QW787 P3Dv4 - first impressions?

[BrianW 124]

I think the challenge with giving a first impression is that we’re all at different experience levels and/or have different expectations, and many people may not know what’s missing or just don’t care.

If you consider yourself an advanced user of PMDG, FSL, etc, you’ll quickly notice some of the things you’ve grown used to having are absent, like RTE 2, the descent forecast page, the ability to divert to an alternate using the ATLN page, and of course the already mentioned wind data.  The small details and refinement that the top developers include are also missing from this 787.  Some of the systems and indications don’t operate quite like the real thing either. I’m not sure if these are bugs, or deliberate developer omissions.

Overall it’s not bad, plus it’s the only choice for a 787 currently.   I’m hoping they’re able to fix the bigger issues, and maybe add some features, but honestly it really leaves me wishing for a PMDG version with all the details.

[GCBraun 2,390]

Ok, bought it and got a CTD on my first flight climbing out of EGLL (Stackhash). I have not experienced a crash for three months and I have done the same flight multiple times with the NGX and FSL without issues. I will try again with the WX turned off.

Besides that, here are some quick positives and negatives:

• Performance was really good, even though I was in a notoriously heavy airport and in rainy weather;
• Plays really well with native VR;
• TrueGlass looks amazing;
• Systems, while not 100% complete, are a breath of fresh air compared to the add-ons that I have;
• EFB is less gimmicky than I thought and actually has some useful functionalities.
• Sounds are not that good, especially during taxi and roll-out. Everything is just too quiet and there are no bumps to be heard;
• Cockpit lightning is bad. Wish they has used something like TrueLight;
• Weight and balance software does not sync on real time to the simulator;
• CTD on the first flight.

 

[rtodepart 761]

23 hours ago, tooting said:

Because all you lot seem to think this pay to beta crappo is OK and the best thing since sliced bread, so over the last 10 years with the help of large downloadable patches (something unheard of and not feasible 10 years ago) the initial versions are unpolished the Cs products, BBS products, proatc, CRJ, aerosoft scenery and wilco products are released unpolished and then the promise of being patched, patched, And then patched again, the above is a testament to this fluffy lovely beta junk. They want to get a product out to get the $$$$, but as a community (I hate that word) we are idiots and too scared / stupid to raise our voice and complain and if you do you get banned. Welcome to 2018

In short, You reep what you sow.  This is how the community and society in general is nowadays, once In a blue moon, an absolute corker like a pmdg,  fsl or majestic bird comes along. Its a gem

Other than that it's always average of sub average products. 

I like the 787 I really do.  Same as I don't dislike the asda tea bags in my work kitchen they make a alright cup of tea, But it's not a marks and spencer or whittards of Chelsea standard tea bag cup of tea. 

But it's not finished, not by a long chalk.

it's an asda, not a marks and spencer type of product, with pmdg/fsl being the marks and spencer quality here 

well said . too bad like you said if we try to raise our voice that wont end well .............

[pracines 823]

Now this is a good first impression, thank you Thiago! 🏆

2 hours ago, GCBraun said:

Ok, bought it and got a CTD on my first flight climbing out of EGLL (Stackhash). I have not experienced a crash for three months and I have done the same flight multiple times with the NGX and FSL without issues. I will try again with the WX turned off.

Besides that, here are some quick positives and negatives:

• Performance was really good, even though I was in a notoriously heavy airport and in rainy weather;
• Plays really well with native VR;
• TrueGlass looks amazing;
• Systems, while not 100% complete, are a breath of fresh air compared to the add-ons that I have;
• EFB is less gimmicky than I thought and actually has some useful functionalities.
• Sounds are not that good, especially during taxi and roll-out. Everything is just too quiet and there are no bumps to be heard;
• Cockpit lightning is bad. Wish they has used something like TrueLight;
• Weight and balance software does not sync on real time to the simulator;
• CTD on the first flight.

 

 

[earthdog 842]

On 5/24/2018 at 1:08 AM, Chapstick said:

Watching Chewwy's stream, there's a pretty game-breaking bug with VNAV not populating the altitude fields correctly. This might be worth buying after a patch or two.

Flying exclusive online with VATSIM with ATC, i almost never get to use the VNAV :)) Always V/S....But it is annoying ...

[regis9 4,005]

Finished up my initial flight CYUL-ZSPD and all went well, VNAV tracked as expected, no issues intercepting the ILS.  First flight was quite good overall.

[odourboy 1,288]

16 hours 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've only done a 'sanity' flight... basically hand flown from one airport to another, but there were no obvious issues running under V4.1. Other than using the HUD for my landing, I barely scratched the surface of functionality so YMMV.

[ComSimPilot 623]

I have finished four flights so far. The dreamliner brings the latest era of modern aviation to our simulators. That's the first one we have currently to play with and I so much enjoy flying it.

