1 hour ago, ATRguy said:

I’m sure it was exactly as dramatic as you’re making it sound 🙄

As dramatic 80 million level D  sim LOL

3 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

Now here where I have huge problem! If TFDi was freeware product than I agree developers get to decide  how their work gotta fit. Then I understand their aspirations and visions and  shared with me for free, and so I take it  as is. However, commercial product - customers do matter! They don't give me a favor by selling something and than tell me shut up we decide what is good for you. This is straight red flag in my book. If I was aware of that kind attitude I would never invested a penny. So here I'm regretting investing in it 😞  Hope it give someone piece of mind!

So dramatic. I think they would react very differently to criticisms of pitch sensitivity and external model if they were the type who didn't listen to their costumers.

At the moment, there are more important things to be resolved first before TFDi can work on implementing 'gimmicks' and other feature requests to please half a dozen users. I can only guarantee you MSFS will not generate bad weather strong enough to need to avoid, so the lack of WX radar won't kill you.

If the missing WX radar is a dealbreaker for you, I think it's best to ask for a refund.

Edited July 10, 20241 yr by edu2703

4 minutes ago, edu2703 said:

So dramatic. I think they would react very differently to criticisms of pitch sensitivity and external model if they were the type who didn't listen to their costumers.

At the moment, there are more important things to be resolved first before TFDi can work on implementing 'gimmicks' and other feature requests to please half a dozen users. I can only guarantee you MSFS will not generate bad weather strong enough to need to avoid, so the lack of WX radar won't kill you.

If the missing WX radar is a dealbreaker for you, I think it's best to ask for a refund.

WX radar is not focus here per se, but rather  the response. Instead "yes we will think about it later but right now we are focusing on more important stuff" The whole attitude is a big turn off

2 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

WX radar is not focus here per se, but rather  the response. Instead "yes we will think about it later but right now we are focusing on more important stuff" The whole attitude is a big turn off

Not a big Fenix Fan either I gather.  That has been the position Fenix concerning the use of WX RADAR in the a320 and remains so until Fenix chooses to address, no matter how loud the peanut gallery gets.

WFM,

-B

7 minutes ago, btacon said:

Not a big Fenix Fan either I gather.  That has been the position Fenix concerning the use of WX RADAR in the a320 and remains so until Fenix chooses to address, no matter how loud the peanut gallery gets.

WFM,

-B

A fallacy of hasty generalization! LOL In contrast, Fenix explicitly stated that technologically it very hard for the to implement due to nature of their design!

33 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

WX radar is not focus here per se, but rather  the response. Instead "yes we will think about it later but right now we are focusing on more important stuff" The whole attitude is a big turn off

Seeing now, your question on Discord was answered by a YouTuber and not by a dev or person affiliated with TFDi. So essentially you received an unofficial answer about the WX radar implementation. I also did a search and didn't find messages from the devs about weather radar.

Not long ago, there was a little confusion on discord precisely because someone not affiliated with TFDi answered a question about a bug that someone reported, with him saying it's not a priority, it won't be fixed soon. One of the devs quickly responded by saying he's actually fixing the reported bug as we speak.

It appears there is a problem with some individuals on discord who are not affiliated with TFDi talking about the aircraft development as if they were devs. Although one or two of them actually have some knowledge of this because they are CE buyers, they don't speak or at least shouldn't speak for the devs, as mistakes like this can happen. Devs will always have the final say on things that will or won't be implemented and obviously they can go back on decisions like PMDG did.

I believe you should open a ticket or make a feature request on GitHub, if someone hasn't already done so. At least it could receive some kind of official response on the matter.

 

4 minutes ago, edu2703 said:

Seeing now, your question on Discord was answered by a YouTuber and not by a dev or person affiliated with TFDi. So essentially you received an unofficial answer about the WX radar implementation. I also did a search and didn't find messages from the devs about weather radar.

Not long ago, there was a little confusion on discord precisely because someone not affiliated with TFDi answered a question about a bug that someone reported, with him saying it's not a priority, it won't be fixed soon. One of the devs quickly responded by saying he's actually fixing the reported bug as we speak.

