Considering getting something to haul vast amounts of rubber dog****, at least until the 777f comes out. Excluding price wondering how the MD11 & A300F compare?

Looking at my VA the 300 seems to be more used.

Interested mostly in performance & complexity, but any opinion is useful.

G

I have both. Did a video where I compared MD11 performance with the Fenix, 777 and A300. Not considering the price, I think the MD11 could be worth getting, if only for its quirkiness. In that regards it’s similar to the A300, both takes some getting used to and are not intuitive from the get go. 

I haven’t flown the A300 in a while now (too many aircraft not enough time), and I doubt I’ll fly it much in the future now that I’ve got the MD11. I wouldn’t say it’s better, but possibly more interesting/unique. Also it’s early days and I presume it’ll get updates in the near future.

Ah yes, performance. Have a look at my video from 12:45. The MD11 is 9-10 fps lower than Fenix/777 and 8-9 fps higher than the A300.

Edited July 7, 20241 yr by Cpt_Piett

@Cpt_Piett just watched the whole video, looks good, although the comments in general seem to suggest otherwise.

If the 300 has lower frames than that, which is lower than the Fenix then that would rule out that one.

G

A300F is pretty much polished since it was release quite a while ago. Both MD-11 and A300F are missing EGPWS aka terrain radar. A300 has default WX radar while MD-11 doesn't not. I think range wise MD-11 beat sock off A300F. In any case MD-11 is still early access product so I would not recommend getting unless you ok with ongoing beta test ! 

The MD11 flies beautifully.  I purchased the 777 and MD11 the same week and I've not been about to stop flying it.

To me a deal breaker with the A300 is the fact that they use the default sim database. Its very frustrating when you're using it and you see that there are procedures missing from the database.

1 hour ago, xender said:

To me a deal breaker with the A300 is the fact that they use the default sim database. Its very frustrating when you're using it and you see that there are procedures missing from the database.

Can't MSFS 2020 be used with updated Navigraph data?

1 hour ago, xender said:

To me a deal breaker with the A300 is the fact that they use the default sim database. Its very frustrating when you're using it and you see that there are procedures missing from the database.

That's actually one of the main reasons I haven't bought it yet. Also, while textures look very nice, as far as I can see, there are problems with the model I just can't ignore. The iconic nose down pitch is just not there due to presumably wrong gear modeling. Then the iconic cockpit windows are way oversized, which is a no go for me. It just looks off.

That may sound harsh, but I prefer to stay with the add-on, that convinces me visually and systems wise and that is the Fenix A320.

I've heard there may be a substantial update in the works for the ini A300. I will keep a close eye on that, as I would love to fly the type.

5 hours ago, rmeier said:

Can't MSFS 2020 be used with updated Navigraph data?

It can (And I do it) but for some reason it isnt as complete.

8 hours ago, NovemberUniform said:

That's actually one of the main reasons I haven't bought it yet. Also, while textures look very nice, as far as I can see, there are problems with the model I just can't ignore. The iconic nose down pitch is just not there due to presumably wrong gear modeling. Then the iconic cockpit windows are way oversized, which is a no go for me. It just looks off.

That may sound harsh, but I prefer to stay with the add-on, that convinces me visually and systems wise and that is the Fenix A320.

I've heard there may be a substantial update in the works for the ini A300. I will keep a close eye on that, as I would love to fly the type.

Yes, there is a big update in the work from inibuilds on there A300 what is in Tests at the moment, watching this on there forum.

I'm excited to see what's to come...

cheers 😉

9 hours ago, rmeier said:

Can't MSFS 2020 be used with updated Navigraph data?

Yes, but that's not the probem: The problem is that the MSFS navdata format (updated by Navigraph or not) is faulty, it will miss entire approaches when the scenery has different runway numbers than the navigraph data. This does not happen with custom navdata formats (-> PMDG, Fenix, CRJ)

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

Yes, but that's not the probem: The problem is that the MSFS navdata format (updated by Navigraph or not) is faulty, it will miss entire approaches when the scenery has different runway numbers than the navigraph data. This does not happen with custom navdata formats (-> PMDG, Fenix, CRJ)

In FSX you could just download a utility that updated all the runways in the sim to match the real world and therefore nav data. Ahh encryption, gotta love progress haven't ya? 🤔

8 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Yes, but that's not the probem: The problem is that the MSFS navdata format (updated by Navigraph or not) is faulty, it will miss entire approaches when the scenery has different runway numbers than the navigraph data. This does not happen with custom navdata formats (-> PMDG, Fenix, CRJ)

Just so I understand, is that a problem for iniBuilds to resolve or an issue with Asobo's handling of Navigraph data updates? (Or possibly an issue with 3rd party scenery?)

For me personally, I have not yet observed the issue you describe...and the A300 is still my most flown aircraft in MSFS (and yes, i have purchased the PMDG 777...still on the fence with the TDFi MD11...awaiting more info, and possibly a first patch for the reported pitch issues).

18 minutes ago, rmeier said:

Just so I understand, is that a problem for iniBuilds to resolve or an issue with Asobo's handling of Navigraph data updates? (Or possibly an issue with 3rd party scenery?)

For me personally, I have not yet observed the issue you describe...and the A300 is still my most flown aircraft in MSFS (and yes, i have purchased the PMDG 777...still on the fence with the TDFi MD11...awaiting more info, and possibly a first patch for the reported pitch issues).

To me it looks like a problem for Asobo to resolve. This issue wont exist if Navigraph could update 1:1 the msfs database.

If you want to see the problem happen, just try to load the sids for MDPP. There are none on the inibuilds A300, a thing that I discovered when I was preparing to land...

13 hours ago, rmeier said:

Just so I understand, is that a problem for iniBuilds to resolve or an issue with Asobo's handling of Navigraph data updates? (Or possibly an issue with 3rd party scenery?)

For me personally, I have not yet observed the issue you describe...and the A300 is still my most flown aircraft in MSFS (and yes, i have purchased the PMDG 777...still on the fence with the TDFi MD11...awaiting more info, and possibly a first patch for the reported pitch issues).

Well actually all three of them, if you will:

1) Asobo has to fix the Navdata format, so it will overwrite the runways as depicted by the scenery

2) The 3rd party devs need to update their runways, so they match the current Navigraph (or MSFS AIRAC data)

3) iniBuilds needs to stop being lazy and finally create a custom navdata format for their FMS