QW787 P3Dv4 - first impressions?

[bgpearce01 36]

@w6kd Ok, fair arguments.  

Apologize for my negativity.  Is anyone out there enjoying the aircraft or have some constructive feedback outside of my complaining?

[Aether 37]

18 minutes ago, w6kd said:

First, I keep seeing these criticisms that prices go up with no increase in quality.  I think what people keep missing is the increase in complexity of an add-on simulating a modern glass cockpit, as well as the increase in cost of development tools, not to mention the time value of money (inflation).

In 2004, I spent $35 for the Dreamfleet B727 add-on.  In 2018 dollars that'd be $47, for a (relatively) simple round-dial 2D panel, no VC, no FMS, no HUD, no EFB, no weather radar, and a moderately complex GMAX model. $70 represents a 49% real increase in price over that FS2002 add-on.

Now add the thousands of additional hours needed to study and then replicate the complex layers of Boeing's newest modern glass integrated flight deck, a 3D VC model mapped for dynamic lighting, a working weather radar, a collimated HUD, an integrated Electronic Flight Bag.  Add in the $1500/year cost of a 3ds Max subscription to do a complex articulated 3D exterior model and VC, the hours needed for bump-mapping textures etc.  Is it not conceivable (obvious?) that the complexity of such an undertaking requires at least a 50% increase in manhours that might well justify the 50% increase in price over the inflation-adjusted real price of a much simpler add-on 14 years ago?

Second, what some folks consider to be "showstopping" sometimes boggles the mind.  I flew all-glass Gulfstream IV and V jets in the real world, and the number of times an actual VNAV descent using the FMS was even possible was probably less than 10 times--out in the open Pacific Oceanic area descending into an island or into Iceland--in five years time.  We generally used V/S, despite having the computer available, because the computer VNAV wasn't much use with ATC calling the shots.  You'll never hear "why no, Frankfurt, we can't descend now, because we haven't reached our TOD yet..."  Would it be nice to have VNAV descents working right--yes, of course, but not a "showstopper" if I want to fly like I do in a real jet.

A high-complexity add-on sold in a low-volume market just isn't going to be tested like a game that sells 50 million copies.  Bugs are a fact of life, even for the top-tier titans or our teeny tiny industry like PMDG.  To infer that to accept the presence of minor bugs as a fact of life must mean that we're willing to accept literally anything the devs market to us is a gross exaggeration...if your standard really is that no bugs are acceptable, then literally no product will be acceptable to you.  Yep, some are better than others, and if you value a working VNAV on a long-range passenger jet add-on that much, you can get exactly that in a B777 for $135 at PMDG.

It's impossible to look at the level of effort these guys must have put into an add-on like this B787 and conclude that they just don't care. 

Regards

 

+1

[whitav8 98]

Just to give a little perspective on aircraft simulation development, I was a team leader for the instrument panel graphics and FlyByWire computer for the 787 internal engineering simulation at Boeing Commercial Aircraft in Seattle during the major development phase in 2004 and following. We had access to all the specifications for the actual systems from the design engineering team (hundreds of folks) and could ask them directly how the functions should work as well as get their block diagrams which we converted to code using Simulink/Matlab. As we assembled the software parts of the 787 simulation (aerodynamics, primary controls, engines, gear models, autopilot, autothrottle, FMC, instrument panel graphics,etc...), we had our hardware team (maybe 30 folks) build the very first ever 787 simulator cockpit. This then allowed us to have the actual designers and Boeing test pilots come over to our lab and debug the functions. Two years later, we were close to having it function properly. At that point, we started receiving units from the autoflight hardware vendors - all their prototype systems and removed our software models and starting using the actual preliminary hardware via ethernet-like interfaces. Three more years and it was time for certification and first flight. Each of the simulation systems mentioned above had a team of at least 5 $100,000 a year engineers, so the total simulator team was approximately 80 folks working for 5 years - no wonder the 787 development cost the Boeing company about $10 billion  (that includes the manufacturing efforts - especially the composite use instead of aluminum -  of course!).

Knowing this, I am always amazed at what our wonderful PC flight simulation companies are able to accomplish!

