I see the JF C-46 Commando is listed up to P3D v4.
Anyone successfully flown it in P3D v5.3 HF1?
Thanks
T43
I see the JF C-46 Commando is listed up to P3D v4.
Anyone successfully flown it in P3D v5.3 HF1?
Thanks
T43
Twice43 - Coincidentally - Yes. I had just reinstalled it into P3DV5.3 HF2 no problems with it all. I originally bought it for FSX and had just re-downloaded the entire package again from JF (I guess it was an updated copy via JF). I have the V4 to V5 registry hack set up anyway, so it looks for V4 but is directed into V5. It does not install via the xml method but into the P3D root directory but that's ok I pull it all out again having created an xml and made up and addon folder for it. It now shows up fine and works nicely using that method too!.
I cannot comment on some earlier bugs with radios etc with the non modern cockpit version but loading up the modern version all the relevant navaids etc were all working as far as I could tell. If anything it seems much better than I remember it from FSX days in terms of fidelity and functionality in fact not bad at all - behaves and flies like I would expect the C-46 to do for real. One of AH's better models actually nice textures and detail overall. But yes it is working just fine in P3DV5.3.
Now just have to find some repaints I had that have gone missing!
Here's a shot of the C-46 in P3DV5.3 at Wrangell Alaska Jan Kees Reeve Aleutian Paint.
Thank you Bendy.
Did you find repaints on a particular site?
The C-46 reminds me of a sausage dog with wings.
Wouldn't win a beauty contest, but it has 'character' & history & 2 x 2,000 hp engines!
T43
Twice43 - I was after a couple Jan Kees did which are here in the Warbirds Library. There were few done for the JF/AH version (you get about 20 liveries anyway) I guess the painting was difficult or not that much interest - probably both, the liveries that come with it a good representation of the various operators/
Flies just fine, I just used it for a few flights with my VA. Also did a paintjob myself, need to fix the lettering on the lower wings then I'll upload it to the library here.
Oh there are a couple of things with the C-46. The MIL version which has the WW2 style instrumentation had bugs in the radio set up - namely the displays on the Coms and NAVAIDs would not display - they seemed to work but without the mouse tool tip telling you what the frequency you were selecting was you had no idea. Curiously the TXPDR and the ADF did show. AH in typical style never fixed this and even though the updated version I got which was for P3D still had those irritating faults. The Modern Version with digital radios on the main panel by comparison worked ok. The MIL version cockpit is also very dark in P3D and you have to have the lights on to see anything meaningful. So you will a beautifully modelled aeroplane with nice textures and lots of variants but don't be surprised at some stuff that is flaky or does not work - as I said typical AH they had a penchant for never finishing stuff properly - so now I remember why I parked it in the TO DO hangar from FSX days!. But if you want a C-46 then I guess it is the only one!
So you will a beautifully modelled aeroplane with nice textures and lots of variants but don't be surprised at some stuff that is flaky or does not work - as I said typical AH they had a penchant for never finishing stuff properly - so now I remember why I parked it in the TO DO hangar from FSX days!. But if you want a C-46 then I guess it is the only one![/QUOTE]
Have you come across an Everts Air Fuel livery??
T43
Yes there is an Everts Freight in the Modern Version that comes with the package it but I have not seen one in the markings specifically for Everts Fuel Delivery. I know they are different in some aspects because I have a few of the other Everts aircraft in my Hangar, such as the DC-6 and the DC-9.
I made some changes to the aircraft configuration file - I think AH stuffed up the dimensions for the tail and rudder areas so I modified them - if you want to be able to keep it nicely under control during full power take offs then use these (just cut and paste into your aircraft config file - make a back up of the old one first). The engine and power data is about right. You will find with the correct airfoil dimensions it behaves a lot better on the ground and in the air. I changed the reference speeds as well. These are correct. I had the benefit of pilot notes from an experienced C-46 pilot who gave a good appreciation of how the C-46 handled and what power settings etc to use and what to expect.
