MD11Forever

Eric, with all due respect, it has nothing to do with being "anal about details and authenticity"; rather trying to figure out exactly what was uploaded. The visuals do not match the description. The author could have simply stated something along the lines of what you did, in that he modified (or "modernized") the MD80 model to use a B717-style flightdeck and sounds.

Appreciate the effort, but what exactly is this? As pointed out above, this is not a 717. The model as-shown is a MD80.

Great, except that aside from the Jetstream, the sale only includes boxed/CD versions.

Long time Norton user through FS9, FSX, and P3D. No issues here. The new versions of N360 run very nice with a much smaller system footprint.

No issues here either, smooth as can be with no crashes.

Very nice work, Kyle & TDS. Thank you for continuing to support FS9!

Thank you George and FlyTampa for not abandoning us FS9 users. Every product you guys release is an automatic purchase for me...

Your top link comes back as a 403 error...perhaps it wasn't supposed to be public yet?

Welcome back!

As others have said, this is NOT an official rendering of what the new livery will look like. Personally I'm rather attached to the current livery...and it'd have to be something pretty incredible to change my mind. But I'm not running the airline, so we'll see what they come up with... :lol:

Sounds like a great opportunity. As I work in a different transportation profession (railroad) that has a great deal of casual fans, I've been in his shoes. I can't count how many times I have been approached by a railfan somewhere who proceeds to tell me how I do my job- and if I mention that he is incorrect they want to argue about it. Personally I find it comical, but plenty of my co-workers get po'ed about it and then proceed to pass judgement on all fans as being that way. I still remember the days when I was on the outside looking in, and try to always remember that... With all that said, over the years on my layovers in the Chicago area, I've managed to cross paths with a number of airline pilots who were also on layover- and I've found that a little small talk about the transportation industry in general can often get them to open up. Had one guy I would see regularly up near ORD who was an AA 737 captain, he was a rail buff and therefore we each had information the other was interested in. Thanks for sharing your experience!

Nope, I don't think it is unreasonable at all. What they develop, or what ANY developer decides to produce is entirely up to them. If their research and so on shows that perhaps FS9 isn't their market, more power to them. Point being that there is still a sizable FS9 market for addons, be it aircraft of this caliber or scenery, or what have you. If they are basing their decision not to produce the 787 on the sales of the BAe146, this would be a mistake in my opinion. As has been stated above, the two aircraft are completely different animals and the BAe is more of a niche aircraft that doesn't appeal to many the same as as the 787 does/will. I was planning on buying the 787 upon release, but now I will spend that money elsewhere. Same as a developer (Qualitywings in this case) decides not to support FS9, I choose not to support Qualitywings. Simple as that, and not distorted/incorrect. A matter of opinion or preference, maybe, I'll give you that much.

No problem. They don't want my money, I'm happy to find another developer who does.

Get your money back via Flight1. I would also contact Flight1 and inform them of how you were treated and locked out of support for a product you purchased via their storefront. I would also attempt to find a contact at Airsimmer that doesn't go via the forum and then inform them of your experience. Thanks for sharing this information with the rest of the community so we can make a good choice about where to spend our money.

Improved ATC, proper useage of modern hardware, cloud shadows, better weather. A better AI engine.