Dave W.

[F737MAX 5,608]

I've seen two videos where there were problems with VNAV, ILS capture and late turns when overflying a fix. I call those bread and butter features of a payware aeroplane since those have not been issues since FS9.
These are not as complex as replicating G/S mini, Alpha Floor protections, or a functioning WX radar and that is why I think we should be unhappy with this product in the state it currently appears to be. Yet if QW can fix these, they will get all the praise they would deserve.

I'm done putting my view across on this. It would be good to hear from others what they like most about the 787.

Edited May 24, 2018 by F737NG

[regis9 4,014]

4 hours ago, psolov said:

How did you fix the Air Canada dupicate livery issue? I had the same problem. BTW, I love the plane, looks great, sounds great, easy to fly.

Cheers, Pete

You have to edit the aircraft.cfg file and change the title of one of the aircraft, I just added the word “old” to the end of the old paint scheme version.

[ms2 184]

5 minutes ago, Biggles2010 said:

strongly held opinions about the QW787, and nearly all of them are from people who do not own the product, and have not tried it.

Totally agree, 

When buying a PMDG plane, I haved big problems but never said on Avsim that the product is bad or very expensive... just waiting patiently the patchs of corrections and understand some mistakes I do myself with the plane.

I'm happy that QW release this aircraft, because B787 was a revolution ifor Boeing and we could have it in P3dv4...

[anden145 2,285]

1 hour ago, w6kd said:

First, I keep seeing these criticisms that prices go up with no increase in quality.  I think what people keep missing is the increase in complexity of an add-on simulating a modern glass cockpit, as well as the increase in cost of development tools, not to mention the time value of money (inflation).

In 2004, I spent $35 for the Dreamfleet B727 add-on.  In 2018 dollars that'd be $47, for a (relatively) simple round-dial 2D panel, no VC, no FMS, no HUD, no EFB, no weather radar, and a moderately complex GMAX model. $70 represents a 49% real increase in price over that FS2002 add-on.

Now add the thousands of additional hours needed to study and then replicate the complex layers of Boeing's newest modern glass integrated flight deck, a 3D VC model mapped for dynamic lighting, a working weather radar, a collimated HUD, an integrated Electronic Flight Bag.  Add in the $1500/year cost of a 3ds Max subscription to do a complex articulated 3D exterior model and VC, the hours needed for bump-mapping textures etc.  Is it not conceivable (obvious?) that the complexity of such an undertaking requires at least a 50% increase in manhours that might well justify the 50% increase in price over the inflation-adjusted real price of a much simpler add-on 14 years ago?

Second, what some folks consider to be "showstopping" sometimes boggles the mind.  I flew all-glass Gulfstream IV and V jets in the real world, and the number of times an actual VNAV descent using the FMS was even possible was probably less than 10 times--out in the open Pacific Oceanic area descending into an island or into Iceland--in five years time.  We generally used V/S, despite having the computer available, because the computer VNAV wasn't much use with ATC calling the shots.  You'll never hear "why no, Frankfurt, we can't descend now, because we haven't reached our TOD yet..."  Would it be nice to have VNAV descents working right--yes, of course, but not a "showstopper" if I want to fly like I do in a real jet.

A high-complexity add-on sold in a low-volume market just isn't going to be tested like a game that sells 50 million copies.  Bugs are a fact of life, even for the top-tier titans of our teeny tiny industry like PMDG.  To infer that to accept the presence of minor bugs as a fact of life must mean that we're willing to accept literally anything the devs market to us is a gross exaggeration...if your standard really is that no bugs are acceptable, then literally no product will be acceptable to you.  Yep, some are better than others, and if you value a working VNAV on a long-range passenger jet add-on that much, you can get exactly that in a B777 for $135 at PMDG.

It's impossible to look at the level of effort these guys must have put into an add-on like this B787 and conclude that they just don't care. 

Regards

 

+2 (wish I could give you 2 votes on that one! Well said! Complete agree.