[airplane_geometry]
oswald_efficiency_factor=0.81000
wing_area =1360.00000
wing_span =108.10000
wing_root_chord =13.20999
wing_pos_apex_lon =3.14786
htail_area =272.00000
htail_span =37.00000
htail_pos_lon =-51.12017
htail_pos_vert =3.50000
htail_incidence =0.00000
htail_sweep =5.00000
vtail_area =156.00000
vtail_span =12.00000
vtail_sweep =35.00000
vtail_pos_lon =-43.71476
vtail_pos_vert =10.00000
elevator_area =120.00000
aileron_area =72.00000
rudder_area =60.00000
elevator_up_limit =34.00000
elevator_down_limit =17.00000
aileron_up_limit =35.00000
aileron_down_limit =20.00000
rudder_limit =18.00000
elevator_trim_limit =20.00000
spoiler_limit =60.00000 // for cowl flap induced drag
spoilerons_available =0
wing_dihedral =0.00000
wing_incidence =0.00000
wing_twist =0.00000
wing_winglets_flag =0
wing_sweep =0.00000
wing_pos_apex_vert =0.00000
aileron_to_spoileron_gain =0.00000
min_ailerons_for_spoilerons =0.00000
min_flaps_for_spoilerons =0.00000
spoiler_extension_time=0.00000
spoiler_handle_available=1
auto_spoiler_available=0
positive_g_limit_flaps_up=3.00000
negative_g_limit_flaps_up=-2.40000
positive_g_limit_flaps_down=2.10000
negative_g_limit_flaps_down=-1.80000
load_safety_factor=1.00000
[Reference Speeds]
flaps_up_stall_speed = 78 //Knots True (KTAS)
full_flaps_stall_speed = 62.00 //Knots True (KTAS)
cruise_speed =174.00000 //Knots True (KTAS)
max_indicated_speed =220.00000 //Red line (KIAS)
max_mach=0.35000
FWIW - here is a cut and paste from my notes on how you manage and fly the C-46.
There were never any certified V-speeds on normal C-46s. No "blue line," no Vmc, V1, V2, Vx, Vy, etc. Many chief pilots couldn't live with this, so they conducted their own rough testing, and picked some speeds that worked well enough, and with which they could browbeat trainees and checkees. But anyone who uses them is kidding himself, and possibly developing a dangerous thought process. Having published "V-speeds" also means that a "V1 cut" is required on check rides, and I've had quite enough excitement in airplanes, thank you very much, we don't do those, anymore. Without published V-speeds, the FAA does not allow even the simulated failure of an engine in flight below 500 feet on a check ride.
The old manuals usually call for a "minimum safe single engine speed," and it's generally around 95 knots, or "close enough," and that's what we use.
(Some C-46s were heavily modified, and certified under the old CAR 4b for transports (Everts has one working on a Part 121 operation, today!) Those do have true V1 and V2 speeds, along with appropriate charts. Those speeds are NOT good to use in the unmodified aircraft.)
Under CAF and FAA rules, we use full rated power (2,000 HP, 52", 2700 RPM) on ALL takeoffs, regardless of weight, a very good idea in ALL piston-powered airplanes.
With just a little help with forward elevator, the tail wants to come up around 40 knots or so, and with a little experience, we learn and hold a fixed attitude, slightly tail-low.
Somewhere around 80 knots the airplane obviously wants to fly, and we let it do so, holding the attitude at which it lifts off. The moment the airplane is off, that 80 knots instantly becomes 88 knots, as there is a built-in error in the pitot system when in ground effect.
Still maintaining the liftoff attitude, we allow a gentle climb and a gentle airspeed increase, and we accelerate to 95 knots. With that, and only when positive there will not be ground contact, pull the gear. Pulling the gear is the signal to everyone in the cockpit that we will continue flying with an engine failure. Before that, we'll probably put it back down. We continue to hold that same liftoff attitude and accelerate to about 105 knots, then pitch up gently (VERY gently) to hold that speed. Jet pilots have a LOT of trouble with this concept, and invariably they will haul the airplane off the ground and "rotate" to a nose high attitude as they do on the job. That is DISASTER in any old prop airplane, for the performance is simply not there.
(There is also NO SUCH THING as "Vr" or "Rotation" in a prop airplane! That is strictly a jet certification term, and has several very specific meanings that do NOT apply to props! I always get a chuckle out of the idea of "rotating" any prop airplane, especially something like a Cherokee.)
