French VFR Canso

[Rallymodeller]

Haven't seen a thread about this here, so I'll give the heads up: French VFR have done a PBY-5A Canso/Catalina.


http://frenchvfr.free.fr/download.ph...=808&tconfig=0

It's still a work in progress, apparently, but awesome to see a Canso in MSFS. Looking forward to giving it a try later.

[CG_1976]

I must be doing something wrong. Got her started, taxi, she wont roll TO from the rwy ??? Yes the Parking brake is released lol.

[Mario Donadon]

I downloaded it and liked it, some improvements may come with time, but it's very good, great work, and Free

[Javis]

[Javis]

I must be doing something wrong. Got her started, taxi, she wont roll TO from the rwy ??? Yes the Parking brake is released lol.

What's a Catalina without an Iphone these days, éh ?.. You might wanna try calling it up and f.i. do a Ready For Take-Off (Page 2). Click the Reg.Number atop the dashboard to call it up.

Btw, no problem here getting it to roll..

[Javis]

Freeware Fantastique !!

Cockpit needs a little bit of 'living it up' but it has lots of nice touches already. I think she flies beautifully, just what to expect from a Cat. Pity no water effects yet but we can be sure that'll be implemented shortly naturellement. She deserves it well ! As you can see above the devs certainly went the extra mile by adding a fully fletched maintenance scene with loading fuel and all (available via your Iphone). The engine sound may be familiar to you if you ever flew Manfred's Magnificent Masterpiece C-47 in FS9. It's Tufun's (Ted Wolfgang) likewise magnificent concert in P&W's Major Third that Ted was kind enough to lent to FrenchVFR for their wonderful freeware Catalina. Still sounding strong !!

Merci bien et Merci a million FrenchVFR for this magnifique freeware Catalina Canso !

[lagaffe]

Thanks Javis for yours screens: beautiful and I love its.

Concerning the Conso, now that the "Stearmans" are almost finished (a few details to settle) I will be able to take over this Canso and apply many new functions that I learned during the last 5 months:
- finish rivets on structure
- improve the visual aspect of propellers at start-up;
- animate fuel filling a little more
- review textures to try to turn all that deserve into PBR textures (virtual cockpit)
- and a few other things I noted in my readme.

PS: For the team who develop this aircraft: I am alone, just me

Thanks to follow this addon

@Rallymodeller,
Yet there is indeed a post to follow the developments of this addon (3 pages) :
=> https://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforu...ighlight=canso

[Sunny9850]

Prompted by the post I downloaded the latest version of the CANSO
and took her out for another spin around the Canary Islands.

Beautiful model with lots of delightful stuff to discover here and there.
I did notice two things though, but maybe I am mistaken.
Eingine 1 is animated on the right side of the aircraft and Engine 2 on the left.
There also seems to be a little bit too much power available. Even at closed throttle
I had to ride the brakes during taxi.

But all I can say is Merci Beaucoup for a wonderful aircraft to the sim.

Sunny

[jankees]

maybe I should finish this paintjob one day...

jk5425 by JanKees Blom, on Flickr

[Rallymodeller]

@Rallymodeller,
Yet there is indeed a post to follow the developments of this addon (3 pages) :
=> https://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforu...ighlight=canso

Not sure how I missed it, thanks!

[Javis]

Thanks Javis for yours screens: beautiful and I love its.

You're welcome, Didier, and the pleasure is mine. Always loved the Catalina and i am very thankfull to you for bringing it to MSFS !

I can't help noticing there are some problems with the vertices here and there on your external model :



When this kind of anomalies show it is usual a matter of checking the vertices in these area's. You'll find a number of these vertices not welded together propperly which results in strange shadowing you do not want there. I work with 3DSMax myself and have almost no experience with Blender but i'm sure it must have some kind of vertices checker as well. Usually you can set its params to how close you want to have vertices next to each other in those area's. If they are closer to each other (i.e. *too* close) they will get automaticly welded. You can also do it manually of course by welding vertices that seem to be too close to each other (or delete one of them). Little bit of work and some testing first is advisable of course but you will soon see the floats look much better in their natural shape and the strange shadow where the fuselage bends sharply inwards will have dissapeared.

Once you get the hang of it you might want to select the whole fuselage with the vertices checker (using standard vertices seperation of course ;-) and find more vertices too close to eachother while not welded ( vertical stab and rudder f.i. ). And that goes for the whole wing too of course.

I certainly don't want to put more workload on you, Didier, but i'm sure you'd love to get rid of these strange shadows as well.

Again thank you very much for your hard- and wonderful work !

[DennyA]

Super excited that the Canso's going to get further development!

I'll grab the Stearman for some period flying in the meantime! Can't wait to check it out.

[Allen]

Javis: With the fuselage the model has too much of a smoothing value. The shadow you see is from the normals being told to round over an edge that should be "Mark Sharp" or the bottom shouldn't be welded to the side vertices in that area.

Here are some images done in Blender. Done in now an quite old version of Blender but should still happen with to current versions from what I have seen.



With normals displayed for Faces and Edges you can see that the 180 degree that the side and bottom share a common Edge normal while the 89 degree side and bottom have there own Edge normal.



