-154 which is one of the highest quality and most complex aircraft ever made for FSX and in terms of systems in same level with PMDG 737NGX.

 

This is not a praise-only forum.

 

True, I guess it's just a good thing that those who want to save some money can justify it with one negative comment in middle of loads of positive ones.

 

Probably Pelle is just so overly negative because of having some FPS problems, in terms of systems this bird seems to be top notch. Remember another topic where he totally bashed another developer when he had to wait for only a day or so to get his product download link as some automatic system had failed to send it.