The Climb
As the gear comes up and the situation stabilizes at around 105 knots, we usually call for the first power reduction, to "METO" (Maximum Except Take Off) power, or 44" and 2550. When heavy, we'll delay that a few more seconds, to help gain altitude to protect from an engine failure.
At about 300 feet when light, or 500 feet (or more) when heavy, a second power reduction is usually used, to 36" and 2300 RPM, or "Climb Power."
105 knots makes an excellent pattern speed during the climb, and in level flight. The airplane seems to like that speed, using about 25 inches of manifold pressure and 1800 RPM on downwind, level. Any faster speed tends to overrun other VFR traffic in the pattern, and slower than 105 knots brings on problems with an engine failure. Trainees will almost always lose 10 knots while they struggle with the airplane, and while 95 is fine, getting slower will cause control problems with one engine at high power, and one windmilling.
The Approach
Trainees quickly learn that if they let the speed drop below 95 knots anywhere on downwind or base, or if they get below the glide slope, it is certain that I'll cut one, and equally certain he won't make the runway. They will not want a second demonstration!
The Landing
The best way to fly the airplane is to stay WELL above the electronic or visual glide slope, and keep 105 knots and NO flaps to somewhere within about a mile of touchdown. At that point, full flaps can be extended, and the power eased back a bit, allowing the airspeed to slowly drop off to about 75 or 80 knots over the fence. Somewhere in the flare, it is best to completely close the throttles, and land power off. There is a tendency for the nose to drop, but a little back pressure handles that, as on almost any airplane. There is plenty of time to "feel" for the runway, and land in a slightly tail-down attitude.
Under NO circumstances should C-46 pilots aim for a touchdown on the end of the runway. It's too easy to misjudge and "stub your toe" on the runway lip, and I've seen that happen too many times. Aim for the numbers, or where the numbers should be, or beyond.
Depending on the vertical speed at the moment of touchdown, the airplane's tail may drop. The tail is very heavy, and again old Isaac's laws come into play. The gear stops the vertical speed of the gear, but the heavy tail wants to continue down. That may increase the angle of attack enough to make the airplane fly again, which is probably not a good idea. If the landing is a squeaker (a better term would be "squaller," for the tires will emit a low-pitched yelp of some duration on a really good landing, while the tires come up to speed), there will be little tendency for the tail to continue down. With an "impact," the tail wants to come down a lot, and that leads to the famed C-46 bounce.
The Bounce
The downside of doing wheel landings is that bounces happen. A lot. Handled properly, a bounce is no big deal, but most manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, and make them worse. The worst possible solution is to try and "pin" the airplane by pushing the yoke well forward, raising the tail, and keeping the airplane on the ground. One person who used to instruct in China Doll before I arrived preferred this technique, and one day managed to nail both props. I understand he walked away, and was never seen again. No wonder they were short of instructors!
Now, there's a difference between a slight forward pressure to keep the tail from continuing the descent when the main gear's downward progress is halted by the ground, and stuffing the nose down to achieve a negative angle of attack while the airplane is still airborne. The first is done as touchdown occurs, the second is usually attempted with the airplane still in the air after a bounce.
I have seen many people get a bounce, try to land again, get another, and then continue the length of the runway, bouncing merrily away, each one about the same as the last. This is made worse by small shots of power, which do nothing but keep the forward speed up, allowing more bounces before running out of lift.
The easiest way is to note the attitude at or just before the first touchdown, and nail that attitude, letting the airplane bounce. It will quickly lose speed, the bounces will decrease in height and damp themselves out (he says), and by about the third touchdown, they'll be all done. If the natural tendency to add power is avoided, there will be very little extra runway used.
Another technique is to simply add power, set up a new touchdown, and try to land it again. Of course, that often ends up with another bounce, much further down the runway.
No matter what technique is employed, the new C-46 pilot invariably gets so distracted by the bouncing, he forgets all about the rudder. Bad move, the airplane KNOWS. I don't know how, but it just really does know. So swerves will begin, adding to the woes of the pilot. By this time, his hands will be so sweaty he's slipping on the yoke and throttles, and the sweat is getting in his eyes so he can't see the swerves, I guess.