It appears there is a problem with some individuals on discord who are not affiliated with TFDi talking about the aircraft development as if they were devs. Although one or two of them actually have some knowledge of this because they are CE buyers, they don't speak or at least shouldn't speak for the devs, as mistakes like this can happen. Devs will always have the final say on things that will or won't be implemented and obviously they can go back on decisions like PMDG did.

I believe you should open a ticket or make a feature request on GitHub, if someone hasn't already done so. At least it could receive some kind of official response on the matter.

 

I would be happy if that is the case. I still don’t get why affiliated person act as developer?

They're not wrong. Weather radar as implemented in the sim is useless. It doesn't tell me what I need it to tell me in order to react appropriately to the weather that's happening in front of the plane. It's the sim equivalent of a fake hood scoop on a Honda, and I've never really been into "looks pretty, doesn't work."

When/if it's possible to make a weather radar that actually behaves like a weather radar, I'll be right there with the people who are mad that devs aren't including it but at this point? I'd just as soon them work on something that could actually enhance the flight rather than pretty but almost entirely useless light smears on a screen.

 

I don't usually see posts from @sd_flyer as dramatic . Its unfortunate that someone answered him as if they had authority to answer though. That's how misinformation spreads. The devs i hope will take more control of the narrative on their discord going forward.

On the other hand i must kind of agree with the counter argument that the currently implemented weather radar kinda sucks (Missing tilt and other features) at the moment and on top of that one can fly through anything and come out on the other side without issue. So i would probably give the devs a pass on this one if for them its importance is lower than the other immediate fires they have to put out. Hopefully there is some movement on the weather radar and weather severity issues later in the year so then TDFI can then get to the point where it would be a detriment not to include it.

7 minutes ago, eslader said:

They're not wrong. Weather radar as implemented in the sim is useless. It doesn't tell me what I need it to tell me in order to react appropriately to the weather that's happening in front of the plane. It's the sim equivalent of a fake hood scoop on a Honda, and I've never really been into "looks pretty, doesn't work."

When/if it's possible to make a weather radar that actually behaves like a weather radar, I'll be right there with the people who are mad that devs aren't including it but at this point? I'd just as soon them work on something that could actually enhance the flight rather than pretty but almost entirely useless light smears on a screen.

 

Except it isn't useless, It's certainly not a complex weather radar by any means but it's a conical weather radar that appropriately reflects water droplets of varying severity. It supports horizontal and vertical scan modes (set the by the developer). The annoying issue it has is it lacks tilt, this is slightly circumvented by it scanning in a cone shape. Though not perfect by any means and certainly devs could do with a proper read-ahead api similiar to xplane's API grid-layout. It's useful enough to know when approaching severe weather and what's required to avoid it. The problem I've seen is a few devs keep using the top-down mode of the radar, when either the vertical or horizontal scanning mode should be used. This specific issue is what led to A330Driver making that topical video.

Matt at WT did a deep dive on it but it's been hidden atm.

I’d rather have a working terrain radar. Also there’s more pressing issues that are probably looked into coming up to the first update.

On 7/9/2024 at 2:13 PM, Cpt_Piett said:

...Edit... I’d like to hear more from people that have it. But it seems the price and the current issues have perhaps stopped people who are interested in it from buying. 

I've had my heart set on this one since the day I heard about it.  I was going to buy it on day-one but held off to avoid a potential mad dash/server crash situation and to get a read from the community/streamers.  

Nothing that I read or saw kept me from buying it, because for me, I don't feel there are any show stoppers.  Nothing serious enough to wait any longer than I already have.  

I have confidence that the issues will be corrected.  Whether that confidence is misguided or not will play out over time as the updates come.  In the mean time, I'm enjoying it a great deal.  

 

I haven't even bought the aircraft yet (waiting for the financials to look a bit healthier) but the moment I can, I will. I am certainly not put off by the naysayers on this thread that keep raining drama and disillusionment on this very complex but character filled aircraft.   It's not perfect. No one is saying it is. But the issues are not show stopping either and some of the 'issues' on their Discord are user generated or even a function of the character of the real aircraft especially as to landing.  TFDi are making the all important fixes (regarding pitching etc) but even then it won't be perfect.  So what's the gripe?

