Ultimate 787 Update - Version 1.1.3 Released

[HighTowers 1,434]

I am pleased with this aircraft. After this update, everything is working quite well. Did a nearly 4 hour flight and didnt really have any major or even moderate issues.  Some minor quirks were throttles being rather animated in oscillation which seems odd. This was doing .85 and a 80kt headwind.  (Speaking of which , the cruise winds all loaded fine on the legs rte data page and accurate.) Also, when leaving the last waypoint in the legs page, an aircraft should continue on present heading, but instead, it made a rather abrupt turn. Quick intervention, and no problem. While shouldnt happen, these are little things that pilots need to do to intervene when things dont do as you expect. No biggie at all.    Don't use VNAV much, but the initial use on descent was fine only that the STAR info had to be corrected relative to the current chart.  LNAV was very accurate and believe the turns are much better anticipated by the AP.   One more note, is that ground handling is rather easy. This bird wants to move even when loaded up. 

All in all, fun aircraft, and highly recommend it.  Great work QW for your determination and perseverance in improving your aircraft.  

[Christopher Low 5,352]

Quote

One more note, is that ground handling is rather easy. This bird wants to move even when loaded up.

My test flight in the 787-8 (Rolls Royce engines) at Belfast International was with all three fuel tanks at 65% (don't ask me why I had this much fuel....it's just the way I do things), and no passengers. In this configuration (I think the weight was around 419000 pounds), the aircraft started to move with the engines at idle, and proceeded at a comfortable pace along the taxiway with minimal brake intervention required.

Edited March 28, 2019 by Christopher Low

[flycln 435]

On 3/25/2019 at 5:35 PM, honanhal said:

As to VNAV: in the previous version there was an issue with above-path descents. Putting up the spoilers should have resulted in an increased rate of descent to maintain the selected VNAV descent speed, while engines stayed at idle. Instead, what happened was that the engines spooled up with the spoilers up, reducing the rate of descent and defeating the whole exercise (and making it much harder to get back on path, forcing the use of VS or FLCH, although FLCH also had some issues).

Is this fixed?

James

I'd love to know this as well because it drove me nuts. It's like the speed brakes never had the desired effect, even slowing the descent rate instead of the speed. Engine idle descent also didn't seem to work correctly in general.

This and the stability issues got me to get a refund from the vendor. I really did enjoy hand-flying it, though, and it's a pretty bird so I'd absolutely consider buying it again when/if it's in a better state.

[G-YMML1 582]

Could someone give me a favor and test if "save panel" option was truly fixed. During your normal flight, save the scenario via P3D regular "save flight" option, then try to reload the flight and see if a panel state was retained (MCP, FMC settings, etc)

Thanks

Dmitriy   

[Steve Dra 7,588]

22 hours ago, tomcatman24 said:

It is gorgeous inside and out (especially with pbr now)

I agree!

And for someone who's been painting for a while and "may" have some bias on all things visual...I'd say QW nailed it aesthetically...but who am I to judge...let's inject some pics into this over-talked about thread ease the eye-strain of all that reading...

Here I am evaluating the new PBR effects and what has to be adjusted to make them look right.

My Gulfair's gold engines really bring out the PBR effect...the sun glint is so amazing as you pan around the aircraft.

The underside is a tad dark (as it should be if you understand what's going on with PBR and how painter's have been adding an artificial shadow to the underside of our planes since the beginning of time).  I'll need to take the painted shadow off the fuse and let PBR render it now (as it is actually doing, adding a "double" shadow effect...in case you've wondered why most all your existing paints from vendors with PBR models...3 now and counting...are darker than before PBR)

The engine on the 3 "TUI" Group paints I did need adjusting, the belly doesn't look too bad, but will adjust anyway.

NWA needs some attention too

Love that dynamic glint!  Really makes the paint come alive.

For the record, I don't fly this plane to ATP standards, and thus far it's been a wonderful plane to fly (and paint).

I've read most of the text here (before the eye strain kicked in), and have to agree that with the Flight1 30 day money-back policy....any and ALL questions regarding if this is fixed or that is 100% real-world accurate are totally moot points from an asking-the-community standpoint.

Get the plane, fly it yourself, determine if it meets your standards/expectations of what a $70'ish addon should provide.

If so, keep it and enjoy...if not, return it.  Could not be simpler.  The bottom line is that even if 1000 simmers say its great, we all know that every single computer system we own reacts differently to various software packages...some here have no real issues with the plane, some seemed to be plagued with them.

I could wholly recommend this plane (and I do) as I have no issues with it whatsoever, but on your system...well who knows?  Wait....we do know who knows...YOU DO!   Hence my constant suggestion (this is not the 1st thread covering this topic) of utilizing the Flight1 offer and trying it yourself is the only real way you'll know if its right for you...AND your system. 😉

 

Edited March 28, 2019 by Steve Dra

[cyyzrwy24 127]

.....works fine, but unfortunately VNAV still needs lots of work....other than that 12 Hr flight nice and smooth, most importantly stable,  not sure about texture in VC, personally don't like it, unless is totally zoomed it looks very rough. Taxing, manual flying very smooth, sound is very good...lots of good stuff. Outside look impressive I might say, I guess PBR really makes the difference.