52 minutes ago, F737NG said:

I've seen two videos where there were problems with VNAV, ILS capture and late turns when overflying a fix. I call those bread and butter features of a payware aeroplane since those have not been issues since FS9.
These are not as complex as replicating G/S mini, Alpha Floor protections, or a functioning WX radar and that is why I think we should be unhappy with this product in the state it currently appears to be. Yet if QW can fix these, they will get all the praise they would deserve.

I'm done putting my view across on this. It would be good to hear from others what they like most about the 787.

I'm curious as to how you know, that the fixes aren't as complex to alleviate?! Are you just guessing and making conjecture or do you have any insight into the coding of a highly complex addon.

Personally I'm quite amazed as to what QualityWings has pulled off here. 

[anden145 2,285]

1 hour ago, bgpearce01 said:

@w6kd Ok, fair arguments.  

Apologize for my negativity.  Is anyone out there enjoying the aircraft or have some constructive feedback outside of my complaining?

Well, there's quite a few positive feedback and posts in the beginning of this thread...
That is, until all the 'haters' came in, and started off shouting...

Sorry people, but I kinda feel there's a lynch-atmosphere in here. It's quite unpleasant, IMO...

[B777ER 2,486]

I'm sure it's a great piece of kit. There are some niggles with it that I personally want to see addressed before I spend my money. The VNAV, ILS capture to name a couple. I'm sure they will fix it at some point in the future (based on past timelines we are talking months) and when they do I'll purchase. If they don't, then I'll never buy. Similar to the CS 757. They are going into months now to get version 1.1 released and also when they do I'll purchase it. Some may say get it now and live with it while they work on an update and too some that is totally acceptable. To some they are willing to deal with those issues and I say good for them. Too me, it's not and as well I'm not willing to deal with those issues that to others may seem trivial. To each their own. 

[ryanbatc 12,857]

I rarely have time to fly anymore but I'm seriously considering this addon.  I think the price is more than fair.  

Everything today in age just costs more.  

[PilotPete99 915]

2 minutes ago, regis9 said:

You have to edit the aircraft.cfg file and change the title of one of the aircraft, I just added the word “old” to the end of the old paint scheme version.

Thanks!

Cheers, Pete

[Manny 1,293]

I am still on Version 4.1

 

the requirement says

 

LM Prepar3D Version 4

anyone with P3D 4.1 successfully running this? 

 

[Woozie 732]

Thanks all for sharing your impressions. I'll wait for a few hotfixes until I throw my money at them, but this bird definitely remains on my wishlist.

Guess the DCS F/A-18, about to to be released in early access end of this month, will keep me busy enough anyway *g*

Edited May 24, 2018 by Woozie

[breakinghbts 50]

Just thought I'd share my initial thoughts. Last night I goofed around with it. And just now I completed the tutorial flight. I made a few small notes.

1. ATC refers to my aircraft as experimental, anyway to fix this? I'm sure its just something in the cfg maybe?

2. Both last night, without CDU setup, and today during tutorial, the TO/GA switch didn't work. Not sure if this is my fault or not. More flights will help figure that issue out.

3. During decent and also after arrival, the fuel cutoff switches kept toggling by themselves. Didn't see this issue posted about yet. Maybe it's something in my setup? (they toggled in the VC, but it did not affect the behavior of the engines)

Other thoughts: I did not have an issue with TOD or ILS capture. Hopefully I won't have the issue pop-up in the future. The aircraft seems very sluggish once airborne, both the tutorial, and my goofball flight both had a significant loss of airspeed just after liftoff. Not sure if this is intended behavior? Just nerve wracking when co-pilot calls for flaps 1, and your speed is dropping. 

That's pretty much my first impression. Frames on par with NGX I'd guestimate. So far I'm impressed. No it's not PMDG level, but I didn't expect that. I was expecting something similar to aerosoft airbus level, and this seems so far to be similar.

-Tony@PVD

 

edited for clarification on fuel cutoff switch toggle

Edited May 24, 2018 by breakinghbts

[Amon1973 1,421]

48 minutes ago, Manny said:

I am still on Version 4.1

 

the requirement says

 

LM Prepar3D Version 4

anyone with P3D 4.1 successfully running this? 

 

I'm still running P3D V4.1, and thinking about buying this and was wondering the same thing.