wolfko Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 I waited so long for a 146 or an Avro with VC and now there were even 2 released within a couple of months and I can't make up my mind which one to get. Any suggestions? Thanks, Wolfgang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlaycock Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 I have the quality wings one and I love it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wooleryk Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 +1 for quality wings one. I have it. Very good detail. Great VC. Plus you get 6 versions. 146-100 , -200, -300. The avro rj -70, -85 and -100. Lots of liveries to download on the site as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arismac Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 I agree the Quality Wings is an excellent aircraft. BUT I have not been able to get the FMC working despite carefully following the manual. Mr Lars Roennig at Quality Wings is both abrupt and unhelpful when it comes to support. I have mine installed in P3D and it just might be perfectly OK in FSX. I can't find this out yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arismac Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 I have dual installed the QW Avro into FSX and everything appears fine in FSX, including the FMC, but there are clearly issues in P3D which will need to be resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickel Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Or at least will get the six versions once the -146 ones are out (at no extra cost). I was tempted to jump on the JF one once I saw it was from CLS, but I'm pleased I waited for the QW RJ. It ticks all the right boxes for me systems wise (ie, plenty to play with, but ctrl-e works and there is a non-standard 'gps' button on the AP panel to follow the default FSX planner route if you don't want to program the FMC). I'm really looking forward to the steam -146 versions. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arismac Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 The AP is also a bit dodgy, Mike but only in P3D. Works the way it is supposed to in FSX. I am glad I have kept my dual install while Lars over at QW sorts out the bugs. I did buy the JF version but it is no where near as good as the QW in FSX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickel Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Mine's FSX & FS9, so I can't comment on the P3D version. I'm having issues with the AT for TOGA, but I'm pretty sure that's driver error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfko Posted September 17, 2012 Author Share Posted September 17, 2012 Thanks a lot for all you input, this is really very much appreciated. It’s interesting that there is a clear vote for the QW version. I have to say that his was also my favourite until I checked some youtube videos over the weekend. In this videos the CLS VC look photoreal, crisp and clear, while the QW VC appears a bit blurry and looks more like it was painted than photoreal. In some areas It even looks dull. BTW the same is valid if you compare the outside models. I know I will get a lots of variants within the QW package and the systems might be excellently modelled (which I think is also valid for the CLS version), but I must admit I’m a bit of a VC junkie, so the decision will be a tough one. I’ll let you know which one made the race in the end. Cheers, Wolfgang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyxx Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Well to be blunt the CLS is only good if you like a very basic aircraft, The QW is with out Question the one to buy but even then be warned its not NGX The aircraft was talked about to coolsky DC-9 "can't even hold an ILS straight in a x-wind, has poor L /Vnav, very basic fms, not smooth PFD & ND, 0-failures, no checklist read by FO, no learning center with schematics, IMO mediocre flightdynamics, many buttons in VC unworkable.......is reasonably priced? not creme of the crop graphically, system-wise, and feature-wise....& QW is? Sorry, but Coolsky & QW are not even in the same league if u are in to complex aircrafts IMO." I've deleted it ATM but will go back to in if they up it's spec, but all that being said lots of people like it, they don't push or find its faults or limits, simple as that. Stay clear of the CLS IMHO Wolf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayh Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Nyxx - your post is a little confusing to me - are you comparing the Coolsky DC9 or the QWBae146? (or both to the PMDG NGX)?? Which aircraft (i.e. DC-9 or the QW 146 has all the above faults?) Ray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyxx Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Sorry Ray, Yes it was a reply to a topic about the DC-9 when people thought the QW was an epic aircraft. The NGX is just the bench mark all are judged by. The QW is as above, Poor at hold a x-wind LNAV and VNAV not even close to the NGX Basic FMC Mediocre flight dynamics imo Many buttons in VC unworkable The only aircraft that give me CTD Still it's a far better than the CLS and if you don't push the QW around much it's nice, just not up there, but QW never said there PMDG. So fair point. It looks great BTW. The VC is a nice place to be. I know we cannot say XXXX aircraft has come out any-more but is it OK to talk about other makers aircraft and name them like this topic. I would like to be clear on naming names in a topic like this. Don't want to break Orbx term of use of forums. There forums there rules, have to respect that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sinz Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Another here for QW Although QW only has the RJ versions atm free upgrade to the 146 later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfko Posted September 18, 2012 Author Share Posted September 18, 2012 Another here for QW Although QW only has the RJ versions atm free upgrade to the 146 later. I have deleted my post, because ist was a complete nonsense! Cheers, Wolfgang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom C Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Can I peep in here a sec folks please. I run the NGX over NZ SI & NI and get comfortable high teens to mid 20's FPS. How does the QW RJ compare to that? You would imagine it should be better, but their 757 began life hard on FPS so I have help off for the moment, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgutteri Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 I actually bought the Flight1/CLS version but ordered a refund the next day as little things like no mouse scroll on knobs and no right-clicking on switches made me feel like it was an unfinished product. Really enjoying the QW version though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfko Posted September 20, 2012 Author Share Posted September 20, 2012 I actually bought the Flight1/CLS version but ordered a refund the next day as little things like no mouse scroll on knobs and no right-clicking on switches made me feel like it was an unfinished product. Really enjoying the QW version though. Doesn't Flight1 publish the QW-version and JustFlight the CLS-version? wolfgang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyxx Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Yes they do Wolf, along with 30 Day money back if you don't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Routley Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 I would like to be clear on naming names in a topic like this. Don't want to break Orbx term of use of forums.Technically that would be right. It is important that the conversation stays civil and constructive on a thread like this, would be my take. We do retain the right to lock or remove topics about other dev products, but this usually is only necessary in obvious situations. 'Bagging' any developers product here is not ok. Those posts/threads will pretty quickly disappear. Similarly, posts to promote other scenery vendors products are (obviously) not on. Mostly, reasonable judgement prevails. Sent with Tapatalk for iPhone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyxx Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Thanks Ian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgutteri Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Doesn't Flight1 publish the QW-version and JustFlight the CLS-version? wolfgang Ahh yes sorry for the confusion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 QW have hit a nice balance with their AVRO RJ, looking forward to the 146 version. Justflight just don't go far enough with their "lite" approach to FMS among other things. Only thing that bugs me about the QW is the lask of performance data and procedures - but it's not a QW problem - it's virtually impossible to find apart from very basic numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Ri Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I've tested the both QW 146 & JF 146. QW 146 is far better than JF (for me) cuz the performance is awesome. Flew 2 days ago over NZSI and all i can say the plane is very smooth. Most of the times the plane doesn't follow the ILS Path even when i see the plane doing autoland. Most of the times landing before the runway, sometimes far away from the runway. (during autolands) but when everything is ok and the plane follow the ILS path, most of the times landing very very hard. Maybe im doing something wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.