Few things in FMC needs to be added to be comparable, but hey, we fly to much PMDG and FSL, so we see the difference. But overall I will use it, nice addition to current fleet....Hopefully QW will continue improving it.

[cyyzrwy24 127]

3 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

NWA needs some attention too

Hi Steve, where can I get NWA livery? Looks nice in Bowling Shoe.....

[Steve Dra 7,588]

5 minutes ago, cyyzrwy24 said:

Hi Steve, where can I get NWA livery? Looks nice in Bowling Shoe.....

Hey Alex, just click the link in my sig...the NWA is about  half-way down on the 1st page.  I painted it during the Flightsim Expo last year when I was chatting with the QW crew and Kyle mentioned he liked the livery (as do I...NWAs best IMO), so I painted it for him. (not that he couldn't do it himself as he's an accomplished painter as well 😉 )

9 minutes ago, cyyzrwy24 said:

not sure about texture in VC, personally don't like it, unless is totally zoomed it looks very rough.

Not sure why folks are experiencing this unless its that I'm in 4k on a 55 inch 4k TV...this is what it looks like for me.

Click the pic to get a full view...it's scaled in the Avsim view and not really what it looks like on my screen

I can only comment on how it looks on my system since its the only one I see it on except for QW's at the Conference, and it looked great on their system as well.

I hope folks can find a way to make it look as good on their systems, unfortunately I can't provide any suggestions.

 

 

[cyyzrwy24 127]

25 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

Hey Alex, just click the link in my sig...the NWA is about  half-way down on the 1st page.  I painted it during the Flightsim Expo last year when I was chatting with the QW crew and Kyle mentioned he liked the livery (as do I...NWAs best IMO), so I painted it for him. (not that he couldn't do it himself as he's an accomplished painter as well 😉 )

Thanks Steve, I will look when I come home from work and download.....

 

25 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

Not sure why folks are experiencing this unless its that I'm in 4k on a 55 inch 4k TV...this is what it looks like for me.

Click the pic to get a full view...it's scaled in the Avsim view and not really what it looks like on my screen

Well, problem is that once you look at PMDG VC and when you compare with everything else, (for me) looks unsatisfactory...at least to me and my eye. Since I am not familiar how this things are done/made and why PMDG VC is superb (at least on my PC), are they made in same technique, technology  (perhaps I used wrong term)? Even on your picture sharpness on lettering (MCP, ENG...) or everywhere else is way to sharp, so becomes blurry and "un-readable if not zoomed properly". Possibly I have that experience on my PC, but in my defense, PMDG VC is like I see in the real cockpit. Nothing sharp and readable from every angle. With QW once I zoom more in, it looks really perfect. I see you are a painter, I guess you know what I am looking at...or I see it differently?
 

 

Edited March 28, 2019 by cyyzrwy24

[Christopher Low 5,352]

The characters on the displays are quite small on my 24" widescreen monitor @ 1920x1080 resolution, but they are very sharp and clear when I zoom in.

On a side note, can someone please help me with the following minor issues.....

• How do I activate the MINIMUMS and APPROACHING DECISION HEIGHT callouts?
• Two QWCAS cabin crew messages are overlapping each other just before I turn onto final approach in my test flight. Surely this is not correct?
• When I disengage the autothrottle, I get a CAUTION message, but no audio warning.
• Is there an option for an "engine power marker" on the EICAS display (so that I can match the thrust when I disconnect the autothrottle)?

 

[eslader 1,783]

4 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

How do I activate the MINIMUMS and APPROACHING DECISION HEIGHT callouts?

Upper left of the upper control panel. You'll see a knob that is labeled "Radio Mins Baro" Make sure the outer knob is turned to Radio. The inner knob adjusts your decision altitude, which you look up by checking the approach chart - in Navigraph if you have it, and otherwise you can get it from Skyvector:

https://skyvector.com/airports

 

Plug in your airport, then scroll down to Instrument Approach Procedure charts, choose the runway you're using, and the DA's will be listed at the bottom - you'll have to pick which one you're supposed to use based on what kind of approach you're conducting. For info on how to read that, check page 29 here:

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/aero_guide/media/editions/cug-tpp-edition.pdf

 

Otherwise, if all you want is to hear the sounds, then set it to 400.

 

 

 

[Christopher Low 5,352]

I have already set the RADIO MINS BARO to "Radio" (although I will double check this to make sure that I have turned the knob to the correct position) and set the decision height on the FMA (exactly the same procedure as the PMDG aircraft), so those callouts should be active (unless I need to manually add them to the QW787.cfg file).

Edited March 28, 2019 by Christopher Low

[eslader 1,783]

I don't remember having to do anything special to get the callouts to sound, but I bought it a long time ago and could be mis-remembering.

 

[jalbino59 114]

3 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I have already set the RADIO MINS BARO to "Radio" (although I will double check this to make sure that I have turned the knob to the correct position) and set the decision height on the FMA (exactly the same procedure as the PMDG aircraft), so those callouts should be active (unless I need to manually add them to the QW787.cfg file).

On one of the MFDs click info>qw config>sounds> look under GPWS Altitude callouts are those all selected?

[Christopher Low 5,352]

All of the GPWS callouts (apart from "5") are enabled. However, I think that I may have been switching the RADIO MINS BARO knob to "BARO", as it appears to be set to "RADIO" by default, so I will check that out in another test flight tomorrow.