How does the latest AAU2 787 compare to Qualitywings 787 overall? I have been busy and haven't have much time to try out the new update yet and would like to hear your thoughts and opinion.

Unless I'm missing something, I don't think QW have a 787 for MSFS?

Jase

Nope. The comparison is with the QW 787 for FSX/P3D. That's the only benchmark available...

I mean it's pretty word not allowed good with AAU2.  I had the QW for P3D.  I guess overall the QW may have been a bit more in depth (as WT mostly touched the avionics and some systems afaik).  But um....AAU2 is free lol

What are you waiting for?

Apart from the fact I can't control doors (I don't know why GSX asked me to close door L1, when they opened it by themselves), and that there's no Jump Ahead function in MSFS (the Travel To function is completely useless for me), I felt the autotrim (the C*U law) was better done than in QW.

Howwever, I found that, at higher flight levels,  if I change from VNAV to any other vertical mode, the speed is set to M0.95. I'm no real pilot, but that doesn't feel right. I'm just climbing; I'll keep on evaluating.

Edited July 4, 20232 yr by Luis Hernandez

5 hours ago, captain420 said:

How does the latest AAU2 787 compare to Qualitywings 787 overall? I have been busy and haven't have much time to try out the new update yet and would like to hear your thoughts and opinion.

There is no QW 787 for MSFS.

Well let's see.  In MSFS, there IS an AAU2 787 and there ISN'T a QW 787.  Seems to me there is nothing to compare.😉

The QW 787 for P3D was more in depth, though not by far. Things that come to mind are EFB with Perf Calc and w&b, quite a lot of additional FMC pages and some smaller 787-quirks. As for the flight performance and autopilot I honestly don‘t remember, but I guess that means the QW was solid.

Do we even have QW787 for MSFS to start with? 😄 And AAU2 is free, so?

I always remember the way the QW 787 drew the routes (the pink line) were strange and didn't know if that was a 787 thing IRL or just the way QW did it. I do prefer the way the MSFS 787 draws the routes with the curves etc. 

It's been a very long time since I have flown the QW thing though and sure it did have some additional features and functionality but I do also really enjoy the MSFS 787 with the new updates WT brought to it. 

Edited July 4, 20232 yr by Zangoose

It’s too bad that company is dead. 

1 hour ago, omarsmak30 said:

Do we even have QW787 for MSFS to start with? 😄 And AAU2 is free, so?

You can still compare quality of a free and non-free product, what‘s the matter? Also just because there is no alternative on MSFS it doesn‘t mean you have to actually fly the aircraft. For many people here on Avsim money isn‘t the actual factor, but time is. I don‘t want to waste my precious simming time with planes that leave me unhappy or unsatisfied or annoyed after the flight. That said, the WT 787 is not of that kind and will leave you quite satisfied, though I suppose this will only get better once their EFB is available.

Edited July 4, 20232 yr by Fiorentoni

The QW787 is good for P3D. It has features such as 'jump ahead' (a native function in MSFS), electronic checklists (commonly seen in add-ons now), auto-step climb, EFB and moving maps, and a bit of life added to it from the crew and pax announcements feature.

Where it doesn't do so well, IMO, is the MFD refresh rate (a P3D platform limitation), a lack of systems depth, no failures, and I wasn't sure if the Boeing C*U (fly-by-wire) system worked as expected (thoughts @jon b?).

If MS keeps the 787 in the aircraft list for MSFS2024 and the WT team remains interested in updating it, there's no reason why the MSFS cannot surpass QW's efforts.
Despite a recent rumour, I'd be surprised to see a QW 787 make its entrance into MSFS. 

15 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

The QW787 is good for P3D. It has features such as 'jump ahead' (a native function in MSFS), electronic checklists (commonly seen in add-ons now), auto-step climb, EFB and moving maps, and a bit of life added to it from the crew and pax announcements feature.

Where it doesn't do so well, IMO, is the MFD refresh rate (a P3D platform limitation), a lack of systems depth, no failures, and I wasn't sure if the Boeing C*U (fly-by-wire) system worked as expected (thoughts @jon b?).

If MS keeps the 787 in the aircraft list for MSFS2024 and the WT team remains interested in updating it, there's no reason why the MSFS cannot surpass QW's efforts.
Despite a recent rumour, I'd be surprised to see a QW 787 make its entrance into MSFS. 

Thanks. That's a good writeup. I am looking for more comparisons between the QW 787 for P3D, and the WT 787 in MSFS. So if an EFB is released by one of the 3rd party freeware devs (ie. Heavy Division) for the WT 787, and the EFB is of comparable quality to the QW 787 EFB, would the WT 787 with the freeware EFB be roughly the same as the QW 787?

Edited July 4, 20232 yr by abrams_tank

The OP clearly didn't refer to a QW 787 for MSFS. Obviously he was just looking for peoples comparison between the QW 787 many of us are used to vs what is available now from AU2.