QQW 787 Dreamliner Questions

[Radial9 69]

I have recently completed my migration from P3D4.5 to P3D Version 5.2.22.27615. I'll assume that's 5.2 HF2. Worth the time and effort!

I'm considering purchasing the Quality Wings 787 Dreamliner. Have read reviews, watched some vids of flights and thought I would giverago. I have the PMDG 737NGXu, and recewntly picked up the 777 and 747 packages when they wereon sale. 

It appears that QW only allows registered owners of the aircraft to view their forum. I've always had an issue with this policy, but that's just me. It makes it impossible to determine what owners think of the quality of their purchase and the level of support offered by the vendor. In this day and age, read only access could surley be allowed if they desire to keep the noise level down.

Anyway, is anyone running the QW 787 on P3DV5.2hf2? The web site reads P3dV5.1

I would ask them directly but every link on their website to contact them or send them a message is dead. Not always a good sign.

And... it comes in a Flight1 package. Every time I get near that software and company my frustration level goes off the charts. I was going to buy the Reality XP GPS system for my A2A Bonanza, but I just get a trembling in my fingers every time I go near anything with a F1 label on it. I would be replacing my existing F1 GPS in the Bonanza, which I cannot get to function for love or money, and have given up trying to get updated for V5.

Thanks!

Bob

[markmasterson 63]

Bob,

    I have QW787 for several years.  I have had no problems with it in P3D V5.2 HF3.   It is not the same as PMDG but it is a quality add-on.  Lookup some reviews on Google before you make a choice.  Just wanted to chime in that I have and still continue to enjoy this addon.

Mark

[787flyer 633]

Hi Bob,

I am currently flying this aircraft on a round-the-world tour and am loving it. 👍

 

Its pretty functional and all the main features work although there's some little things that are niggle to me like the Descend Now function on the FMS is not functional i.e. if I want to descend earlier than the calculated TOD. Its small things like this that are missing, but on the whole is pretty reliable and stable. I would say, as Mark also stated above, not PMDG or FSLabs level - its  a notch down from there but way better than any default aircraft.ETOPS calcs and ETPs in the FMS are also not present.

The main thing I struggle with is the flare at the moment. This aircraft loves to float, buts that's down to my piloting than anything wrong with the flight model. I believe its very realistic.

As for the QW forum, you are right however I would not be too concerned about this since there's only limited info on that site worth reading since QW does not keep this forum to to date (this is a shame and impacts QW reputation I feel). Searching the web usually provides you an answer.

One problem I did find upon initial install that I solved was the fuzzy gauges. I had to turn the VC mip maps off in P3D to get the sharpness of the gauges back.Also the latest RealLight/TrueGlass issues (from TFDi) that previous versions suffered seems to be resolved now too.

As for the Flight One wrapper, I also agree. There's a "learning curve" to how to use the installer based on how they have their different vendor stores set up in there, but once familiar the actual installation process is quite painless.

 

In summary, if you enjoy the other airliner products for PMDG ; I am fairly sure you will like the QW 787 too.

I can't comment on the Reality XP GPS as I havent purchased that.

 

 

 

[C2615 319]

Main things I got for QW is the broken descend, not just VNAV descend, but the aerodynamic one as well.

I made some tweaks to it's engine thrust to made it fit the typical descend rate found on FCTM, works better, but still VNAV is broken.

[elcaro 4]

I like the QW787 for several reasons.  I think it hand-flies nicely.  I think the graphics and eye-candy inside and out are second to none, and better than most.  I also like the automation, and it's nice not having to worry about all the gyrations setting and switching pneumatic systems for engine start, etc.

My experience with jets is admittedly limited since my primary focus has always been recips, but I haven't noticed issues with descent control.  If I want to deviate from the FMS descent profile, FLCH works for me.

[Radial9 69]

Thanks Guys, appreciate the feedback.

[DChockey08 299]

On 8/27/2021 at 3:18 PM, Radial9 said:

And... it comes in a Flight1 package. Every time I get near that software and company my frustration level goes off the charts. 

Good to know I'm not the only one. 

I really enjoy the QW787. As someone who has spent quite a lot of time in my previous job inside the flight deck of a 787, I think it's a fantastic looking version of the aircraft. External modelling, internal modeling, and sounding as well (the interior sounds in the flight deck are absolutely spot on). 

The systems are on the PMDG-light level. I'd put them somewhere between the PMDG 777 and the Aerosoft Airbus in terms of realism. Has a few quirks and not everything is 100% accurate, but it gets the job done nicely. Certainly the best (well, the only) 787 on the market now and I'd bet good money it's the only one we will ever see. 

[Bob Scott 7,715]

I'm having a hard time trying to find a way to give a thumbs-up on this one.

I just loaded the latest version, v1.4, and I can't get it to do anything resembling a normal VNAV climb--it keeps levelling off, won't follow the climb speeds on the FMS, altitude intervention isn't apparently modelled, etc.

The autopilot is sluggish...turns in a descent result in 400-500 fpm changes in the descent rate, turns in level flight result in altitude deviations, speed control by the A/T is sluggish enoiugh for the speed to drop 10 KIAS below selected when making a configuration change during an approach, etc.

It's a pretty thing, but if you're not fairly tolerant of a fair amount of sloppiness not evident in better add-ons like the PMDG 777, it may not be your cup of tea.

The good news is that it's sold via the Flight1 wrapper, so you can get it and decide for yourself with a no-questions-asked 30-day return policy.

 

[cowpatz 243]

39 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I'm having a hard time trying to find a way to give a thumbs-up on this one.