As for the floats. The same problem that fuselage has is happening with the floats. Also the conversion from Quad face to Tri face may have not work quite right. I don't know if Blender's "Triangulate Face" algorithm was used or if the model was exported with what ever plug in 2020 uses and it auto converted to triangular face with a triangulate faces algorithm of its own.

The area in red should have "Mark Sharp"ed or smoothing should have been dropped tell that area was sharp line. The blue area may be an area where the Quad face to Tri face may have not work quite right.

[Javis]

That's a well documented example, Allen. I was thinking more along the 'smells like unwelded vertices' line.. Whenever i encountered such odd shading or deformed mesh i'd always found unwelded vertices to be the culprit. After welding them the object always returned smooth as a baby bottom.. ;-) (must say always been reluctant to go messing about with smoothing groups. Once i was happy with a certain smoothing value i'd never change it) :

https://www.reddit.com/r/3dsmax/comm...ke_this_model/

Hopefully Didier can make use of one of these methods to refine his beautiful Canso model.

Thanks for your input !

[lagaffe]

That's a well documented example, Allen. I was thinking more along the 'smells like unwelded vertices' line.. Whenever i encountered such odd shading or deformed mesh i'd always found unwelded vertices to be the culprit. After welding them the object always returned smooth as a baby bottom.. ;-) (must say always been reluctant to go messing about with smoothing groups. Once i was happy with a certain smoothing value i'd never change it) :

https://www.reddit.com/r/3dsmax/comm...ke_this_model/

Hopefully Didier can make use of one of these methods to refine his beautiful Canso model.

Thanks for your input !

Hi Javis,

I had not noticed this rendering defect during the tests and my testers either (we can no longer count on them, everything gets lost ) but it is not a problem of soldered vertex because the "auto-weld" option is always activated. On the other hand what I noticed is that in some situations it tends to bugger (Blender 2.83). after working a little with Blender 3.3.5 for my vintage pilots (Boeing Stearman), I think I would migrate to this new version that is more durable.

On the occasion of the resumption of the project, I would be happy to review with attention these two parts.

For the floats, the best would be to draw a horizontal line with a "Mark Sharp" and redo a smooth upper and lower this boundary line.


@Sunny9850,

If you watch carefully several videos of a Canso or a Catalmina during the startup step, you will see that it is always the right engine that is started first. Why?
Because an essential part (electric in my memory but I would check) is on this right engine, the left has none. So the start is with the right first then it is this motor that provides the electrical energy for the left.
Moreover I had modeled an internal APU and I had to use it in the next versions to start the right engine more naturally.

This caused me a lot of trouble because FSX, P3D and MSFS consider by default that the starting order of the engines is always from left to right but this is only a hypothesis of Microsoft and that does not take into account the reality. To be able to realize this I had to modify many codes that took the hypothesis of Microsoft as a basis.

[Sunny9850]

@Sunny9850,

If you watch carefully several videos of a Canso or a Catalmina during the startup step, you will see that it is always the right engine that is started first. Why?
Because an essential part (electric in my memory but I would check) is on this right engine, the left has none. So the start is with the right first then it is this motor that provides the electrical energy for the left.
Moreover I had modeled an internal APU and I had to use it in the next versions to start the right engine more naturally.

This caused me a lot of trouble because FSX, P3D and MSFS consider by default that the starting order of the engines is always from left to right but this is only a hypothesis of Microsoft and that does not take into account the reality. To be able to realize this I had to modify many codes that took the hypothesis of Microsoft as a basis.

I think you misunderstood, if i move my left throttle lever, in the sim it is the right engine.
And this also does apply to props and mixture.
This has nothing to do with which engine is started first or is considered the main engine for electrical supply etc.
For example in the Connie the start sequence was 3-4-2-1, but the #1 engine is still the left wing outboard engine.

Cheers
Sunny

[lagaffe]

I think you misunderstood, if i move my left throttle lever, in the sim it is the right engine.
And this also does apply to props and mixture.
This has nothing to do with which engine is started first or is considered the main engine for electrical supply etc.
For example in the Connie the start sequence was 3-4-2-1, but the #1 engine is still the left wing outboard engine.

Cheers
Sunny

Sorry, I did not understand all the nuances of your question and therefore my explanations were not complete.

Do you have read the documentation provided and the recommendations for joysticks's assignements ?
This aspect is clearly explained with a screenshot and a file assignments.PDF so that there is no misunderstanding possible.

The screenshot included in Documentation folder :



Personally I use a THRUSTMASTER throttle with 2 levers and it seems logical that the right lever manages the right engine and the same for the left lever

PS: It was Microsoft that got into the habit of naming engines from left to right but in our case: it does not correspond to reality. I understand that it was more simple for them. At my level, I simply tried to model reality on the assignment of joysticks for the pleasure of lovers of twin-engine aircraft.

For the IDLE RPMs, I planned to tune it in the next version: it's a little bit too hight and should be decreased at 400/450 rpms. (if I remember well because I have not updated Canso for 5 months). Engine's friction and engine efficacity (508 and 509 tables which were used in the old aircraft.air in FSX) should be also revised in the same direction so as to reduce the traction of the propellers at very low rpm.

