How good is the Fly The Maddog X MD-80 for P3Dv5?

[Ilari Kousa]

It's good, although not as polished/easy-to-use as some addons with newer origins (PMDG, FSL, MJC...) but the system simulation is extensive (CBs, failures...) and the FM is good too. The looks aren't on par with the competition but the "meat" is there.

[Guest Kalnon]

I'm looking for a new study level (or close to it) plane to waste my money on and I was looking at either getting the Fly The Maddog X MD-80 or the Aerosoft CRJ Professional this time.  For the Maddog X I was just wondering how good of an airplane it is and if it's really worth the $100 price tag?  For example, how's the VC look, does it have high quality textures, are most of the plane's systems modeled and how is the flight model?  I do notice it seems to have a few different variants which is nice (though have to pay extra).  I'm interested in feedback from anyone who's tried it.  I'm also interested in feedback on the CRJ Professional as well if anyone has any.  Thanks.

[Michael Moe]

Hi , this MaddogX is one of the finest in P3Dv5 overall but also an old "dog" as you will get your hands full without FS2CREW (which i doesnt use btw even if its a good addition though).

They say they want you to challenge them to the FCOMS and it does feel as a whole plane. There is features even better than some Airliners from real world like the EFB and ACARS with CPDLC integration.

Michael Moe

[Patco Lch]

Great plane but be willing to hit the books and study a bit. If not don't bother because Leonardo made an extremely true to life model and it will bite you pretty quick if you don't take time to study. I guess that's why it's called Mad Dog. There are many excellent training videos on utube.

[Guest Kalnon]

19 minutes ago, Patco Lch said:

Great plane but be willing to hit the books and study a bit. If not don't bother because Leonardo made an extremely true to life model and it will bite you pretty quick if you don't take time to study. I guess that's why it's called Mad Dog. There are many excellent training videos on utube.

Thanks for the input, I am interested in studying it if it is study level.  Sometimes I just want to fly something less complicated like GA planes but right now I'm interested in a nice study level plane.  I have some familiarity with how the MD-80 planes works as I've flown in and have many hours in the default MD-82 that comes with X-Plane 11 and I've really enjoyed flying it for what it is.  Of course, that one is not study level but it's still fairly complex for a default flight simulator airplane.

[Bob Scott]

The Maddog is definitely right up there on the top shelf when it comes to high-fidelity add-ons.  It's some good old-fashioned flyin' iron...sort of in that halfway position between steam-driven round dials and all-glass.

Have heard nary a negative word about it...can't say the same for the CRJ, unfortunately.

[Guest Kalnon]

2 hours ago, Bob Scott said:

The Maddog is definitely right up there on the top shelf when it comes to high-fidelity add-ons.  It's some good old-fashioned flyin' iron...sort of in that halfway position between steam-driven round dials and all-glass.

Have heard nary a negative word about it...can't say the same for the CRJ, unfortunately.

Thank you for your input, I appreciate it.  Top shelf sounds good to me.  I do notice that generally when it comes to the prices of 3rd party aircraft for any simulator you usually get what you pay for, so the higher the price usually means a higher quality add-on.  I've also now had the chance to dig up some reviews of the plane and it does seem like a quality, top of the line type of add-on.  I enjoy flying both the good old-fashioned flyin' iron type of planes and the modern glass cockpit kind.  I really do like the look of the cockpit of the X-Plane 11 MD-82 as well as images of the Maddog X and your definitely right, it is both a good mix of modern and classic jet aircraft combined.  Like the look of those very unique looking N1 and N2 gauges for example is so cool.  I think that and it's flight characteristics make it a unique and interesting aircraft.  Interesting what you say about the Aerosoft CRJ.  The only thing bad I've heard about it so far is that it can be hard on frame rates though I do admit I need to look at some more reviews on the web to learn more about the positives and negatives of that plane.  I think I'll end up getting the Maddog this time around, maybe the CRJ next time.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Kalnon

[TopGun33]

Hi ! I'm a heavy user of the Leonardo Maddog.

