fsx-ms Quality Wings Update & Video

[Chock 17,769]

It's almost certainly going to be a case of "thrice blessed he who gets his blow in fust" with this one I suspect. Yes there are two pretty basic payware 787s already available for FS, but both of those (Aerosim and AFS) were knocked out in an attempt to 'get in first' with a basic lookalike, to garner some sales by virtue of being the only ports in a storm. In both cases, they were created and on sale even before the 787 was in major service, or indeed finalised as a design, so a fair bit of guesswork and inaccuracy was inevitable.

 

By contrast, the QW effort has the benefit of being developed when more is known about the actual in-service aeroplane, so even if it doesn't model every function of the real aeroplane, what QW choose to include in their model is likely to at least bear some resemblance to the real thing.

 

I don't think you have to be a clairvoyant to suspect that PMDG will, at the very least, have been giving serious consideration to doing a 787, since they are to a large extent, the Boeing study sim people. Personally, I'd be willing to bet they've either got one in the pipeline, or will announce that they have one planned at some point soon. Needless to say, the very different nature of the avionics and systems on the 787 would mean that it isn't going to be a five minute project to create a 'study level' simulation of a 787 though, so anything which takes an FS model of the 787 at least a good way toward simulating the real aeroplane in a relatively hard core way is likely to do well for a good few years sales-wise, since it would be the only one available for quite some time which is even close to  having a stab at some genuine realism.

[threexgreen 3,139]

 

 

I don't think you have to be a clairvoyant to suspect that PMDG will, at the very least, have been giving serious consideration to doing a 787, since they are to a large extent, the Boeing study sim people.

 

Having been spoiled by PMDG products for years for me the question is how close it will be to PMDG standards, both graphics-wise and system-wise.

[anden145 2,285]

Should be interesting...

 

I have a feeling, that it will be about the same as Aerosoft's Airbus in terms of complexity. Maybe a little bit closer to PMDG... but certainly not the level at what PMDG og FSLabs is producing... 

 

This is just wild guesses on my part, of course.

[Boeing or not going 578]

Having been spoiled by PMDG products for years for me the question is how close it will be to PMDG standards, both graphics-wise and system-wise.

PMDG systems are more deep but they have the deeper development team to program that. QW do just enough while still making a fun to fly airplane. But I am still a little bitter they never released the 146 freighter variant that they did make a few promises in forum posts before release. 

[CaptainGabe 81]

Man I can't image all the coding that flight deck has gone/is going through. 

[Captain_Al 66]

Judging from the video and as a type rated guy on the 787, this looks pretty good, not PMDG graphic standard excellence, but not bad either. The armed pitch mode on takeoff was not correct, it would be VNAV, not VNAV SPD in white under TO/GA. The EFB looks really realistic  and the electric seat sound was really good. The gear handle looks off to me, may actually be a little smaller and less cartoonish and the ISFD speed looks definitely off and cartoonish. Boy, if PMDG did this 787 project, it would be something to behold in like year 2030. 

 

If you notice LNAV was not centered in the FMA, but it is in beta testing. I was wondering if he was going to set his MCP at all, which he did not, or use the HUD, which he did as he started the takeoff roll. The HUD looked pretty good.

 

I will probably want to get this when it is released. No easy feat to develop this I am sure. Nice job, Quality Wings...

[Boeing or not going 578]

Judging from the video and as a type rated guy on the 787, this looks pretty good, not PMDG graphic standard excellence, but not bad either. The armed pitch mode on takeoff was not correct, it would be VNAV, not VNAV SPD in white under TO/GA. The EFB looks really realistic  and the electric seat sound was really good. The gear handle looks off to me, may actually be a little smaller and less cartoonish and the ISFD speed looks definitely off and cartoonish. Boy, if PMDG did this 787 project, it would be something to behold in like year 2030. 

