3 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

Not sure this is correct. FMS OVRD provides means to select either an Indicated Airspeed or Mach number. Not sure how often you want to fly mach with slats extended.

 

Yes I was wording it wrongly and also misunderstood the OP, sorry: You cannot override when the desired speed would be below slats extension speed. The OP I answered to was trying to get speed down with FMS override from 210 to like 170, but did not extend slats. That's why it didn't work.

FMS override does work as you said.

Detailed review here:  (199) The Most Expensive Addon in MSFS - but is it the Best? | Leonardo MD-82 "Maddog" Full Review - YouTube

24 minutes ago, Paul_Yorks said:

Detailed review here:  (199) The Most Expensive Addon in MSFS - but is it the Best? | Leonardo MD-82 "Maddog" Full Review - YouTube

Towards the end he hammers on the price point. It's what I was saying before release. The price is too high for a MSFS add-on regardless of the complexity of the plane. I want Carenado visuals to go with a reasonable price point.

Update: This is definitely a must watch before buy. All valid reasons for me to pass.

Edited May 2, 20224 yr by DJJose

9 minutes ago, DJJose said:

Towards the end he hammers on the price point. It's what I was saying before release. The price is too high for a MSFS add-on regardless of the complexity of the plane. I want Carenado visuals to go with a reasonable price point.

Update: This is definitely a must watch before buy. All valid reasons for me to pass.

some will find it worth it , others not, so what?

 

40 minutes ago, wim123 said:

so what?

So what is your point?

Just looking at your name "wim123" and I should have known. A little child in front of a PC?

Edited May 2, 20224 yr by DJJose

34 minutes ago, Paul_Yorks said:

Detailed review here:  (199) The Most Expensive Addon in MSFS - but is it the Best? | Leonardo MD-82 "Maddog" Full Review - YouTube

O M G ... Those graphics are horrendous! Some parts that are in view all the time aren't even 3D but completely flat (and very badly colored) low res pictures...? Am I missing something? Never mind how good the systems are: those graphics are awful FSX/P3D ports imho. I can't believe they released this for MSFS. I would never ever buy this and certainly not for that price. If I hadn't known I would have thought this was an old P3D video. My goodness.

Yes, I know not everyone cares too much about graphics but I do and this has to be one of the worst looking planes in MSFS yet.

Yes, price is too high and only "aficionados" will purchase it, unfortunately.
Knowing that the systems coding is already done and mature since the P3D version, folks like us are paying full price for a ported product from previous FS versions and that is a bit harsh, particularly when some new MSFS features are not exploited (interactive checklists, drone's views presets, cockpit high quality texturing, surround sounds and so on).
At least one would have expected a discount for this new version when owning previous ones.
But despite that, I don't regret my purchase because this bird is a joy to fly.
I just hope Leonardo will enhance his product soon with a bit more love on the visuals and sounds in order to enjoy the MD-82 as it deserves in MSFS environment.

31 minutes ago, tup61 said:

O M G ... Those graphics are horrendous! Some parts that are in view all the time aren't even 3D but completely flat (and very badly colored) low res pictures...? Am I missing something? Never mind how good the systems are: those graphics are awful FSX/P3D ports imho. I can't believe they released this for MSFS. I would never ever buy this and certainly not for that price. If I hadn't known I would have thought this was an old P3D video. My goodness.

Yes, I know not everyone cares too much about graphics but I do and this has to be one of the worst looking planes in MSFS yet.

Not sure what video you were watching? Or at what resolution...? Keep in mind it's only an HD video from Into the Blue.

Believe me, it looks nothing like P3D in MSFS. There are spots which are badly textured and probably ported, but they are hardly noticed from the VC unless you look for them. Anything important is looking great. It's by far the best aircraft released for MSFS yet, and it's looking great in the VC , though not 100% up to what MSFS is capable of.

I'd be returning back to P3D if planes were looking like this...