System-wise, it is one of the most advanced if not the most advanced add-on available for P3D. I love the 3D models, it runs very fine. I find the VC very detailed, for example the FMC CRT displays will have a slight curve, just like real CRTs.

It is also fully integrated with GSX and has an optionnal ACARS system that uses hoppieNL and is compatible with VATSIM and Activesky.

In addition to the system depth that you could also find with the PMDG and FSLabs, the Leonardo Maddog adds a (light) maintenance and persistance module.

That means the more you fly your aircraft, the more you will experience aging of the airframe and systems, with chances of failures as you go. You can choose a brand new airframe or set your airframe and engines to 70.000 hours and cycles if you'd like, the aircraft will behave as such. As you grind flight after flight, if you don't perform the mandatory checks (rest assured, it's a just a click in the load manager) you may well experience failures related to this.

The best is that you can actually treat the failures by working the related checklists, the aircraft will behave accordingly.

Be reassured though, this is optional and you can deactivate failures if you don't want the hassle.

Another example is brakes heating that is very well simulated. Basically, the MD-80 has a not so efficient braking system. So that means if you land too fast and don't use thrust reversers, you are in for a runway excursion that's for sure. Same thing if you taxi like a dumbass, you can overheat your brakes and in case of an RTO things may not end well.

I personnally put my hands on a set of real world AOM and related documentation from a now defunct airline, it really has everything, and I fly the bird by this airline's book. It's been pure joy.

To me it is one of the greatest add-on ever made for P3D, and I love it.

On my Youtube channel there are a few videos I shot with the Leonardo Maddog, that may help you decide. (sorry for the savage advertising here)

I hope this helps.

[Guest Kalnon]

1 hour ago, TopGun33 said:

Hi ! I'm a heavy user of the Leonardo Maddog.

System-wise, it is one of the most advanced if not the most advanced add-on available for P3D. I love the 3D models, it runs very fine. I find the VC very detailed, for example the FMC CRT displays will have a slight curve, just like real CRTs.

It is also fully integrated with GSX and has an optionnal ACARS system that uses hoppieNL and is compatible with VATSIM and Activesky.

In addition to the system depth that you could also find with the PMDG and FSLabs, the Leonardo Maddog adds a (light) maintenance and persistance module.

That means the more you fly your aircraft, the more you will experience aging of the airframe and systems, with chances of failures as you go. You can choose a brand new airframe or set your airframe and engines to 70.000 hours and cycles if you'd like, the aircraft will behave as such. As you grind flight after flight, if you don't perform the mandatory checks (rest assured, it's a just a click in the load manager) you may well experience failures related to this.

The best is that you can actually treat the failures by working the related checklists, the aircraft will behave accordingly.

Be reassured though, this is optional and you can deactivate failures if you don't want the hassle.

Another example is brakes heating that is very well simulated. Basically, the MD-80 has a not so efficient braking system. So that means if you land too fast and don't use thrust reversers, you are in for a runway excursion that's for sure. Same thing if you taxi like a dumbass, you can overheat your brakes and in case of an RTO things may not end well.

I personnally put my hands on a set of real world AOM and related documentation from a now defunct airline, it really has everything, and I fly the bird by this airline's book. It's been pure joy.

To me it is one of the greatest add-on ever made for P3D, and I love it.

On my Youtube channel there are a few videos I shot with the Leonardo Maddog, that may help you decide. (sorry for the savage advertising here)

I hope this helps.

Thank you so much for your input and I appreciate the video link.  I am watching it as I write this.  From your video, what I've seen so far, I can definitely see the good modeling and VC details your talking about.  The VC looks fantastic for a P3D airplane from what I can tell.  I also love all of those other features of the aircraft you've mentioned as well.  All of that stuff really interests me.  For me, what makes a good study level airplane is one that offers the kinds of details and other extras like the persistence file, aging, the brakes and ACARS, all really add a lot to the immersion factor.  A good one should also have a well detailed, well modeled and good-looking VC, for me, this is another great feature that adds so much more to the immersion.  For me, quality study level planes are all about the immersion factor and how true to life it can be.  I want to fly it like the big boys do 😀

[level7]

14 hours ago, Kalnon said:

For example, how's the VC look, does it have high quality textures

I have it. "high quality textures" is not how I would describe the VC. The VC text is also not legible using MSAA.

