I got the FTsim sounds working for all the variants following G550flyer's instructions above. Try copying these and see if they work for you. It looks like you have something different in the size and date lines. 

    {
      "path": "SimObjects/Airplanes/MaddogX88/sound/MD80_Sp.PC.pck",
      "size": 140886287,
      "date": 133027422380000000
    },

    {
      "path": "SimObjects/Airplanes/MaddogX83/sound/MD80_Sp.PC.pck",
      "size": 140886287,
      "date": 133027422380000000
    },

    {
      "path": "SimObjects/Airplanes/MaddogX/sound/MD80_Sp.PC.pck",
      "size": 140886287,
      "date": 133027422380000000
    },

3 hours ago, Wise87 said:

There talking about it on the FlytheMaddogX - Pilots Facebook page. Looks like it might be a Simmarket issue. The developer sent the user a the Fly_The_Maddog_X_MSFS2020_edition_1.2b152.exe directly and it didn't alert on them. I know SimMarket offers 4 servers when users download. I wonder if it's one of their servers. 

I don’t think that is the case. Defender has been throwing a ton of false positives today, FTMD and the SWS RV-14 update are two that come to mind, but there are others I could name in the past 24 hours.  I suspect MS will release new defs soon that fix a lot of false positive issues.

-B

Does anyone else feel the Maddog is not very optimized for MSFS2020? Granted I get good performance with Frame Generation but I can feel the plane could be better. 

Tonight I did two flights between KDFW and KATL. The first flight was in the MD-88. During the startup, taxi and take-off my FPS were in the 80-105 range. Average was around 93. I repeated the same flight in the PMDG 737-800 and my FPS were in the 105-120 range, average 110+. My Monitor is 120hz so I set it to cap at 120. 

Besides the lower performance (interior & exterior)  the Maddog flew great. I added the FTsim sounds thanks to atc0616 suggestions and the plane sounds great. 

Edited March 24, 20233 yr by Wise87

14 hours ago, micstatic said:

what am I doing wrong?

you can simply use the MSFSLayoutGenerator https://github.com/HughesMDflyer4/MSFSLayoutGenerator

put a copy in the directory where your layout.json is and just drag and drop the

layout.json over the .exe and it gets rebuild.

For me, it works every time without a problem.

Im using the 8K/16K cockpit mod for the 82 but I guess it doesnt work with the 83 because of different overhead panel? Hopefully the creator will do the 83 version also. 

Any idea if you can install an 82 livery for the 83? I understood the basic hull is the same in both planes.

15 hours ago, atc0616 said:

I got the FTsim sounds working for all the variants following G550flyer's instructions above. Try copying these and see if they work for you. It looks like you have something different in the size and date lines. 

    {
      "path": "SimObjects/Airplanes/MaddogX88/sound/MD80_Sp.PC.pck",
      "size": 140886287,
      "date": 133027422380000000
    },

    {
      "path": "SimObjects/Airplanes/MaddogX83/sound/MD80_Sp.PC.pck",
      "size": 140886287,
      "date": 133027422380000000
    },

    {
      "path": "SimObjects/Airplanes/MaddogX/sound/MD80_Sp.PC.pck",
      "size": 140886287,
      "date": 133027422380000000
    },

thanks that did the trick

12 hours ago, Wise87 said:

Does anyone else feel the Maddog is not very optimized for MSFS2020?

Yes performance could be better. One thing I did to improve performance in the Maddog is to remove the smoke.fx files in lsh-maddog-fx / Visual Effects / lsh / maddogx-fx.

When I advance the throttles fps will drop by an average of 20 to 25 with the smoke effect active, without it the fps drops by an average of 10. The same goes for the ini builds An225, performance in the exterior in that aircraft is very bad for me with smoke effects active.

I hope they further optimize the aircraft for better performance.

It’s odd that in a sim with such grand visuals a smoke effect could be a major performance issue.

Hard pass for me I'm already dissapointed that Leonardo has no intentions to fix the bad textures of MD-82 or fix their ported 3D model to perform better in MSFS environment or fix the sounds of a 75 euro product. Spending another 25 euros no thanks! With this pricing practice it's a rip off and I don't care how good the systems modeling is. It's 95 euros with the expansion for a prodcut that doesn't look and sound good with awful textures.

Edited March 24, 20233 yr by the_simpilot

Just now, the_simpilot said:

(...) I'm already dissapointed that Leonardo has no intentions to fix the bad textures of MD-82 or fix their ported 3D model (...)

Has LSH announced that textures / modeling is not on the roadmap for the product line? That seems surprising because they're a one-aircraft company that spends all its dev time on improving the MD-82/83/88.

48 minutes ago, WestAir said:

Has LSH announced that textures / modeling is not on the roadmap for the product line? That seems surprising because they're a one-aircraft company that spends all its dev time on improving the MD-82/83/88.

As far as I know they have not announced a roadmap at all. I'd be happy to take a look but there's no website or any information about their future plans about the aircraft. All they have is the forum and there's no roadmap post there for the maddog. If anyone knows the link to their roadmap post please share

Edited March 24, 20233 yr by the_simpilot

Leonardo generally is more of a work behind the scenes privately, and make an announcement shortly before the release kind of dev. He doesn't give regularly scheduled updates like the other major devs do. Essentially every release is a bit of surprise sort of thing. That being said, at least from my experience with them in p3d, they are always working on improvements and new features so it's not like they sit on their hands for long extended periods. In terms of textures and sounds, I don't think they have really addressed it. Personally, I find the textures adequate enough so I don't care one way or the other. Must be blind. Sounds, I get, and would like to see an improvement but the systems win it over for me.

I wish they would improve some of the visuals.  But flying the thing is a joy.  Nothing changes that. 

1 hour ago, Kevin_28 said:

I find the textures adequate

Exactly. Adequate but not befitting an ultra-premium priced add-on.

Just now, odourboy said:

Exactly. Adequate but not befitting an ultra-premium priced add-on.

Maybe it's because I purchased this plane for p3d such that it doesn't bother me. Honestly even with all the 3rd party enhanced cockpit textures, though I can see the difference, its not something I really notice in flight. I'm usually looking more outside than in I suppose.