Wow, whatever Dude

2 hours ago, Anders Bermann said:

Personal views, expressions and opinions are subjective.

Not in my opinion...

3 hours ago, DavidP said:

Wow, whatever Dude

Wow, thank you, for your positive attitude, your incredibly intelligent response, your enlightenment and your genuine interest in the subject matter...

1 hour ago, Boomer said:

Not in my opinion...

Huh? 

13 hours ago, DEHowie said:

Because i dont need to.

All the Bieings run the same FMC which is based on the system developed for the 737-300 way back when.

FMC's have advanced far beyond that point except for Boeings.

The list of missing features compared to the MD-11 FMC system is quite massive.

It may hurt your feelings that the Boeing system even in the 787 is the same basic system with none of the advanced planning features of Airbus or MD.

A perfect example is conducting a missed approach to an alternate. You will NEVER be cleared direct EVER. Yet all Boeings only give you the ability to get a fuel figure for that.

With RTE 2 being used for your second approach you dont have acess to a final fuel figure oherhead your destination except via direct tracking with no allowance for an aporoach and landing.

I could go on with the number of features missing even from the current Boeing FMC on the 787.

In short it hasnt changed, its been the same for over 30 years and other that its great ability to show visual information which is great its missing numerous important functions covered since the late 80's by all of its competitors.

Having flown the 717 which has the same FMC/Autoflight system as the MD-11, the Airbus A320/330 and a Pegasus FMC as per 767/757 I know them all.

The Boeingbthing is boring per se as that simmers realy need to see "why" real pilots prefer the other two in operational use.

In fact if in the reao world we could have MD's FMC combined with Boeings displays and an Airbus flightdeck you woukd literally have the ultimate aircraft.

In short the Boeing thing IS boring in simming because yes they are all functionally the same and simming gives the unique chance to view multiple aircraft easily something many professionals never get to do.

Hence why have another same same Boeing when the chance for seeing the great MD system exists?

Or just go buy the TFDI 717 and see the best system going...

 

 

**sniffle sniffle**

747 feelings aside, I personally find that I can do more with the Boeing style of FMC/CDU much faster than I could with an Airbus or MD style FMC. (That statement is almost completely horsesh*+ and it’s probably because I’m used to the Boeing style FMC… I find that it is more logical and works more like I do if you get what garble I’m trying to say.) I realise that in Airbus or MD’s MCDU’s, you can have all the information filled out faster than in a Boeing due to the higher automation and while that is definitely a plus for real world operations, for simmers (or me at least), having that larger human interaction requirement is something I really enjoy. I’m not saying that Airbus or MD are bad, I enjoy flying the 717 and the FSL A320 (albeit the a bit lacking in the bus…) (and the Q400 amd some ancient Boeing’s but that’s off topic.) but I guess I’m a Boeing man, and once you are one of those guys, you don’t change! :P

Stop it 

Had PMDG had the policy of giving update prices to transfer to P3D rather than having to buy it again, I'd be secretly desperate for them to reconsider their now concrete position against bringing the MD-11 into the x64 bit world. As it is, like a successful airline, I would have to decide the most cost effective option, and given that I am going to have to rebuy the 737 and the 777 for P3D, I would have to leave the MD11 stored in the Mojave Desert that is FSX when I build my new computer in the coming months. I've decided it's time to say goodbye to FSX and its drawbacks/restrictions, so the new PC will only have P3D on it.

That said, it is sad that the MD-11 will be left behind. I fired it up in FSX the other day for the first time in about 2 years and think it's still a lovely simulation. Sure, textures could do with a bit of an update and the x64 bit world requires a lot of rejigging anyway (the nature of which I don't understand), but would it really require that much work to bring it into x64 bit? It wouldn't need a complete rebuild from the ground up like the 747 did, would it?

I respect PMDG's decisions though. They clearly think it best to leave the MD be; so be it.

Since I'm no professional and do not have an entertainment license for P3D, I`ll still stick with *outdated* FSX, even *prehistorical* FS9, and the *antique* MD-11. Let the others boast and argue about their bigger, better, prettier, faster, newer sims, while I simply fly. Live and let live.

And I don't normally fly heavy metal (jets and FMCs are for kids anyway), but when I do, it's the PM3D, sorry: PMDG MD-11.

8 hours ago, Anders Bermann said:

Wow, thank you, for your positive attitude, your incredibly intelligent response, your enlightenment and your genuine interest in the subject matter...

I'm intrigued at how people get upset over, "in my opinion", trivial things. Thanks for the insults too, I appreciate that, very kind of you.

 

Hey...

 

8 hours ago, Anders Bermann said:

Wow, thank you, for your positive attitude, your incredibly intelligent response, your enlightenment and your genuine interest in the subject matter...

Huh? 

 

32 minutes ago, DavidP said:

I'm intrigued at how people get upset over, "in my opinion", trivial things. Thanks for the insults too, I appreciate that, very kind of you.

 

 

In case you missed it:

 

8 hours ago, scandinavian13 said:

Stop it 

Who exactly are you talking to?

23 hours ago, DEHowie said:

Because i dont need to.

All the Bieings run the same FMC which is based on the system developed for the 737-300 way back when.

FMC's have advanced far beyond that point except for Boeings.

The list of missing features compared to the MD-11 FMC system is quite massive.

It may hurt your feelings that the Boeing system even in the 787 is the same basic system with none of the advanced planning features of Airbus or MD.

A perfect example is conducting a missed approach to an alternate. You will NEVER be cleared direct EVER. Yet all Boeings only give you the ability to get a fuel figure for that.

With RTE 2 being used for your second approach you dont have acess to a final fuel figure oherhead your destination except via direct tracking with no allowance for an aporoach and landing.

I could go on with the number of features missing even from the current Boeing FMC on the 787.

In short it hasnt changed, its been the same for over 30 years and other that its great ability to show visual information which is great its missing numerous important functions covered since the late 80's by all of its competitors.

Having flown the 717 which has the same FMC/Autoflight system as the MD-11, the Airbus A320/330 and a Pegasus FMC as per 767/757 I know them all.

The Boeingbthing is boring per se as that simmers realy need to see "why" real pilots prefer the other two in operational use.

In fact if in the reao world we could have MD's FMC combined with Boeings displays and an Airbus flightdeck you woukd literally have the ultimate aircraft.

In short the Boeing thing IS boring in simming because yes they are all functionally the same and simming gives the unique chance to view multiple aircraft easily something many professionals never get to do.

Hence why have another same same Boeing when the chance for seeing the great MD system exists?

Or just go buy the TFDI 717 and see the best system going...

 

 

To say the Boeing FMC hasn't advanced at all from the 737-300 FMC is analogous to saying that the Airbus FMC hasn't changed since the original A310 FMC. The 757/767 is indeed quite similar to the original 737 FMC, but the Pegasus upgrade you refer to added significant functionality and capacity to the original 737/757/767 FMC. Since then the 747 FMC had additional features, the 777 even more and the current 737NG FMC is a more complex device with more features compared to the original 737-300 FMC. Now there is also integration with the EFB in the 777 and 787. In short, they aren't all the same.

Of course few diversions are direct, but there's nothing to stop you building a complete route to the alternate once you have the clearance. Some things are better in the Boeing than the Airbus. The Progress pages on a Boeing 747 or 777 FMC are much more informative than Airbus. Fixes are easier to access. If you want to create a range fix in the MD FMC you are out of luck.

The TFDi 717 is certainly a good substitute for anyone missing the MD11 in P3D

Blather and bother...where's my P3Dv4 MD11...get on the stick...

12 hours ago, Boomer said:

Blather and bother...where's my P3Dv4 MD11...get on the stick...

Boomer, as a 747, I have one question for you, where is your NGX? You mention some excellent fellow Boeing birds in your signature, but the baby Boeing is nowhere to be found…

3 hours ago, VHOEI said:

Boomer, as a 747, I have one question for you, where is your NGX? You mention some excellent fellow Boeing birds in your signature, but the baby Boeing is nowhere to be found…

You will note all my birds listed are Heavies, sir...

Just do it. Like Nike. Then i'll buy it and we'll be one happy MD-11 family.