Wow, three quotes. Only thing flawed is you bring up it's not study level. No body asked or mentioned study level but you. Do you even own the plane? Never mind, I forgot. It's not study level. 

Bickering aside, I've just done another successful flight in mine, and I enjoyed it very much. I find myself wondering why I waited so long to make the purchase, but I'm definitely glad I finally did.

12 hours ago, SimPilot221 said:

lack of realistic IRS alignment time

The alignment time is there, there is a config option to set this.  But yes by default the alignment time is short as it was felt most users would not want to wait out the realistic alignment time.

Edited June 29, 20196 yr by ErnieAlston

I've noticed these words - QW/PDMG/Price seems to stir a few people up on these forums lol.

Anyways I've got my Majestic Qantaslink Q400 (amazing aircraft) for my short flights which I can just jump on program and fly and I'll use the 787 as my mid to long haul.

I'll be starting off doing Jetstar - Cairns to Tokyo - Brisbane to Bali for a bit.  Routes I've flown on personally then maybe the epic Perth to London.

Should be grand.

FYI on Fselite it was stated that next update will bring the 787-10 as well as some fixes and improved displays. It "should" release during this summer.

I fly the QW787 on my home flight sim and I fly the B787 when I go to work. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The QW787 gives me a feeling of immersion that is quite satisfying.  I especially have enjoyed using the iPad integration with the FMC. I have replicated many real world flights I have done with the QW787 and found them to more than close enough.

It's possible that my mind fills in any gaps in the simulation with my real world experience.  In any case, I never think to myself, “this doesn’t seem realistic” when I fly the QW, just the opposite.

On 6/28/2019 at 8:57 AM, Ray Proudfoot said:

Matt, I agree that "study level" is a term that has come into use on AvSim to describe an aircraft that is modelled to the highest level possible within the limitations of the flight sim engine.

...which makes the A2A Cub* a study-level aircraft, which I have no problem with, but it's probably not what's in people's minds when they use the term. 

(*Along with all A2A AccuSim aircraft.)

 

 

Edited June 30, 20196 yr by Holdit

6 hours ago, scottsware said:

I fly the QW787 on my home flight sim and I fly the B787 when I go to work. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The QW787 gives me a feeling of immersion that is quite satisfying.  I especially have enjoyed using the iPad integration with the FMC. I have replicated many real world flights I have done with the QW787 and found them to more than close enough.

It's possible that my mind fills in any gaps in the simulation with my real world experience.  In any case, I never think to myself, “this doesn’t seem realistic” when I fly the QW, just the opposite.

There you go, guys. Straight from the horse's mouth. If a real world 787 pilot can be impressed with the QW 787, then that's good enough for me.

6 hours ago, scottsware said:

I fly the QW787 on my home flight sim and I fly the B787 when I go to work. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The QW787 gives me a feeling of immersion that is quite satisfying.  I especially have enjoyed using the iPad integration with the FMC. I have replicated many real world flights I have done with the QW787 and found them to more than close enough.

It's possible that my mind fills in any gaps in the simulation with my real world experience.  In any case, I never think to myself, “this doesn’t seem realistic” when I fly the QW, just the opposite.

Should they improve the Level Change and VNAV reliability (LNAV would be a plus) and make the flight deck lighting realistic (using the correct knobs, etc) then it would be awesome. The WX radar is awful but they say it will be improved already.

6 hours ago, Holdit said:

...which makes the A2A Cub* a study-level aircraft, which I have no problem with, but it's probably not what's in people's minds when they use the term. 

(*Along with all A2A AccuSim aircraft.)

Perhaps not but it still deserves the accolade if it's modelled as accurately as possible.

9 hours ago, Wanthuyr Filho said:

Should they improve the Level Change and VNAV reliability (LNAV would be a plus) and make the flight deck lighting realistic (using the correct knobs, etc) then it would be awesome. The WX radar is awful but they say it will be improved already.

Actually lighting is decent. I agree that the knobs aren't all working but you do get some flood and lights if you want too.

So I bought it but I can't even get it off the ground it keeps crashing to desktop. Reinstalled seems to be ok. On take off nearly stalled and crashed maybe issues with pre-flight? anyways I'm in the air.

Edited July 1, 20196 yr by VBHB

Hope you enjoy it! Did you set trim properly??

I have no problems with take off trim calculations in the QW787. Those issues are reserved for the CS757

Strange I find the 787 to be extremely easy to fly upon takeoff. Did you correctly set throttles to toga? 

And yes CS757 is a death trap at takeoff.