I just loaded the latest version, v1.4, and I can't get it to do anything resembling a normal VNAV climb--it keeps levelling off, won't follow the climb speeds on the FMS, altitude intervention isn't apparently modelled, etc.

The autopilot is sluggish...turns in a descent result in 400-500 fpm changes in the descent rate, turns in level flight result in altitude deviations, speed control by the A/T is sluggish enoiugh for the speed to drop 10 KIAS below selected when making a configuration change during an approach, etc.

It's a pretty thing, but if you're not fairly tolerant of a fair amount of sloppiness not evident in better add-ons like the PMDG 777, it may not be your cup of tea.

The good news is that it's sold via the Flight1 wrapper, so you can get it and decide for yourself with a no-questions-asked 30-day return policy.

 

I think you may have an install issue as I don't see that sort of behaviour.

[Bob Scott 7,715]

23 hours ago, cowpatz said:

I think you may have an install issue as I don't see that sort of behaviour.

I re-flew the last profile that gave me so much butt pain (787-9 from OTHH-KJFK) and discovered more about what was going on.

I flew the PATOM 1M SID out of OTHH (Doha, Qatar), which has hard altitude restrictions of 3000 ft at BUDEB and ALKAG, 4000 at DEBIL, and 5000 at ALNAK.  ATC gave me a climb to 10000 right after takeoff, so I selected 10000 ft in the MCP, pressed the alt knob for altitude intervention, and the 787 climbed through 3000, but then levelled off at 4000.  I pressed alt intervention again, and it started to climb, but levelled off again at 5000.  So each press of the intervention knob is clearing out the next restriction where it should be clearing out all upcoming restrictions below the altitude set on the MCP when intervention is selected.  This is easily duplicated, and the (incorrect) altitudes being set are reflected on the FMS as well.

I closely observed turns in a V/S descent, and again saw 500 fpm deviations from the selected rate, mostly when rolling in/out of the turns.

When i configured with gear and set flaps to 25 from 20 approaching the FAF, the A/T allowed the speed to decay 10 KIAS below the selected speed.

No, these are not installation issues.

[cowpatz 243]

Bob the altitude intervention use you describe is functioning correctly. Each press of the ALT knob will remove one altitude constraint between the current aircraft altitude and the altitude set in the MCP window. if you want to climb to your cruise altitude (when set in the MCP altitude window), and "bypass" the constraints, then use the CLB DIR LSK.

I can't say that I have seen the vertical speed errors or speed instability of the magnitude that you are experiencing (in similar situations) but I will take a closer look when I next fly it. A prolonged VS error of 500 fpm does seem excessive but not out of the question depending on the magnitude of the rate commanded and AOB etc. What period of time is the VS error at that magnitude and what was the commanded descent rate?

In general terms the 787 autopilot is quite soft with a bias to passenger comfort. You may also notice quite a bit of speed instability in a VNAV PTH descent, especially at low cost indexs, that either requires living with a much higher speed than programmed, or require the regular application of speed brake.

Edited September 1, 2021 by cowpatz
Word double up.

[Sparkrite 188]

On 8/27/2021 at 8:18 PM, Radial9 said:

I have recently completed my migration from P3D4.5 to P3D Version 5.2.22.27615. I'll assume that's 5.2 HF2. Worth the time and effort!

 

On 8/27/2021 at 8:24 PM, markmasterson said:

I have QW787 for several years.  I have had no problems with it in P3D V5.2 HF3.

 

Am I missing updates?

Unless Radial9 & markmasterson are part of the 'chosen few' by LM, all I can find is P3D V5.2 HF1. 😨

Edited September 1, 2021 by Sparkrite

[Tokitaumelie 164]

7 hours ago, Sparkrite said:

 

 

Am I missing updates?

Unless Radial9 & markmasterson are part of the 'chosen few' by LM, all I can find is P3D V5.2 HF1. 😨

Current version is Prepar3D_v5.2.22.27615.

So, probably v5.2 HF2 🙂

 

[Sparkrite 188]

9 hours ago, Tokitaumelie said:

Current version is Prepar3D_v5.2.22.27615.

So, probably v5.2 HF2 🙂

 

Nah, haven't missed anything, still 5.2 HF1 :-

https://www.prepar3d.com/news/announcements/2021/06/120807/

 

Just had me wondering when people above talking about HF2 and even HF3...........

 

 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Sparkrite

[Bob Scott 7,715]

On 8/31/2021 at 10:28 PM, cowpatz said:

Bob the altitude intervention use you describe is functioning correctly. Each press of the ALT knob will remove one altitude constraint between the current aircraft altitude and the altitude set in the MCP window. if you want to climb to your cruise altitude (when set in the MCP altitude window), and "bypass" the constraints, then use the CLB DIR LSK.

I can't find any documentation that would confirm this.  On page 4.2 of the Boeing 787 FCTM, it says "Altitude intervention is accomplished by selecting the next desired altitude in the MCP altitude window, pushing the MCP altitude selector which deletes the altitude constraint and allows the airplane to climb to the MCP altitude." 

If there are multiple altitude constraints programmed between the acft's current altitude and the selected altitude, then from what you're saying, by selecting altitude intervention the jet wouldn't behave as described in the manual, allowing "...the airplane to climb to the MCP altitude."  It would, instead, level off at another intermediate constraint.  In other Boeing airplanes with an altitude intervention function, if you set an altitude in the MCP and select altitude intervention, it clears all intervening constraints up to the selected altitude.  Intervention means "take me there now."  Boeing is pretty good about maintaining commonality of function between their aircraft--it seems odd to me that they would make the 787 behave differently from a 777 or 747-400 in this regard.

Is there more definitive illumination on this topic somewhere?