In that case, we might as well just do a go-around and get it over with, mop up the sweat, and come back for another.
The Swerve
I've never run off a runway (or ground looped), but I've come closer than in any other airplane while instructing in the C-46. I've been from one edge of the runway to the other many times now, and it's just not a fun maneuver. It is the classic problem faced by all instructors, just how far can you let a trainee go. You must allow mistakes, and allow the trainee to attempt the correction, but this one is so critical, and recovery is so difficult, it's really hard.
It's also hard to explain why I've just rammed in full rudder, and started reaching for the throttles (a primary recovery control). He thinks I've just reacted for no reason at all, because he probably didn't even see the nose start to go.
It's rarely the first swerve that's the most difficult. What happens is that the airplane will swerve (for whatever reason), the trainee (or instructor) then stops the swing, leaving the nose pointed at the edge of the runway. It's very easy to panic at that point, and actuate all available control to the other extreme, to keep it on the runway. Once the nose swings back towards the centerline, the trainee relaxes, and figures everything is all right, after all, we're going to miss the edge of the runway. But what is happening is that the airplane is now in a violent and near-uncontrollable swerve that will go right through the runway heading, with an increasing yaw rate! This is the swerve that will put you right off in the boonies in short order, in a ground-looping swirl of dust.
The instant that nose stops on the first swerve, and just barely begins to swing back to the runway heading, THAT'S the time to start full attempts to stop the new swerve!
It is SUCH an interesting airplane, and I love it dearly.
Be careful up there!
Vne: Never Exceed 234
Vmo: Maximum normal operation 191
Va: Maneuvering 130
Vle: Landing Gear-Extend 130
Vfe: Flaps-Extend 117
Landing Lights 121
Description Pwr Setting Prop RPM Takeoff Power 52.0? 2,700 Maximum
Except Take Off. 44.0? 2,550
Climb 36.0? 2,300
Cruise 30.0'” ~1,900
"I think AH stuffed up the dimensions for the tail and rudder areas"
Sorry mate but I take exception to that remark. We tend not to "stuff up"dimensions. Ever wondered why sometimes you see different figures to book? Sometimes it is necessary to alter dimensions to get a certain flight profile. If you think it doesn't fly right, that is of course, your opinion and you are entitled to it and to change the files if you wish. But please don't go around telling people we "stuffed up".
I'll give these a squizz tonight. I wanted to use this for a recent Misty Moorings VA tour but as it came from AH hand-flying was virtually impossible (at least with my setup) -- any trim change at all resulted in almost violent pitch-up or pitch down, and coordinated turns while keeping roughly the same altitude were hopeless. And once I got the paintkit sorted out repaints became a lot easier.Originally Posted by BendyFlyer
Interesting. We have literally hundreds of happy C46 flyers. Might be the V5 latest upgrade doing things - I have no idea. We have not been approached by Just Flight to do any changes.
That might be the case. I got it back in FSX days when it first came out and it was fine. Hadn't re-installed it until recently, but it was so trim-happy and aileron heavy that it was very unpleasant to fly. Everything else worked fine, though -- still takes off like a homesick angel...
Some orbits of my real life home airport at CYZR shows that those mods did the trick. It's actually possible to maintain a bank without going wildly up or down, and the plane can now be trimmed into a nice level flight at maybe +/- 10 fpm (not bad for a plane this size). It now flies just like I remember it doing when I first got it lo those years ago.
Rallymodeller,
It sounds like you may have an old version.
Long ago AH and then JF made a few updates to the 46.
If you have access to your JF account download the latest version.
The latter versions flew much better than the original.
I’m going to try it with BendyFlyer’s mod, I suspect that will improve it even more!
I7-6700K @ 4.3, ASUS Z170-P, 32GB DDR4 2133, RTX 2070 8GB, Windows 10 Pro, P3Dv5.3 HF2
Bazaar - I was perhaps intemperate using the description ' stuffed up'. Look I did enough (used to until MSFS arrived) FDE and Air File refining along with beta testing flying of sim models on a variety of models with a few developers over the years to understand why folk who create models do what they do sometimes and why the data in say an aircraft configuration file or AIR file may not match the real world aircraft data precisely. I understand these parameters and issues very clearly. You know as well as I do that testing can be a very tedious business especially when something is out of whack or what is happening is not expected behaviour or response. Why? because I unlike a lot of simmers have decades of real world flying experience on pistons and turbines (taildraggers and tricycle U/C) as an instructor and training captain.
