I haven't heard any of the expected flameings of this product. Anyone havy any opinions about this one? How are the flight dynamics?Normally I'd be frusterated about the lack of an FMC, but maybe thats a bit more of an honest approach towards releasing a product. Finish something then release it as a module. Is the panel finished?__Josh

Josh,I purchased the MDMax the day after release. It is trully an outstanding representation of an MD80 panel. It does not have a VC, nor is the exterior model anything to brag about, but the systems modelling is incredible. I think pretty much everyhting that can be represented is so. The Flight Dynamics are also super. As you say, there is not an FMC yet but it is coming. If it is anywhere near as good as the panel it will be fantastic. Be aware though, if you are looking for "eye candy" and jump in and fly, this one is not what you want. Even starting the APU and distributing power is a detailed process.

Josh,haven't bought it yet, but here are some panel screenshots : http://xoomer.virgilio.it/murmur/index.htmlIt looks like a pretty comprehensive procedure simulation. I only partially remember some MD80 procedures, but with the features they are now simulating in their actual state, you'll have enough to do until the FMC comes out. Sure the FMC is needed, but pressing FMC buttons is probably not what it's all about ;)Mike

Can anyone post some screenshots of the panel quality at 1280x960? My LCD doens't go up to 1660x1200 .. I'd like to know if the quality is seriously degraded.

Or you could just download it and select it as stretched wallpaper, the result should be the same ;)brEagle

I am running the MD80 panel at 1280x1024 and it looks great. I have read on the MDMax forum that 1660x1200 is the way to go and anything less is not desireable, but I think they do themselves a disservice in saying that. 1280x1024 is very sharp and really looks good. The detailed lighting and lettering is sharp and easily read. The gauges on the overhead panel are also well done and easy to read. The digital readouts are easy to read and the fonts are crisp and the lighting well done.I have to agree with the posts above in that this simulation superb and, from my limited knowledge (though I am a rw pilot) of the MD80, represents an accurate and detailed process of managing such a system.I have been having a lot of fun learning this thing and less time actually flying so far. As stated above even starting the APU and applying power takes some time and understanding. I look forward to the upcoming liveries and actually flying this bird soon.Great work MDMax.

>Josh,>>haven't bought it yet, but here are some panel screenshots :>http://xoomer.virgilio.it/murmur/index.htmlThat doesn't look like any MD8X panel I've ever seen...:-eek

I dind't know the MD80s throttle quadrant was located on the main panel. Fascinating.I don't care how good the systems modelling is - if it's not visually accurate what's the point?

Aw come on Bill!!!The PS1.3 747 panel out of the box didn't look much like a 747-400 panel either ... but ... certainly has most of the procedural functionality and fidelity.As George (Bigun) pointed out above ... this is not an eye-candy panel ... but a very cool MD-8x representation ... is it an AIRLINER.NET cockpit photo? ... maybe not 100% visually ... but if you were an MD-80 type rated person, I think you might feel comfortable with all the details.This is one fine piece of software ... as it is. Very much worth the $$ if you are in the market for a great MD-80 experience, IMHO of course. If you remember the original excellent Maddog 2000 ... this is it, all fixed up and detailed.Cheers!

Well I bit the bullet (again) and am quite pleased. I realize that the throttle quadrant isn't positionally acurate, but I don't remember seeing a window pop up whenever real life pilots want to access their throttle quadrant so it's all really subjective. Personally I find it nice to be able to see the darned thing rather than some clear wasted panelspace or half an FMC.Systems-wise this thing is amazing! I can't imagine anything getting more accurate than this. This bug-free bird is made to be flown, and flown realistically. If you are looking for any kind of eye-candy, look elsewhere, because this is all about systems and execution. I believe they will get their FMC out because anyone THIS anal and honest about their product would have to do it. I GOT what I paid for and to be honest, that alone is worth mentioning.I'm an MD nut and bought both. I'm not even going to tell you guys what I think of Lago's production. MAYBE I'll load that up again in a few months, but seriously, I doubt it.___JoshJust as aside, not everything about creating immersion is about visually appealing product, sometimes guts and depth can make up for - and sometimes surpass a superb visual representation (captain-sim??).

Hi,Here's one of the main panel at 1280x960. The quality is FINE, don't worry :).http://pilots.svil.fi/teropa/jako/md_tiskiin.jpgTero

Eric,Not EVERYTHING can be made both visually accurately and procedurally wise for a PC desktop simulator. I'm finding it really just a bit unbelievable lately reading a lot of comments around about this thing.The PC screen is not a 3D environment encompassing the entire cockpit. Thus, if some things are frequently needed or are otherwise important to keep in the main panel view, then that's how it should be.I think the MDMax guys have made good design decisions with this one, and they have even explained the ideas behind those decisions in their forum.What's more I find it really weird that you dismiss the systems modelling just like that ! only to argue for an accurate presentation of the main panel for a 2-dimensional monitor. Now come on! rgds,Tero

Thanks for the shot! I think I'll be buying this one, even though I am a VC nut. Systems fidelity trumps all. How are the manuals? Do they mention the actual SYSTEMS, or is it just procedures and cockpit information? One of my pet peeves is that even some of the higher end add-ons don't mention the aircraft systems ... so you're flipping switches without knowledge of what's happening behind the scenes.

I am interested in this, but would prefer it to be a complete product with a decent exterior model and FMC. The absence of a VC does not bother me, in fact I try to remove VCs from certain aircraft that have them (like the CS 707).I enjoy the Igfly Tu-154M that has no VC and that is fantastic.Definetely a better offering than LAGO but I think it is very overpriced at a total of 55 Euros. I could buy it though, nonetheless as it seems to be a complete A/C systems sim...

Thanks for the revision!!! It helps a lot to make my mind up.All I heard about the Lago model is pure complaint, all I am hearing about this one is pure happiness.You don't need to buy the AC or the liveries. In their forums it is explained that the panel is compatible with any MD-80 as long as you keep the aircraft.cfg and the .air files, replacing only the .mdl.Leo