The plane has a lot of potential and overall its a very good representation of the 787. To make it short I'll also write the pros and the cons. I'll start from the looks and then go to the systems:

Pros:

Very nice modelling and texturing on the VC
Fluid performance
Very good air and ground handling. Its a joy to taxi, takeoff and land. Nice tiller/acceleration/braking response. One of my favorites points on this plane. Seems very realistic. 
LNAV and VNAV worked correctly, lets say 90% of the time (they are not broken but need improvement. More on the Cons)
LOC/ILS capture worked perfectly fine for me all the times. Not sure what are the problems some refer to.
 

Cons (current release version 1.10) :

The exterior modelling is perfect for the engines and wings. But the fuselage needs to be of bit higher resolution. I would also like more shine (glossy finish). Currently its too mat I think. Also I would like more details and depth on the cockpit windows.
The cabin sound announcements do not sound realistic. I prefer to turn them off for now. They sound not like you hear them in a cabin but on the recording studio. Also they don't mute when you change to outside view. These are small problems though.
LNAV. The line drawing does not take into account the speed of the airplane. I want to be fair: I'm not sure if its for all turns or only happen some times. Some times it will draw lines that cannot be flown on the current speed. 
LNAV. It happens that the plane turns a little earlier than the magenta line during a turn. Not a show stopper, it makes the turn quite OK but needs to be addressed.
VNAV. It happened to me once that it did not respected an 'At or Above' restriction built into the STAR procedure.
VNAV. The T/D green circle can appear outside the magenta line.
Some tiny visual bugs on the NDs that can be fixed easily.

Not sure:
When get captured on the ILS, the HDG bug does not auto-align with the runway, as it happens for the PMDG 777. Not sure its a bug or its not supposed to happen on the 787.
Weather radar does not sweep, but its a continuous image.
 

Would like to be added:
Climb/Cruise/Descent Winds
EFB assumed temperature for takeoff performance 

Its important to note that my last flight was completely uneventful and everything worked perfectly.

I have made a detailed post regarding these issues and I will keep you updated when QW replies. So far their support since yesterday's release has been perfect. They reply to all questions and take notes of the bugs.

I believe the above Cons will be addressed. Overall I'm very happy with the purchase and I really enjoy flying on the cockpit of the 787. Of course how QW supports these bugs is still something to be seen and my opinion would change if they don't fix these.
However, lets be positive, cause so far they seem to listen everyone. Nothing unusual for a new release. 

Edited May 25, 2018 by Daedalus

[scottsware 69]

I fly the 787 in real life.  I find the QW 787 very realistic and useful in keeping current between flights.  I particularly like hand flying it.  I find that most the functions I would use on a normal flight work just fine.  I have made number flights with the QW787 and found it to feel much like a flight at work.  

Something I notice about many post regarding these flight sim packages is expecting everything to work every time.  This expectation is too high.  Every modern plane I have flown has been quirky and didn't always do what it should.  The last plane I flew that did what I expected on every flight was the 737-200 and that's because it was so basic. From the 737-300 on I have had to intervene not infrequently.  My point is when you are flying and the plane doesn't do what it should, do what a pilot does and either move to a lower level of automation or even turn it off and fix it and complete the flight safely.  If there really is bug, tell the developer, developers care very much about their creations ( I know, I write mobile apps on the side).

This is just one more impression I have about the QW 787.  When I first saw the FSX version of the 787 I thought it didn't look all that real.  I hadn't yet been trained on the 787 but was headed to class shortly after I bought the FSX version of the QW787.  It wasn't until I started training in the actual sim that I realized that it wasn't the QW 787 that didn't look real.  787 cockpits don't look "real" in the classical sense of a jet.  It is a whole different beast than previous airplanes.  I'm lucky enough to get to fly both and I'm amazed at how this sim package captures the look and feel of the 787.

 

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

Thank you Scott, we need some of these eye-opening inputs from time to time so that people connect to earth more often 😃

[ComSimPilot 623]

4 minutes ago, scottsware said:

I fly the 787 in real life.  I find the QW 787 very realistic and useful in keeping current between flights.  I particularly like hand flying it.  I find that most the functions I would use on a normal flight work just fine.  I have made number flights with the QW787 and found it to feel much like a flight at work.  

Something I notice about many post regarding these flight sim packages is expecting everything to work every time.  This expectation is too high.  Every modern plane I have flown has been quirky and didn't always do what it should.  The last plane I flew that did what I expected on every flight was the 737-200 and that's because it was so basic. From the 737-300 on I have had to intervene not infrequently.  My point is when you are flying and the plane doesn't do what it should, do what a pilot does and either move to a lower level of automation or even turn it off and fix it and complete the flight safely.  If there really is bug, tell the developer, developers care very much about their creations ( I know, I write mobile apps on the side).

This is just one more impression I have about the QW 787.  When I first saw the FSX version of the 787 I thought it didn't look all that real.  I hadn't yet been trained on the 787 but was headed to class shortly after I bought the FSX version of the QW787.  It wasn't until I started training in the actual sim that I realized that it wasn't the QW 787 that didn't look real.  787 cockpits don't look "real" in the classical sense of a jet.  It is a whole different beast than previous airplanes.  I'm lucky enough to get to fly both and I'm amazed at how this sim package captures the look and feel of the 787.