AS for the C-46 credit where credit is due yes it is a very nice rendition of the original aeroplane and perhaps the issue is that there are some parameters that are changed in P3DV5 (Although as far as I can see so far the SDK gives no indication that this is the case, ergo, what was done should be still working the same way, installers and gauge issues of course being another issue. So when I get a model in the sim I do the same thing as I would with any real aeroplane, I study the systems, I look at the performance, I start it and shut it down, I check that all the components are doing what they should do! The I do upper air work, stalls and turns and general handling and then I go and fly circuits in the thing until I am satisfied that I have a good understanding of the product and the aeroplane. So what I found in P3DV5 was that there was effectively no rudder authority with power applied on take off (it was uncontrollable (and I always use realistic settings not fudged stuff) and the controls were remarkably sloppy to the point of it being like steering a barge about - now that is not a C-46. So I looked at the data for the tail area and the wing and I amended it to reflect what I thought was incorrect vertical fin area, and wing chord thats all!. So now I get rudder control at the correct airspeed and more responsive general handling in the air - that's all.
Now this issue and others were referred to JF over time - so why they never pass this stuff on I cannot say. I have the latest download so it is up to date. So I want people to enjoy this aeroplane in the sim and I want them to understand that this is not a modern tubeliner - hence the notes from a highly experienced C-46 on what to expect and how to handle an aeroplane like this. Come to think of it had the same arguments with a lot of folk in FSX days who were perplexed as to why the C-46 flew like it did but could not understand the performance they got was the way it was! It's a C-46!!
Gentlemen
Thank you for your input.
Obviously there is plenty of latent passion for the C-46!
The Everts Air Fuel livery I am chasing is N1837M, 'Hot Stuff'
I purchased the product last night & have yet to fly it, but will bear your observations in mind when I do.
T43
Twice43 enjoy it, I really like it a lot it is a different beast to the Douglas Dakota. If you use the standard settings (config etc) then you will need a slight touch of differential braking on the take off roll to keep it straight as the rudder won't do it but that technique works ok too (It would get you busted in real life but hey it is a sim) once it is off and flying don't push it - slow to accelerate it just chugs along! The tailwheel lock lever is hard to find at the back of the pedestal.
Have not seen the Everts 'Hot Stuff' paint you refer to - they had a few and were well regarded by Everts, each with their distinctive nose art unusual for a civilian user. Any good photos of it about? might be worth a go as a paint job.
I'm going to have to dig around a bit re the images as it looks like I might have the wrong aircraft name.
The one I want is N1822M with the art deco female image.
Not the chap with the pitch fork.
T43
Postscript: N1822M's nose art is called "Salmon Ella"
The 4th image below gives a closer look at her.
The 5th is the best.
https://i.postimg.cc/yNH9VtVB/hs-1.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/L8zY0DjW/hs-2.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/C5BdCsFm/hs-3.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/qqvD1QgV/n-4.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/4d9ps9M7/Salmon-Ella-2.jpg
I'm reinstalling P3D after not having flown it for a year or so due to all the great formerly commercial add-ons being made free. There are also some favorite planes I'd purchased previously I'm excited to fly again, including this one. So I'll let you know how it flies for me on a fresh reinstall.
(That said, I'm hoping Baz and team plan to bring this one to MSFS! It would be amazing to see this one there.)
Twice 43 - really like these paints both Hot Stuff and Salmon Ella. I located some old textures for them both for Tom Gibson's C-46 and a few more pics from the net. Will have a go at doing them both but it may be a while. I will let you know if they work out! Dumbo is definitely out - the nose art on that one is way to hard for my limited ability!
Thank you Bendy, & Jeansy.
I searched Avsim & missed those. Not asking the right Q's in Search.
T43
Members who have read this thread: 2
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks