FSX-MS VAS (ili) Is My New Best Friend - QW 787

[Ricardo41 5,936]

As mentioned in another thread, I recently bought QW's 787 and must say that I'm extremely pleased with this purchase. Everything just works, visuals are great, manuals are detailed, and the thing reads FSX flight plans with no muss and fuss. 

The cockpit includes a handy VAS monitor right next to the PFD, so you can see whether or not your VAS is heading South (literally and/or figurativly speaking). 

I recently completed what might be called a "VAS stress test" - a flight from the Seychelles to London Heathrow, with the 787 in the BA livery. 

Additional add ons: AS 2016, ASCA, GEX Europe and UTX Europe, GEX Africa and the Middle East... and Aerosoft's  Mega Airport Heathrow for FSX-Steam. 

My PC is almost 4 year old. 

Total flight time was about 10 hours, coming into Heathrow the weather was really bad with heavy rain and thunderstorms.

Sursprisingly, I had no OOM. VAS max was about 98%.

I've found that turning down Autogen scenery as well as reducing AI and other traffic to <15% makes a significant difference. 

Also, I either fly "into" or "out of" detailed airports but not both. 

All in all, I'm very pleased with QW's 787. It's become my "go-to" plane. Just wish there were more short-hauls available. 

In contrast, most of the other payware planes I bought when I returned to FSX have proven, in one way or another, to be dissapointments. 

[Pugilist2 878]

Great to hear! I am considering purchasing it.

[Jim Young 2,356]

On 6/23/2019 at 7:16 AM, Ricardo41 said:

All in all, I'm very pleased with QW's 787. It's become my "go-to" plane.

It is a beautiful aircraft and well-done by QW.

[Dazkent 113]

Like the look of the QW 787, how easy is it to learn to fly?

 

[forshaw 47]

On 6/23/2019 at 7:16 AM, Ricardo41 said:

As mentioned in another thread, I recently bought QW's 787 and must say that I'm extremely pleased with this purchase. Everything just works, visuals are great, manuals are detailed, and the thing reads FSX flight plans with no muss and fuss. 

The cockpit includes a handy VAS monitor right next to the PFD, so you can see whether or not your VAS is heading South (literally and/or figurativly speaking). 

I recently completed what might be called a "VAS stress test" - a flight from the Seychelles to London Heathrow, with the 787 in the BA livery. 

Additional add ons: AS 2016, ASCA, GEX Europe and UTX Europe, GEX Africa and the Middle East... and Aerosoft's  Mega Airport Heathrow for FSX-Steam. 

My PC is almost 4 year old. 

Total flight time was about 10 hours, coming into Heathrow the weather was really bad with heavy rain and thunderstorms.

Sursprisingly, I had no OOM. VAS max was about 98%.

I've found that turning down Autogen scenery as well as reducing AI and other traffic to <15% makes a significant difference. 

Also, I either fly "into" or "out of" detailed airports but not both. 

All in all, I'm very pleased with QW's 787. It's become my "go-to" plane. Just wish there were more short-hauls available. 

In contrast, most of the other payware planes I bought when I returned to FSX have proven, in one way or another, to be dissapointments. 

Thanks for taking the time to provide the information. It is very informative and you hit on the key points that matters to us simmers "performance and flights." 

I have always liked QW I have the 757 (which i still fly occasionally for short hauls), and after waiting for such a long time for the 787 release I eventually bought the PMDG 747-400 / and now the - 8. 

I actually fly both in and out of dense Add-on airports (I just can't use defaults airports anymore FSX is too old defaults 😊) and I still get good acceptable performance into NY JFK with thunderstorms departing from HK, with the PMDG. Can't be worse with QW

Based on your input I will definitely get the 787 for mid to long range. I will use the PMDG 747 for my long NY to HK flights. I really haven't gotten any OOM within the past 4 yrs. I have been using FSX since it came out so (as you pointed out) I am pretty versed on it so I know exactly what to do and most important what not to do.

I didn't realize that the 787 had a VAS monitor, that in itself is great.

Thanks again.

Forshaw

 

 

However

[Ricardo41 5,936]

7 hours ago, Dazkent said:

Like the look of the QW 787, how easy is it to learn to fly?

 

Not difficult at all. It comes with a detailed tutorial flight. 

6 hours ago, forshaw said:

Thanks for taking the time to provide the information. It is very informative and you hit on the key points that matters to us simmers "performance and flights." 

I have always liked QW I have the 757 (which i still fly occasionally for short hauls), and after waiting for such a long time for the 787 release I eventually bought the PMDG 747-400 / and now the - 8. 

I actually fly both in and out of dense Add-on airports (I just can't use defaults airports anymore FSX is too old defaults 😊) and I still get good acceptable performance into NY JFK with thunderstorms departing from HK, with the PMDG. Can't be worse with QW

Based on your input I will definitely get the 787 for mid to long range. I will use the PMDG 747 for my long NY to HK flights. I really haven't gotten any OOM within the past 4 yrs. I have been using FSX since it came out so (as you pointed out) I am pretty versed on it so I know exactly what to do and most important what not to do.

I didn't realize that the 787 had a VAS monitor, that in itself is great.

Thanks again.

Forshaw

 

 

However

In terms of having details at airports, I find that the "Ray Smith airports" offer a good compromise between the default airport scenery and detailed addons. 

[forshaw 47]

21 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

Not difficult at all. It comes with a detailed tutorial flight. 

In terms of having details at airports, I find that the "Ray Smith airports" offer a good compromise between the default airport scenery and detailed addons. 

Fantastic, thanks for the tip. i will definitely check it out.