 

If you notice LNAV was not centered in the FMA, but it is in beta testing. I was wondering if he was going to set his MCP at all, which he did not, or use the HUD, which he did as he started the takeoff roll. The HUD looked pretty good.

 

I will probably want to get this when it is released. No easy feat to develop this I am sure. Nice job, Quality Wings...

Send a message to them sign up on the forums having expert eyes makes every addon better (As long as they aren't hostile to constructive criticism which some developers are)

Man I can't image all the coding that flight deck has gone/is going through. 

I have not programmed since school but just imagine the work that goes into full system addons. You are building the systems up just like you would program the real thing. These programmers can jump to Boeing and write code for the real fmc that is how deep we demand they go with full realism. Great for us though.

[Chock 17,769]

I think when you consider that it'll cost you the best part of thirty quid for a decent GA aeroplane for FS, and something like this might be perhaps 40-50 quid or so, it's a lot of bang for your bucks bearing in mind that much of the programming for a simulated 787, even one that might not get everything spot-on, is going into some uncharted territory with FS. The 787 is notably different systems-wise to most other airliners where many things are concerned notably the differences in the bleed system, APU etc, which in turn affects how all the systems connect up to the engines, not to mention all the flashy new avionics there are on its flight deck, so it's not gonna be like knocking out another 737-400 or a Cessna 150 or some such, there's gonna be a lot of developmental head-scratching and research required to have a good stab at doing a Dreamliner.

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

This is one bird I will miss purchasing its beautiful 

[scianoir 610]

 

Personally I don't mind developers building stuff to a price and certain level of fidelity, in fact I'm quite a fan of that, because even though I do buy most if not all of the 'study sim' aeroplanes you can get, sometimes I just want to jump in and go, so I appreciate things like being able to have an FMC load a default FS flight plan, even though I have most of the payware flight planners there are and all that attendant malarkey such as Topcat etc. And because I run my own business, I'm also somewhat sympathetic of developers who do it part time, which is in fact the vast majority or them. Of course, one thing to be said for things built to a certain agreed level of fidelity, and with a correspondingly palatable price tag, is that they don't break the bank, and that is important when we consider the following...

 

What a lot of people who frequent Avsim - and some of the other flight simmer forums -  often forget, is that these virtual places tend to be a hang out for relatively hard core simmers. The reality is however, that there are a very large number of flight simmers out there who don't even come on forums such as this, and who aren't quite as obsessive as many of us about mega realism of every circuit-breaker and system behaviour; what you might call a silent majority, in that they don't tend to come on forums to complain about the lift co-efficient of the outboard flaps on their simulated airliner being 0.0001 percent incorrect when compared to the real aeroplane, which nine times out of ten they've never even piloted anyway lol.

 

So I reckon QW have got the realism factor pretty spot on from the looks of things, and I suspect they're gonna sell that thing by the truckload because of that, so good luck to them. Looking forward to seeing it on my desktop.

 

 

I bought the 757 when it first came out and it became my 'go to' plane that I fly 95% of the time.

 

I bought the 146 when it came out just to see the difference in quality from the 757, but I am a Boeing fan so I don't fly it much, but it is a definite improvement quality wise.

 

Now to the 787...after watching this video...WOW!!! I can't wait to get my hands on it!

 

I think QW have a lot of unfair criticism levelled at them on these forums. I have loved flying both their 757 and their even better 146 and the level of systems depth they seem to aim for is perfect for me and probably for lots of other simmers.  If they manage to achieve something similar with their 787 I think it will do very well. I have the PMDG 737, 747, 777 and MD-11 and they are great, but, speaking personally, I find that I have to be in a very 'anal retentive' state to use and enjoy them to their maximum potential and, as a result, I probably fly airliners such as the 757 and 146 much more often. I feel the QW products strike a nice balance between the 'jump in and fly' products of developers such as Virtual Col and the systems intensive PMDG products and as such I think their 787 will do very well. QW, in the past at least, have also struck a nice balance pricewise!

 

Bill