[Sunny9850]

Do you have read the documentation provided and the recommendations for joysticks's assignements ?
This aspect is clearly explained with a screenshot and a file assignments.PDF so that there is no misunderstanding possible.

no I admit I did not read the documentation, actually since it is a work in progress I did not even expect there to be one yet. So I simply assumed it was business as usual.

PS: It was Microsoft that got into the habit of naming engines from left to right but in our case: it does not correspond to reality. I understand that it was more simple for them. At my level, I simply tried to model reality on the assignment of joysticks for the pleasure of lovers of twin-engine aircraft.

No it wasn’t just MS naming engines from left to right. That is the case throughout the factory documentation for the Constellation series, the 707,747, A340, A380. Regardless of which engine is actually started first. But no problem…if that is not the case for the Canso, it is simple to use a different FSUIPC profile.

For the IDLE RPMs, I planned to tune it in the next version: it's a little bit too hight and should be decreased at 400/450 rpms. (if I remember well because I have not updated Canso for 5 months). Engine's friction and engine efficacity (508 and 509 tables which were used in the old aircraft.air in FSX) should be also revised in the same direction so as to reduce the traction of the propellers at very low rpm.

I certainly did not want to criticize a great aircraft. I hope that did not come across that way.

Cheers
Sunny

[Maty12]

I certainly did not want to criticize a great aircraft. I hope that did not come across that way.

Cheers
Sunny

Just to add to that, I don't know about the Canso specifically, but it is convention in the US to number the engines left to right regardless of starting order. Consolidated's own B-24 is numbered in that way, despite the starting order being 3-4-2-1 (inboard starboard, outboard starboard, inboard port, outboard port, or in other words right inner, right outer, left inner, left outer). Number 3 engine is started first in that aircraft because it's the engine with the hydraulic pump. (Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO0iSx-ZCAQ&t=925s)

North American's B-25 is also started right-engine first, mainly so that the pilot can have an easier time communicating with the ground crew before starting the other engine. Despite this, the left engine is still engine 1 and the right engine is still engine 2, they just tell you to start engine 2 first. Personally, this is a habit I've carried over to all aircraft unless directed otherwise by the documentation. I always go 2-1 or 3-4-2-1.

I understand the decision to number the engines as you did and I don't think it detracts from the aircraft. In a perfect world Microsoft would let us choose the engine auto-start order, but as they don't this is a neat workaround for the people who don't start the engines manually. It does however mean that those of us with joysticks and throttle levers have to create a custom preset just for this aircraft. Personally, I have 6 levers, so it was a bit annoying to do but once it's done it's done and I can just switch presets whenever I want to fly it.

If you do keep the current engine ordering, I would recommend not using the terms "engine 1" or "engine 2" in the tooltips or aircraft documentation and using only "left" and "right", like all controls in your airplane are already do except for the primer switches, which are currently labelled as 1 and 2. If you fully want to avoid confusion a disclaimer about engine order in the download page would most likely do so. I know you have already mentioned it in the documentation.

I think you've done a phenomenal job with the interior of the airplane and I very much enjoy flying it.

[Sunny9850]

Hi,
I guess I could have just put it that way😃😃
But yes it was just a bit of a surprise when you want to shut down #2 in flight to see how she does, and the left engine stops.
I never use the automatic start feature so that doesn’t make a difference to me, but I do see the point of doing it that way to do the aircraft justice. In the Connie series, we incorporated an autostart that actually did fire the R3350s in the correct order of 3-4-2-1 as long as it was initiated with our sim-icon for that purpose. It did not work if the user did ctrl+e.

I am using FSUIPC so it really is no big deal to use a different profile. In FS2020 you can also create separate profiles of course, but then you have to remember to use the correct one for this aircraft.
Not quite so convenient.

cheers
Sunny.

[lagaffe]

For each aircraft that i want modeled, I collect always the most of documentation I find.
For the Canso, I have find and also buy (AviaLogs)1.56 Go of documentations (Handbook, Manual, Specifications, Walk-around, Flight Operation Instructions).

By taking for example the document : PFB-June-2020-Handbook2.pdf (PACIFIC FLYING BOATS LTD.CANSO FLIGHT OPERATIONS HANDBOOK), I can read this. The hydraulic pump is well on the right engine and the procedure is clearly explicit: the right engine is started first (pump).



The conventions of Microsoft or US Conventions mean that when using the CTRL+E commands, the start is always done by engine 1 first which does not correspond to reality.
That’s why I took this approach to this plane, not wanting to recode the CTRL+E controls (and not knowing it when I started).
As this numbering goes beyond the engines and also touches all the controls propellers, primer, cowl flapts etc ... everything has been numbered in this direction.

Going back is a very big job (quite risky in case of error) that I would not do.

For the further development of Canso, I would write my posts following the official post I had created:
=> https://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforu...-of-SAGQ/page3

[Tom Clayton]

To keep everything from being split into two threads, I'm going to close this one and refer everyone to the "official thread" that has been around for several months.

https://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforu...ead.php/123262