787: Get Aerosim, or wait for Qualitywings?

[juanvito 0]

Hey guys, I'm impatient to fly the Dreamliner and I'm looking for suggestions.

 

I'm more of a casual flyer, and I mostly use freeware aircraft (in fact, I'm looking at payware Dreamliners because I haven't liked the freeware ones so far). So, I'd like a plane that behaves well when flying, doesn't require me to learn too many complicated systems (I don't mind them if they are optional), and is easy on frame rates. Also, an easy to use paintkit would be a welcome bonus.

 

Any tips?

[FloG 148]

QualityWings stated that they expect their 787 to be released in late 2013, since they are still working on the BAe146. So, if you wait for the QW one, you'll have to be patient. (source:http://qwsim.flight1.net/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=4&PID=9828&title=ultimate-787-exterior-model-and-textures-update#9828)

I don't want to comment on the Aerosim one, because I don't own it.

Finally, there still is the Abacus 787, which I had, but I don't recommend it. (Let's put t this way: The model is of lower quality, in my opinion.)

 

Regards,

Flo

[mganz121 159]

I don't want to comment on the Aerosim one, because I don't own it.

 

I own it and still wont comment. :mad:

[xplanery 250]

Aerosim is kind of lite product, comparable to newer products of Commercial Level Simulations. Myself I like it.

 

It seems to fly pretty well, doesn't really require learning of any complicated systems (uses mainly just default style systems).

[jymp 168]

I've been looking at the AeroSim 787 too, from what I see it looks great, cockpit looks good as well, I'm not into clicking alot of buttons to get off the ground so if it has a good simple VC thats fine with me, it does have a FMC that works so thats enough, plus there are a bunch of repaints for it already, I'd like to have the QW 787, but late 2013 is a little too long to wait,

[juanvito 0]

Thanks for the replies so far. I just found out that Hiroshi Igami (ex-Posky) has been working on a 787, I'll probably wait for that one. Still, I might end up parting with some money if I get too impatient :wink:

[Cai Zicheng 171]

Go to X-Plane and get the X-Plane B787 which is much cheaper.

[FloG 148]

Go to X-Plane and get the X-Plane B787 which is much cheaper.

... and pay another 70$ for Xplane, just because the B787 is cheaper there?

Thanks, but I'll pass.

[jymp 168]

X-Plane ?, nah

[FSMuseum 39]

I'm waiting for QW's (even though the wait is long). I'm a complicated simmer, I love learning a bunch of systems. The Aerosim just won't do IMO. I might get the freeware Hiroshi model once its released and use it until the QW is released. Just my thoughts

[ajpongress 467]

What does X-Plane have to do with FSX?

[Vargveum 53]

It seems to fly pretty well, doesn't really require learning of any complicated systems (uses mainly just default style systems).

 

 

I have no experience with the above mentioned aircraft, but personally I don't understand the point of spending money on "transport category" aircraft that uses FSX default systems. But that's just me.

[xplanery 250]

Well obviously there's a market, some devs such as CLS make only planes with FSX default style systems for people who don't bother learning anything more complicated. I bought this one because it's still by far the best 787 out there, when QW releases theirs I will then buy it.

[FloG 148]

I don't understand the point of spending money on "transport category" aircraft that uses FSX default systems.

I, for example, don't always have the time to follow the complete preflight checks and procedures in order to fly a plane, but still I want to do a flight in, say a 767, so with the CLS version I can just jump into the cockpit, press CTRL+E and taxi to the runway without having to set up the FMC correctly, while in the LevelD I couldn't.

On the other hand, I wouldn't like to spend 50 bucks on an aircraft with only default systems.

[xplanery 250]

And Aerosim does after all have a lot of non default stuff too, such as simple FMC, IFE screens in cabin and more.