Edited May 2, 20224 yr by Fiorentoni

1 minute ago, Fiorentoni said:

Believe me, it looks nothing like P3D in MSFS...

I own both and for the most part it looks like a direct port from P3D. They might've touched up a few spots and increased some textures but I think potential customers spending $79 on this need to know that they haven't put in the same effort compared to PMDG, for example. Don't get me started on the sounds - atrocious and the same ones they've been using for a decade+.

Flight controls are actually like in real life, some Maddog pilot called the MD-82 "a flying truck" from how sluggish is is (no electronics, old school ropes and stuff to control the surfaces). I actually like this compared to the twitchy CRJ.

Just now, Chapstick said:

I own both and for the most part it looks like a direct port from P3D. They might've touched up a few spots and increased some textures but I think potential customers spending $79 on this need to know that they haven't put in the same effort compared to PMDG, for example. Don't get me started on the sounds - atrocious and the same ones they've been using for a decade+.

I own both, too. So what now? What's your resolution? Mine is 2k and "texture resolution" to ultra.

I'm not saying you cannot recognize that it's ported from P3d, but it LOOKS much better and fits very well into MSFS (apart from some bad spots). But maybe that's just me.

1 minute ago, Fiorentoni said:

Not sure what video you were watching? Or at what resolution...? Keep in mind it's only an HD video from Into the Blue.

I know but even then: you can clearly see parts that are flat while they should be 3D. That's cheap and bad imho. And... baked in reflections...???!!! in MSFS...???!!! are you kidding me???!!! Every MSFS plane has 'simulated materials' but this one has low res textured stuff with no material simulated AT ALL. That's an absolute no go in my book. Sorry for going hyperbole but this plane doesn't come even CLOSE to the default planes when it comes to graphics. Very bad. But hey, that's just my opinion.

Completely flat part: come on... seriously?

Baked in reflection on a part you will 'lay your hands on' all the time...? Again, seriously??? NO DEFAULT plane has this! The most expensive addon for MSFS (afaik) shouldn't have this either.

Again, I am sure the system and study level people will or may like this plane but everyone who cares just a little bit about graphics should think twice before buying this one. I'd almost call this a rip off. 😉

I think the bird looks good, not amazing textures but good enough for me at 4K.  I thinki where the product has failed is sounds, the sounds are really half baked, inside and out needs a massive effort. For 90usd this should have been better. Will now have to wait for FTsim to come up w a sound pack and spend another 5-10 on that. this will end up being 100usd addon. 

Just now, tup61 said:

I know but even then: you can clearly see parts that are flat while they should be 3D. That's cheap and bad imho. And... baked in reflections...???!!! in MSFS...???!!! are you kidding me???!!! Every MSFS plane has 'simulated materials' but this one has low res textured stuff with no material simulated AT ALL. That's an absolute no go in my book. Sorry for going hyperbole but this plane doesn't come even CLOSE to the default planes when it comes to graphics. Very bad. But hey, that's just my opinion.

Completely flat part: come on... seriously?

Baked in reflection on a part you will 'lay your hands on' all the time...? Again, seriously??? NO DEFAULT plane has this! The most expensive addon for MSFS (afaik) shouldn't have this either.

 

Again, I am sure the system and study level people will or may like this plane but everyone who cares just a little bit about graphics should think twice before buying this one. I'd almost call this a rip off. 😉

I see what you mean, and sure you can find that stuff when you are looking for it, but again, the overall impression is really good. I like to look around in the VC just as much as in the FBW. Just believe me, I would warn you if it was any bad. Maybe one cannot understand when he does not see it in MSFS.
I would recommend listening to the ones who bought it, the majority seems happy with the visuals and positively suprised (me included, I thought it was worse from the preview videos; it's actually much better)
 

Thanks everyone for the advice on FMS override and not having it dive when I’m trying to climb after takeoff.  I think I may have been jumping ahead a few steps in the takeoff procedure and got bit so I’ll try again using the great info here.

Thanks all!