"Oh well, it's not worth $80USD in its present state and I want a refund". Well, it was never $80 dollars, it was $70. If you were as critical of your purchase decision as you are about your post purchase realisation, you would have seen the comments from CE purchasers, and you certainly wouldn't have spent the extra $10 on buying another derivative. BTW, I doubt PMDG's two derivatives will cost $73.00 plus $10 for the extra one so if you must have two aircraft, then they are only $40 each. Heck CS were selling their default B747 systems Herc for more than that!!!  For those of us who only want one aircraft (the base package if you like) $70USD is not beyond the realms of reasonableness for this level of aircraft. Too expensive for some of us but that's for all the aircraft in this price range, not just the MD-11 and is about the affordability in general of MSFS addon products. But that's another subject.  The MD-11 has a tragic but also interesting technical and development history, is quirky in its character and is not a Boeing or an Airbus, so demand for the product is higher than might otherwise be expected. It crashed the servers just like the PMDG B777 did. (177.32K Http requests in 30 mins).  So, it's not all about which is the most polished model on release. Developers set their prices based on all sorts of things not the least of which would be how much the uniqueness of the MD-11 would be worth in today's MSFS market? I would guess it has successfully attracted a competitive premium.  

PMDG's B737 had a raft of issues that it launched with including a dodgy LNAV depiction and the whole aircraft flipping on its back when landing! The Maddog was also plagued with poor textures, a troublesome EFB and less than stellar post purchase support to name a few.  Fenix also had problems.  The BAE 146 seemed to have a cruisy release but then it didn't have the complexity of computer controlled systems that plague the others.   

The point is that all these aircraft are systems rich and the melding of these systems with MSFS has not been an easy road for some of these developers.  But their attempts at simulating the model as closely as possible are reflected in this level of pricing and the customer has to take some informed risk as to how well they think that will be achieved. After all, that's exactly the risk the CE customers took, right? So expecting a perfect outcome on release and purchasing on that basis and then wanting a refund when it isn't 10/10 is naive at best.    

But there is still water to flow under the bridge. TFDi have acknowledged the issues, but they now need to fix them. I imagine TFDI's entry of a complex aircraft in MSFS would mean the MD-11 is a flagship product for them and I would be surprised if they didn't pull out all the stops to keep this product on track. 

Personally I am way more swayed by the number of users who despite the identified issues have said they love the aircraft even more than B777 and fly it more often. 👍

Cheers

Terry

Edited July 11, 20241 yr by Lord Farringdon

On 7/9/2024 at 11:13 AM, Cpt_Piett said:

I agree with the exterior textures, they’re not good. I do think however that none of the current issues are showstoppers. I’m having a lot more fun with this aircraft than the 777, doing cargo ops in remote, high-altitude areas. Just did another flight in the Peruvian Andes including another RNAV approach. Apparently a fix will be out within the next week or two.

Interestingly, the most outspoken people in this thread seems to be those who don’t have the aircraft. I’d like to hear more from people that have it. But it seems the price and the current issues have perhaps stopped people who are interested in it from buying. 

I have it, I compare it with the Rotate on XP which I also have had since XP11. It's better in a lot of ways, I was just ecstatic until a final approach to KLAX after a long flight when I pushed the approach button and had the thing actually do a 180, my swearing nearly blew the roof off 🙂  UHHHH, ok, it clearly has issues, LOL. 

Even so, I wonder how PMDG feels having given up the aircraft, this really is a worthy successor. I'm always amazed at the completely juvenile behavior of a lot of posters, They seem to never have worked for a living, have NO clue about the cost of living. Complaining about a company that actually wants to charge for its time and labor 🙂 sigh.... 

This plane is TOTALLY worth the price, but it's still green, still has issues. 

25 minutes ago, jfv said:

This plane is TOTALLY worth the price, but it's still green, still has issues. 

Absolutely agree! It comes with a steeper learning curve than other airliners, requires a much more hands-on approach, and is quite a temperamental aircraft. Which is why I like it so much. By now I've done ILS, visual, RNAV, and VOR approaches in various parts of the world, including high-altitude operations in the Andes.

I got it a few days after getting the 777 and it's hard not to compare the two. Is it better? I would say that the 777 is nearly flawless and just works. Sadly the MD-11 has its issues - but like many have mentioned, none of these are showstoppers. I prefer to fly the MD-11, as it is more unique and challenging. I like both though. A lot.