 

Thank you for your very valuable insight. Its what every simmer always wanted to know. 

[Adrian123 1,015]

A john Deere 8345 tractor doesn't work "as expected" sometimes and the technology has to be overridden. ! ;).

[Steve Dra 7,580]

To answer a few questions....

Some with no access to the QW forum wanted to know how the issues are coming in.  This is the best I can show you without breaking any rules. 

Please do not ask me to elaborate on any items within the topics...the one easy way to get access is to buy it. 🙂 

Not to abuse the great F1 return policy....but you DO have 30 days essentially to eval the product yourself and if its a no-buy.....use the return policy.  I did this when I initially bought the FSX version to test it out....knowing that I'd never actually use it in FSX...but was a potential buyer of the P3d product.

here is the banding issue with the cockpit MCP lighting,,,no matter what rez you're using....its just ugly.  In fairness this is a very minor issue as I'd really never even use it, but its there nonetheless. 

I also just reported an issue installing liveries, the dispatch program does not seem to remember what I installed, but when I try to re-add the livery it says it's already installed (even though its not listed on the aircraft.cfg)

 

Overall (if you're still reading down here, lol), I have my own views and philosophy on purchasing flightsim addons. I'm in a segment of my life where I can afford planes like this.  Especially with F1s return policy, I have no issue buying this and finding issues myself on MY machine that will tell me if its going to stay on my system. 

Even with out the F1 safety net, the inherent philanthropic urge I feel to support devs who attempt to bring us addons like this is pretty strong....call it self-serving behavior that if they all went away because we didn't support them, I'd have no hobby that I've enjoyed for decades. 🙂

Deep down, despite our own personal views of any developer, we know that they are really flighsim nuts like ourselves, not getting rich by any means from the effort they put in to dev a complex plane like the 787, and if they really were only in it for the money, they have serious misconceptions of an effort-to-profit model that is realistic.

As long as its clear that QW will support this aircraft, be responsive to customer's concerns regarding issues found, and work to fix them, I'll keep this plane and enjoy it as long as I don't have any show-stoppers that are in fact ligit bugs not brought on by my system, or my lack of knowledge of this aircraft.

I did do a quick lap around KDFW when I bought it, hand flew it out and let it capture the ILS and land itself....no issues.   Very basic I know, but I'm only reporting issues that I troubleshoot myself before reporting...verifying they are repeatable, and will provide detailed info and screens to explain this issue to QW...like I show above in the livery install issue. (I test software for a living so know what it's like to get "VNAV is not working" as the only info in a bug report, hehe)

 

Do I like it?  I like the 787, I'm a P3d user, its an airplane....'nuff said. 🙂

Oh...to answer another question, I'm still on P3dV4.1...seem to work fine on this version. 😉 

 

[l_jayma 6]

26 minutes ago, scottsware said:

I fly the 787 in real life.  I find the QW 787 very realistic and useful in keeping current between flights.  I particularly like hand flying it.  I find that most the functions I would use on a normal flight work just fine.  I have made number flights with the QW787 and found it to feel much like a flight at work.  

Something I notice about many post regarding these flight sim packages is expecting everything to work every time.  This expectation is too high.  Every modern plane I have flown has been quirky and didn't always do what it should.  The last plane I flew that did what I expected on every flight was the 737-200 and that's because it was so basic. From the 737-300 on I have had to intervene not infrequently.  My point is when you are flying and the plane doesn't do what it should, do what a pilot does and either move to a lower level of automation or even turn it off and fix it and complete the flight safely.  If there really is bug, tell the developer, developers care very much about their creations ( I know, I write mobile apps on the side).

This is just one more impression I have about the QW 787.  When I first saw the FSX version of the 787 I thought it didn't look all that real.  I hadn't yet been trained on the 787 but was headed to class shortly after I bought the FSX version of the QW787.  It wasn't until I started training in the actual sim that I realized that it wasn't the QW 787 that didn't look real.  787 cockpits don't look "real" in the classical sense of a jet.  It is a whole different beast than previous airplanes.  I'm lucky enough to get to fly both and I'm amazed at how this sim package captures the look and feel of the 787.

 

I love it... person who really knows the provides real input. Thank you. Happy flying

[Airline2Sim 489]

Not had a chance to fly it yet but I’m interested to see how well modelled the A/T modes are in relation to the VNAV profile. Those of you who watched our 777 Cadet Training Program will recall that there’s a lot to understand when it comes to the various thrust modes such as SPD, IDLE, THR, THR REF and HOLD, plus the subtle but crucial dropping out of VNAV PTH to VNAV SPD when it can no longer maintain the path.

I imagine that the 787 modes are identical as it shares a type rating. Anyone had a chance to see if this is all correctly modelled?