You can tell this is true because of the disappointment in the VC textures in MSFS version.

[Guest Kalnon]

2 hours ago, level7 said:

I have it. "high quality textures" is not how I would describe the VC. The VC text is also not legible using MSAA.

You can tell this is true because of the disappointment in the VC textures in MSFS version.

Interesting point of view.  The textures look good to me at least from what I've seen on videos of it, like in the one above.  I will admit though sometimes when looking at a plane from only in screenshots and videos it can be a bit hard to judge compared to loading it up in the sim and seeing it yourself, especially if they are lower resolution images your looking at.  There've been times I've been surprised one way or the other when I load a plane up for the first time when it comes to how the VC looks.  I did hear about the texture issues with the MSFS version but I don't use MSFS very often.

BTW it's likely that the reason you have a hard time reading the VC text labels is because you use MSAA.  MSAA adds a little bit of fuzzy-ness look to everything compared to SSAA.  If you use SSAA the whole VC looks much better, the gauges and text labels look more crisp and are easier to read and even the yokes looks better, everything does.  I highly recommend using SSAA if possible.  And never use FXAA because it does the same thing MSAA does, only worse.  Also, adding more Tessellation I think makes the VC textures look better as well.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Kalnon

[Skywolf]

Look at my profile. There are links to P3D settings thread which has MaddogX - the VC shot has perfectly clear text (Shots were taken during P3D 5.0 days).  This is one of the finest addons for P3D.  It is complex by the book

Edited February 16, 2023 by Skywolf

[level7]

2 hours ago, Kalnon said:

Interesting point of view.  The textures look good to me at least from what I've seen on videos of it, like in the one above.  I will admit though sometimes when looking at a plane from only in screenshots and videos it can be a bit hard to judge compared to loading it up in the sim and seeing it yourself, especially if they are lower resolution images your looking at.  There've been times I've been surprised one way or the other when I load a plane up for the first time when it comes to how the VC looks.  I did hear about the texture issues with the MSFS version but I don't use MSFS very often.

BTW it's likely that the reason you have a hard time reading the VC text labels is because you use MSAA.  MSAA adds a little bit of fuzzy-ness look to everything compared to SSAA.  If you use SSAA the whole VC looks much better, the gauges and text labels look more crisp and are easier to read and even the yokes looks better, everything does.  I highly recommend using SSAA if possible.  And never use FXAA because it does the same thing MSAA does, only worse.  Also, adding more Tessellation I think makes the VC textures look better as well.

I think in screenshots it looks ok but when moving around in the cockpit it becomes a bit more obvious. I think the FSL and PMDG have better VC texturing.

I prefer to use MSAA if I can get away with it because it is easier on frames but agree need to use SSAA when flying the plane.

The external application configuration manager is a bit old school but does get the job done.

No arguments from me on the overall quality of hte plane.

[787flyer]

On 2/16/2023 at 7:51 AM, TopGun33 said:

I personnally put my hands on a set of real world AOM and related documentation from a now defunct airline, it really has everything, and I fly the bird by this airline's book. It's been pure joy.

Hi TopGun33,

 

A quick question.. you mention the AOM. What guides/manual actually come with the MaddogX download?

I went to their site and its actually down right now for some updates and Simmarket does not explicitly list what comes in the package.

Could you or anyone else who is a Maddog Driver explain what reference material is included in the actual download?

thx.

[Urmel81]

I'm considering since years to purchase it. But there are not so many flights in real life for it.

Does anyone know if there is an European Air Charter Repaint for the Maddog available. Not sure how long this airline will fly the Maddog, but for the moment it is the only chance for European flights.

 

Regards Urmel