I purchased the super 80 from flight1 and installed it and I must say WOW. what a great plane. I have been flying the wilco 737 and the Flight1 ATR but the Super 80 blows em out of the water. What suprises me most is that ALL the systems on the aircraft work (rather complicated the first few flights) and the graphics in the VC are good but the Frame Rate impact is NILL. Why is this? Other addons seem to kill frame rates IE (PIC737,ATR,CAPSIM757 Etc..) ANyway, just wanted to say that this is a great plane. So now my two favorite aircraft are the ESDG Twin Comanche and the F1 Super 80. Kudos to CoolSky & EagleSoft!:-jumpy

good to hearI got a copy at FanCon and it is still sitting here in the case unwraped.Just never felt like installing it - may give it ago now.

Those two airplanes are definitely winners! I'm enjoying both immensely.JimDell XPS 420 Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0 ghz3 gb DDR2 RAM512 mb nvidia 8800GT500 gb SATA driveSoundblaster X-Fi Extreme Music22" Acer widescreen LCD

I was wondering as well when I bought the MD-80. Even bigger was my surprise when I installed the very complex 4-engined CS C-130.Totally smooth and has also very little impact on the frames.On the other hand there are even GA planes which are frame rate hogs....The conseqences for me are, that I will only buy FSX add-ons which have very little impact on the frames, regardless of the complexity of the aircraft. RegardsBernt Capt 767

Because CoolSky actually optimized the coding so it's nto a huge frame hogging mess. They do good work, and Espen is a systems programming genius!

The Flight1 MD80 (FSX Version) and the CS C130 (FSX Version) are "True" FSX models designed for FSX. That is one of the major reasons performance is better, or so I have heard.

I know they are two different kinds of aircraft, but how does the Super80 compare to the ES Twin Comanche? Just in overall, general terms. I hope that's not a strange question...RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

i believe that in general glass cockpits demand way more power to be displayed than analogue gauges do.you can also see that the bigger you make the PFD/ND/EICAS displays the more your fps drop (i.g. PMDG 737 or 744).that is my impression anyways.