HD vc textures would make a huge difference!

HD vc textures would make a huge difference!

+1 for that.

 

 

The PMDG MD-11 is an outstanding FSX/P3D aircraft!

The MD-11 is not a P3D aircraft. Please remember that if you are using any of PMDG's products on P3D, then you are doing so against their expressly stated wishes.

i would love if PMDG would make a kickstarter project for an MD11 update.. would pay up to 500 USD for it (but i know, this is only very little compared to dev costs)..

Hi all,

 

Would the lack of sales for the PMDG MD11 and the huge sales for the Boeing 737NGX be like a hare and tortoise race. The MD11 sales gradually increase over many years as people realise what they are missing, but people don't realise it's still selling, whereas the 737NGX everyone bought at once, crashed the server and now no sales as everyone now has it!

 

Just a thought, lol. I know PMDG would not likely tell us, it's probably confidential, but it would be interesting to know how many of each  of their products have been sold over the years. I mean does anyone actually know how many flight simmers are out there?

 

Makes you think doesn't it?

 

Happy flying and thanks for a great thread.

I hope no one is offended by me asking this question but this is coming from my limited knowledge of the circumbstances around the MD-11 release.

 

 

1. Could it be that the MD-11 did not do very well due to the lengthy development and loss of interest on the part of potential customers?

 

2. Could it be that unlike the NGX, the MD-11 did not receive as much "marketing" ?

 

 

It was said that the NGX sold more in the first day or hour than the MD-11 did over a long period of time. But I am wondering couldn't this have been the case due to the NGX getting much more promotion over the months and weeks leading up to its release?

 

Also, the features of the NGX were at a level that simmers have never experienced before. So could it have done well simply because (in addition to the 737 being popular) it was a totally new experience that peaked the interest of everyone in the FS community?

 

My 2 cents

 

 

Here's my theory. I don't think it has anything to do with marketing or the time it took to produce. I think there's a close correlation between the popularity of aircraft in real life vs flight sim.

 

Several years ago, who was flying the MD11 in pax guise? KLM, World and Finnair? People want to virtually fly aircraft that are tangible. That is, aircraft they see often and can fly on themselves. How many MD11s total were built, ~280? And again, even when the MD11 was released, there may have been 30 of those in the world operating pax ops? It's a niche aircraft in the real world and I think that ultimately translated to the virtual world as well. It's no surprise that the 737, of which 5k+ have been built, and the 747 which over 1k have been built are PMDG's stronger sellers.

 

However, virtually speaking, it's still a fantastic aircraft. McD had a much different control philosophy than Boeing did so it's fascinating to experience both.

 

-john paul

Buying this DVD http://www.itvv.com/pages.php?pageid=50143418 is what convinced me to buy the MD-11.   A full flight EHAM-LEPA-EHAM.

 

 

You just can't NOT like this aircraft. :rolleyes:

@doorstep

 

Beautiful to watch. Pity Martinair retired their fleet.

Buying this DVD http://www.itvv.com/pages.php?pageid=50143418 is what convinced me to buy the MD-11.   A full flight EHAM-LEPA-EHAM.

Me too except it was the Swissair Zurich to Buenos Aries DVD.

As far as I know, Martinair still operates 6 MD-11s?

I know that piloteye will release a MD11F Video from Lufthansa cargo

http://lufthansa-cargo.com/en_us/metanavigation/pressmedia/newsletter/newsletter-archive-2012/spotlight-on-the-md-11/

Are you sure they retired their fleet Mark?  I caught this guy on takeoff out of VHHX just this morning :smile:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's my theory. I don't think it has anything to do with marketing or the time it took to produce. I think there's a close correlation between the popularity of aircraft in real life vs flight sim.

 

Several years ago, who was flying the MD11 in pax guise? KLM, World and Finnair? People want to virtually fly aircraft that are tangible. That is, aircraft they see often and can fly on themselves. How many MD11s total were built, ~280? And again, even when the MD11 was released, there may have been 30 of those in the world operating pax ops? It's a niche aircraft in the real world and I think that ultimately translated to the virtual world as well. It's no surprise that the 737, of which 5k+ have been built, and the 747 which over 1k have been built are PMDG's stronger sellers.

 

However, virtually speaking, it's still a fantastic aircraft. McD had a much different control philosophy than Boeing did so it's fascinating to experience both.

 

-john paul

 

 

That could be true, but there are other add-ons that in real life are not very popular and yet they have sold well (Q400, Concorde X etc). In the end, if a product is good, and people know how good it is, they will buy it. For example, right now with X-Plane there are not many payware aircraft add-ons available, but for those that are available, they do reasonably well simply because of the limited choices in high quality add-ons.

 

FSX is no different really, while we all have our preferences as to what airplanes we like, we are still limited when it comes to high end add-on aircrafts. My concern is what will we do when we have created all the popular planes such as the 737, A320 and 747s? IMO, focusing on these planes isn't very helpful making this hobby very interesting.

 

Don't get me wrong though, I fully agree with your reasoning but there are other factor that need to be considered.

 

- BTW, if aircrafts that are popular = best sellers then the Cessna 152 and 172 should be a money pit shouldn't it?

If the theory of sales was based on popularity and R/W flying at airports today, then that would make the DC-6 project obsolete before its even released. You wont see them flying around with PAX and might see it at an Airshow and the younger generation doesn't even know much about it. <br /><br />I think personally that once your in this cockpit and start up the engines and it starts rattling your windows, people who were skeptical or dont know much about it are suddenly won over. <br /><br />If they put the price down or some discount sale they would see a jump and then more appreciable likeness. May then warrant a visual upgrade. Who knows. Probably not as they seemed pretty adamant about it. <br /><br /><br /><br />

 

 

If the theory of sales was based on popularity and R/W flying at airports today, then that would make the DC-6 project obsolete before its even released.

 

I know this thread has gone for several pages, but this point has been raised several times.

 

Self quote to avoid repeating myself several more times:

The difference is that there were gaps in the development cycle that are now filled.  It's not an issue of opportunity cost, rather an issue of making money where none was previously made.

 

The DC-6 is a lighter interim project that is meant to fill the gap between the major developments to keep the teams tasked with something.  They are not deferring resources to work on it, rather, as resources become available, they can move to the interim project.

 

The teams were originally idle at various times during the main project's development cycle, and are no longer idle.  As such, by releasing a new product, regardless of the aircraft type, money is now being made where money was previously not made.