22 minutes ago, Pilot2PC said:

Youtube has a lot of compression going on. I think the cockpit is well detailed personally, full of character. Here's a screenshot taken at 4K resolution (click on the following link for the full screen version):

https://ibb.co/rcs6Cjc

My concern with the textures was that I considered the window frame lining to be 'overdone' texture wise. It looks a bit cartoonish. Yet here we have the actual aircraft and that's what it actually looks like !! 

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/nF4hYNQEnRDDFUvP8

Cheers

Terry

 

Edited July 3, 20241 yr by Lord Farringdon

Just did a short test flight.

Really like the ground handling. Feels like a huge, somewhat unwieldy beast, have to plan every move well in advance.
Maybe the braking is a bit too ineffective. It was an empty plane and having to put the pedals almost halfway to the stop to get any action is maybe excessive?
But overall felt good.

Hand flying was also good, but does anyone else feel it's a bit too pitch sensitive? Roll felt appropriately heavy, but a small pitch input would produce a bit too much movement.
Not massively so, just weird that you could "yank" the plane with not a great deal of force. This is with honeycomb bravo, on the same profile I use with the other planes.

I'm a bit annoyed at the lack of in-game checklists. At least chuck them in the EFB like Fenix.
For a plane that doesn't seem to come with a manual in the install, it just irks me. Now I need to scour their site for the manual, deal with PDFs and all that.

A few quirks with the autopilot intercepting tight turns and dealing with a departure that flowed into an arrival (took off and landed in the same place). Not sure if it's quirks of the real thing, bugs or something not-quite with my flight plan. Was minor stuff.

All in all I'm pleased with my purchase. Yeah some weirdness, but not bad for a 1.0.
Looking forward to inevitable fixes and so on.

 

If someone has also used the Rotate MD-11 for XP and could do a quick comparison, that would be appreciated. As a user from both sims, I generally do not purchase the same aircraft type twice, unless there is a significant reason to do so. 

32 minutes ago, Georgleboui said:

Just did a short test flight.

Really like the ground handling. Feels like a huge, somewhat unwieldy beast, have to plan every move well in advance.
Maybe the braking is a bit too ineffective. It was an empty plane and having to put the pedals almost halfway to the stop to get any action is maybe excessive?
But overall felt good.

Hand flying was also good, but does anyone else feel it's a bit too pitch sensitive? Roll felt appropriately heavy, but a small pitch input would produce a bit too much movement.
Not massively so, just weird that you could "yank" the plane with not a great deal of force. This is with honeycomb bravo, on the same profile I use with the other planes.

I'm a bit annoyed at the lack of in-game checklists. At least chuck them in the EFB like Fenix.
For a plane that doesn't seem to come with a manual in the install, it just irks me. Now I need to scour their site for the manual, deal with PDFs and all that.

A few quirks with the autopilot intercepting tight turns and dealing with a departure that flowed into an arrival (took off and landed in the same place). Not sure if it's quirks of the real thing, bugs or something not-quite with my flight plan. Was minor stuff.

All in all I'm pleased with my purchase. Yeah some weirdness, but not bad for a 1.0.
Looking forward to inevitable fixes and so on.

 

might be worth creating md-11 specific profiles for your hardware in msfs and playing with the sensitivity on brakes and pitch?

Edited July 3, 20241 yr by EGLD

1 hour ago, Georgleboui said:

I'm a bit annoyed at the lack of in-game checklists. At least chuck them in the EFB like Fenix.
For a plane that doesn't seem to come with a manual in the install, it just irks me. Now I need to scour their site for the manual, deal with PDFs and all that.

I'm the opposite - I dislike the in-game checklist. In one of the emails from them there should be a link to online user guides. That includes a quick start guide and normal checklist. The quick start guide includes advice for all stages, with screenshots - preflight, before engine start, taxi etc. 

I'll also add that my support ticket from yesterday has already been resolved including refund to my paypal account (I inadvertently bought several copies of the product as the website got stuck). I think this is impressive given that they've probably had several similar requests. 

And the download via the installer was super-quick today. 

Edited July 3, 20241 yr by Cpt_Piett

3 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

Never really got this comparison to what is essentially a game addon.

if you treat it like a game it is a game. I have friend who is retired former 777 captain. He absolute love PMDG 777, this is his escape from reality to the virtual world but he does what he loved so much in real world. You probably would not understand....

 

30 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

if you treat it like a game it is a game. I have friend who is retired former 777 captain. He absolute love PMDG 777, this is his escape from reality to the virtual world but he does what he loved so much in real world. You probably would not understand....

 

It's still a game no matter how you treat it. It's not going to contribute to your real-world hours and can't be used as a replacement for it. It's a weird fallacy to compare the costs of a game addon to what is considered real-world training, they are not at all the same, even if you would like to believe otherwise.

You've said it yourself its an escape from reality, so why should its respective costs ever be compared to reality when they achieve different things.

2 hours ago, Lord Farringdon said:

My concern with the textures was that I considered the window frame lining to be 'overdone' texture wise. It looks a bit cartoonish. Yet here we have the actual aircraft and that's what it actually looks like !! 

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/nF4hYNQEnRDDFUvP8

Cheers

Terry

 

Fully agree, and I had the same initial impression as you. The material used in this spot in the real aircraft is not the most tasteful let's say...

Here's another flightdeck screenshot with a different lighting for those interested:

https://ibb.co/zmp1Q0C

 

I want my games ultra realistic to escape from reality in the most realistic way possible. Therefore one can only hope that in the newest Euro Truck Simulator Spain Iberia Edition the cardan shaft will finally be fully animated and actually spinning.

Otherwise the immersion is destroyed and therefore also the escapism - and my cargo dreams would fully rely on the MD11 only because even after 4 years developers still hesitate bringing more awesome cargo planes 😉

 

 

Edited July 3, 20241 yr by JetCat

8 hours ago, Krakin said:

The iniBuilds A300-600 says hi. You should have done a little research before calling my comment stupid.....

I honestly don't care. Som of these devs are trying to inch their pricing back to when P3D was the big sim in town but I am not here for it.

I already bought the Fenix and the A300. I know where to find really good value.

The ini a300 is $44.25 USD. Still more expensive than the tfdi md-11. You just made another stupid comment. 
 

I’ll level with you and concede that you aren’t wrong in saying that some devs are trying to claw back to P3D pricing. That’s a fair statement. But Tfdi isn’t one of them…:unless you’re really that dense and only choose to buy one variant. 
 

The fenix isn’t that much cheaper either. 
 

I presume you won’t be touching the pmdg 777 or their 737?

2 hours ago, GCBraun said:

If someone has also used the Rotate MD-11 for XP and could do a quick comparison, that would be appreciated. As a user from both sims, I generally do not purchase the same aircraft type twice, unless there is a significant reason to do so. 

This person on Reddit says the TDFi MD-11 is much better than the Rotate:

Quote

Not even close. Night and day. Highly recommend the TFDi.

 

7 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

It's still a game no matter how you treat it. It's not going to contribute to your real-world hours and can't be used as a replacement for it. I

You are so wrong!  Yes there is no replacement for actual flying but sim are valuable assets for training if you aware how to use it. And it's no fallacy to compare actual cost of flight training or aircraft ownership with real world. How do you think people trained before first Level D sim was created? 

Many years ago I used to rent  airplane half cost so I just  could seat on the ground and get familiar with cockpit, polish procedures, run checklists and flows (PC sims at the time were a joke)! Here we are  2024! Now we can get same thing at minimal cost: get familiar, polish procedure, improve scan, recognize landmark and etc right at you own house!

I remember back in days some "steam" pilots really struggled transitioning to the glass. In  the best case they could get desktop sim to play around, that for example companies like Garmin provide those on limited basis. But like in case when first Aspen glass line up there was none of PC trainers available. I had to go to orifical Aspen training to get certified and after that teach pilots how to use it . When I did so we spent couple hours in the air playing around PFD/MFD/GPS setting approaches , flows, shuffle different scenarios which could otherwise could be done at home in comfort of desktop computer! So people had to pay for airplane and for my services to learn something they could have done prior in sim if they could!

Couple years ago I upgrade my old gns430 with ifd440. Again I had to use official ifd440 app to get familiar with the unit. So high fidelity sim product do matter! I wish there was good in MSFS version of Avidyne just to get basic approach set up flow polished, but unfortunately it's not. 

So no whether it's nostalgia, flight training, or just possibility to fly something you can't IRL  sims and fidelity do matter ! Also remember when we were kids we played a lot games, and some of those game become our current occupation - that is how human beings are rigged. 

9 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

That’s such a stupid thing to say. Each variant comes out to 40 bucks if you buy both variants. Can’t say that about ANY study level jet in msfs right now.

Erm, no.

The initial variant costs $70. The other costs an additional $10. Otherwise, where's my freighter only for $40?

When Fenix eventually releases the A319/A321 expansion at £39.99, I won't be calling each one a £19.99 variant as there will only be one price to pay: £39.99.

3 hours ago, Georgleboui said:

Just did a short test flight.

Really like the ground handling. Feels like a huge, somewhat unwieldy beast, have to plan every move well in advance.
Maybe the braking is a bit too ineffective. It was an empty plane and having to put the pedals almost halfway to the stop to get any action is maybe excessive?
But overall felt good.

Hand flying was also good, but does anyone else feel it's a bit too pitch sensitive? Roll felt appropriately heavy, but a small pitch input would produce a bit too much movement.
Not massively so, just weird that you could "yank" the plane with not a great deal of force. This is with honeycomb bravo, on the same profile I use with the other planes.

I'm a bit annoyed at the lack of in-game checklists. At least chuck them in the EFB like Fenix.
For a plane that doesn't seem to come with a manual in the install, it just irks me. Now I need to scour their site for the manual, deal with PDFs and all that.

A few quirks with the autopilot intercepting tight turns and dealing with a departure that flowed into an arrival (took off and landed in the same place). Not sure if it's quirks of the real thing, bugs or something not-quite with my flight plan. Was minor stuff.

All in all I'm pleased with my purchase. Yeah some weirdness, but not bad for a 1.0.
Looking forward to inevitable fixes and so on.

 

Your observations about the pitch sensitivity are accurate. Many of us have worked on creating profiles for the aircraft and adjusting the sensitivity with minimal success. The reality is, the thing is way too sensitive, especially on approach/final. I'm hopeful the team will find a way to adjust this and make it feel like a heavy.

I'm also not a huge fan of the characteristics on the runway after landing. The plane still has this awkward tendency to feel like it wants to roll over on itself which is something I feel like we see with some freeware aircraft. 

23 minutes ago, ahsmatt7 said:

The ini a300 is $44.25 USD. Still more expensive than the tfdi md-11. You just made another stupid comment. 

So you're doubling down and making yourself look foolish in the process. I quoted you as saying the two variants of the MD-11 cost $40 each.

The A300 is $44.25 but it is two variants for that price!!!! There's a passenger AND cargo variant so that works out to $22.13 each!

Congratulations on playing yourself.