Plan on submitting a bug report but has the 747 vnav on descent been super aggressive for anyone else? It was chasing 11000 fpm for me yesterday day and oscillating a tone to try and hold the altitude bug.

 

9 minutes ago, nikolajz1 said:

Plan on submitting a bug report but has the 747 vnav on descent been super aggressive for anyone else? It was chasing 11000 fpm for me yesterday day and oscillating a tone to try and hold the altitude bug.

 

Yep, VNAV chasing when transitioning between to/from descent paths will be addressed in the next build.

51 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

Can you list a few examples? Purely out of interest because I'm trying to figure out the level of fidelity as someone who's neither in the beta nor has the premium version.

I’d rather not just point out things missing or not working as it likely sounds negative and overly picky plus many of those things are outside the scope of this update or already being worked on. 

In the sim it’s similar in fidelity to the longitude in most areas and exceeds it already in some aspects. So imho out of all the ‘base’ -aircraft, it’s likely the ‘best’ one there but others might prefer the longitude. 

If you like WTs work on other aircraft, you’ll love what they’ve done in the 787 because they’ve done a great job already and the awesome news is that it’s clearly going to get even better as the beta evolves. 
 

I flew a short challenging flight in the 787 this morning IRL and came home exhausted and actually still wanted to replicate it in the sim on my shiny new toy the WT 787, that’s how good the WT 787 is. The WT update worked great and it will give everyone using it an enjoyable and rewarding experience of operating a 787. 

Edited May 12, 20233 yr by g-liner

18 hours ago, abennett said:

not bad for free.

We're still waiting on more detailed feedback from you....

How do we make the ND screen full map instead of split screen/

 

Thanks

12 minutes ago, rfelger said:

How do we make the ND screen full map instead of split screen/

 

Thanks

Click r and then nd to select ND on both l and R side of your MFD but I think it’s being patched so moving the engine instruments and EICAS to the other side of the cockpit will do it automatically. 

Just now, g-liner said:

Click r and then nd to select ND on both l and R side of your MFD but I think it’s being patched so moving the engine instruments and EICAS to the other side of the cockpit will do it automatically. 

Ah ok cool thanks!

1 hour ago, g-liner said:

On the 787 all the performance is done on the efb and the take off performance is then sent to the FMC. So not having that or things like the VSD makes a big difference in the sim. There’s lots of other things not working or not working correctly on the 787 ant the moment also, WT say they know about loads of them but not others. . . but it is a early stage Beta still. Plus it’s free! 
 

Even WT themselves say the 787 is targeted between the longitude and CJ4 in realism so it’s unrealistic to expect the highest fidelity on such a complex aircraft. 
 

Still it’s a HUGE improvement on the original 787 and transforms it from something useless to an aircraft  that can be operated in a similar way to the real aircraft imho. 
 

I’m certainly loving flying it around and checking it out, it’s amazing to finally have a working 787 in the game.

 

It’s definitely my favourite update  in the sim so far. WT are doing some amazing work in FS2020.

 

Appreciate the response! Those are definitely valid. That doesn't quite answer my question about how loading weight/balance, pax, cargo in the EFB is much different than using the weights menu, though.

Edited May 12, 20233 yr by Kevin_28

39 minutes ago, g-liner said:

I flew a short challenging flight in the 787 this morning IRL and came home exhausted and actually still wanted to replicate it in the sim on my shiny new toy the WT 787, that’s how good the WT 787 is. The WT update worked great and it will give everyone using it an enjoyable and rewarding experience of operating a 787. 

If this doesn't say, "I'm definitely in the right line of work!", I don't know what does! I'm excited to hear this and await the end of beta excitedly.

 

My personal consensus: The MSFS version has not much to do with the real 787. It's a WT plane with a 787 skin (that's no offense), i.e. it has a great autopilot and all that stuff, but the systems are not really custom as in like in the real 787. You can already see many things missing and/or wrong in the first 20 minutes, so it's not a "payware level experience" 787. If QW ever release their 787, there's no reason not to buy it if you really want to feel like flying a 787.

That said, having this for free is great (so please don't take this as a price-to-value post!) and as said, it can perfectly fly from A to B (which even some payware airliners can't yet...). It's exactly on the level it needs to be for a great free default plane, so I'm not disappointed since this was exactly what I thought it would turn out.
Also it's a beta, so there could me many things improved, but I don't believe they'll add in the VSD, secondary flight plan, perf calculator etc. in a beta, because those would be big new features. Still adding the little things (load shed on the electronic engine start, correct Boeing checklists etc.) could improve immersion quite a bit, so my suggestion - apart from bugfixing - would be to get in contact with real 787 pilots and see which little things and quirks could be realistically added in order to make this feel more "custom" and "787-ish".

I don't believe we'll see any other 787 within the next 5 years, so I'd be happy to see this improved over time.

Edited May 12, 20233 yr by Fiorentoni

These forums are so confusing to someone like me sometimes. I've got one person saying, "I just got done flying a 787 in real life and came home to re-enact the flight. It was a great experience!" and someone else saying, "The MSFS version has not much to do with a real 787."

Flight sim forums have taught me that I'm not missing out on anything by having no real-world aviation experience when it comes to enjoying flying on my computer 😁

14 minutes ago, Floaty Potato said:

These forums are so confusing to someone like me sometimes. I've got one person saying, "I just got done flying a 787 in real life and came home to re-enact the flight. It was a great experience!" and someone else saying, "The MSFS version has not much to do with a real 787."

That's why I was looking for some examples of what's missing or incorrect (I guess the video shows that now) to somewhat draw my own conclusion because you read all kinds of "many things are missing/incorrect" or the opposite of that but rarely does anyone ever mention a single example.

I had the PMDG 747-8 in P3D. and regularly fly the “ultimate” in 747 sims: Aerowinx PSX (which I use coupled to MSFS for external scenery).

While I expect the AAU2 748 to be rather simplified in terms of accurate aircraft systems compared to the other two, in one area I expect it will be equal to PSX, and exceed the capabilities of the current PMDG offering in P3D,  and that is in the ability to accurately fly the lateral path of complex RNP AR approach procedures with multiple curved RF leg segments.

PSX can to it, and I expect the WT 747-8 will be able to as well, if the work WT has already done on the CJ-4 and Longitude is anything to go by. PMDG will gain that ability with the new nav data format they are working on - but that is not yet released, and will come to the PMDG 737s for MSFS before it gets added to any other of their other products.

7 hours ago, Nixoq said:

that but rarely does anyone ever mention a single example.

Most of the examples are on the WT discord. I’ve not listed them here as some aren’t intended to be made by WT like the VSD and some are beyond the scope of the update and some are being fixed and the beta is still in the early stages. Some are also being looked at for the future like the integrated 787  EFB being able to send T/O performance data to the FMC 

You’ll  always get a wide range of views as everyone is different, has different opinions and differing expectations. 

My view is WT have said to expect something between the CJ4 and longitude in realism I think it’s at least as realistic as the longitude if not more. 

I think you can operate the WT787 like the real 787, yes some bits are missing and some are being changed etc but to me they’ve captured the essence of what it’s like operating a 787 and (again) made a great product.