AH Curtis Commando Released!

[jeansy]

Overhead switches (or labels) for the instrument lights and beacon are reversed if anyone is taking notes.

Also, I've discovered that the overhead frequency knobs for Nav1 and Com1 do function except they only change the standby frequencies. Doesn't help if you try and change primary frequencies for the older panel.

I noticed that as well, to turn the beacon on you need to use the instrument light switch, and vice versa

 

[jeansy]

Ive changed the AP to the settings from something similar in size and have fixed to uncontrollable pitching and its now flying level and steady

[autopilot]
autopilot_available = 1
use_no_default_bank = 1
use_no_default_pitch = 1
flight_director_available = 1
default_vertical_speed = 700
autothrottle_available = 1
autothrottle_arming_required = 1
autothrottle_takeoff_ga = 1
autothrottle_max_rpm = 90
pitch_takeoff_ga = 8
default_pitch_mode =0
default_bank_mode =0
max_pitch = 10
max_pitch_acceleration = 1
max_pitch_velocity_lo_alt = 2
max_pitch_velocity_hi_alt = 1.5
max_pitch_velocity_lo_alt_breakpoint = 20000
max_pitch_velocity_hi_alt_breakpoint = 28000
max_bank= 25
max_bank_acceleration = 1.8
max_bank_velocity = 3
max_throttle_rate = 0.1
nav_proportional_control = 9
nav_integrator_control = 0.25
nav_derivative_control = 0
nav_integrator_boundary = 2.5
nav_derivative_boundary = 0
gs_proportional_control = 9.52
gs_integrator_control = 0.26
gs_derivative_control = 0
gs_integrator_boundary = 0.7
gs_derivative_boundary = 0
yaw_damper_gain = 0
yaw_slip_control_gain=0.000000
yaw_control_uses_trim=0.000000

 

[AviatorMoser]

I'm afraid I don't understand the comment re panels floating one foot away from the wall (?)

In the civilian VC.

 

[bazzar]

ah.. ok..one for the SP then. Thanks.

 

[bazzar]

I noticed that as well, to turn the beacon on you need to use the instrument light switch, and vice versa

Could be a mouse rectangle clash, I'll take a look.

 

[bazzar]

Overhead switches (or labels) for the instrument lights and beacon are reversed if anyone is taking notes.

Also, I've discovered that the overhead frequency knobs for Nav1 and Com1 do function except they only change the standby frequencies. Doesn't help if you try and change primary frequencies for the older panel.

Yes, it looks like the different versions are going to need separate CFGs. There are no standby's in the military cockpit. The civ cockpit does so the radio entries need to be different.

 

[MustangL2W]

Love the WWII Airborne photos of the C-46 from that timeframe. I'm hoping some more WWII repaints come along for this model.

I really wish you could fly this one around with the "Jump" doors open like you can on the C-47 for Paratroop ops. My Dad had several Jumps out of C-46's in Panama and other places when he was in Special Forces in the early 60's. Dad was in one that limped home on 1 engine over the Caribbean Sea for several hours returning to Howard AFB from an operation in the leeward islands. Dad said he wasn't nervous until the Air Force guys in the airplane started donning parachutes with pale faces and "terror" in their eyes. He always said both engines needed replacing after they got back.

 

[banjoman1960]

is there a way to change the panels to the old one(nogps)
i also miss all the features the MJ c47 offer,no copilot,no failtures.........
i hope there comes more than only a patch,i think the standards for payware are not the same as a few jears ago,see c47 or dc6
model and paints look very good,but no realismus.......

before i buy the next plane,i check wat it has to offer.........for me,i buy no more only nice looking planes,minimum is c47 level...................

cheers
Ralf

 

[bazzar]

Ralf, you need to compare apples with apples. If you are seriously expecting PMDG DC6 level simulation with the C46 then no it will disappoint you. But then it has not taken 4 years to develop or cost the same. MJ's C47 is a masterpiece but again, I am envious of the development time and resources that have gone into it. The hobby is rapidly changing and developing into a two-party system - those that require "study-sim" level and those who do not. Both need to be catered for and are. Neither is bad nor wrong.

 

[Roger]

Ralf, you need to compare apples with apples. If you are seriously expecting PMDG DC6 level simulation with the C46 then no it will disappoint you. But then it has not taken 4 years to develop or cost the same. MJ's C47 is a masterpiece but again, I am envious of the development time and resources that have gone into it. The hobby is rapidly changing and developing into a two-party system - those that require "study-sim" level and those who do not. Both need to be catered for and are. Neither is bad nor wrong.

It's a good point you make Baz, when you consider how many aircraft AH/JF have released in two years then study level is not going to be what you get, especially at their prices. Okay there are sometimes going to be fixes required, but on the whole we get them.

 

[SSI01]

Bazzar, just wanted to let you know this is a WONDERFUL airplane. I work around whatever issues there are, knowing you will deal with them and get used to this bird, a great deal of fun - and memories. When I was around 10 or 12 we lived under one of the approach paths for Willow Run airport in Ypsilanti, MI. We had a constant parade of CV-340s, CV-440s, CV-580s (Frontier, Republic, North Central and Allegheny airlines), and C-46s passing over our home at maybe 800/1,000 ft AGL or so. Zantop had a large operation at WR and were frequently observed flying overhead. So was Flying Tiger Lines, also in C-46s. It was a far more innocent time than now, when on a slow evening Dad and I would buzz down to the approach end of the runway at Willow Run or sometimes Detroit Metro (then also called Wayne Major) airport and these birds, large 4-engine prop birds, and the early jets on short final would fly right over our heads, couldn't have been more than 100-150 feet up. I miss that. Having something like this brings those memories back vividly.

Thanks again for this excellent aircraft!

 

[AussieMan]

I have taken note of the feedback here and posted the major anomalies over on the beta test page. I dare say that all these will be fixed in a future SP.

All through testing I did not have any problems starting the engines using the procedure in the manual. However a friend of mine who flew DC-3s for an airline in the early part of his career told me that you always start the #2 engine first as that is where the main generator is located.


EDIT: Paint kit for the C-46 is available from the Just Flight web page.

 

[Daveroo]

Bazzar, just wanted to let you know this is a WONDERFUL airplane. I work around whatever issues there are, knowing you will deal with them and get used to this bird, a great deal of fun - and memories. When I was around 10 or 12 we lived under one of the approach paths for Willow Run airport in Ypsilanti, MI. We had a constant parade of CV-340s, CV-440s, CV-580s (Frontier, Republic, North Central and Allegheny airlines), and C-46s passing over our home at maybe 800/1,000 ft AGL or so. Zantop had a large operation at WR and were frequently observed flying overhead. So was Flying Tiger Lines, also in C-46s. It was a far more innocent time than now, when on a slow evening Dad and I would buzz down to the approach end of the runway at Willow Run or sometimes Detroit Metro (then also called Wayne Major) airport and these birds, large 4-engine prop birds, and the early jets on short final would fly right over our heads, couldn't have been more than 100-150 feet up. I miss that. Having something like this brings those memories back vividly.

Thanks again for this excellent aircraft!

to all,i appologize right up front,this has nothing to do with the C-46,
SS101,a good friend of mine here in California was a fire buff and collected more then 30 fire engines before his death (at a young age i might add,three kids the oldest of them was 6 at his death.),but why imm telling you this,he made a trip to Ypsilanti and bought an old Seagraves fire engine ,he also brought home a jeep fire engine same trip,but he just loved the seagraves and id never would have heard of a town called Ypsilanti had it not been for Dan,i cant look at a seagraves today ,or see the name in print without remembering my friend.

 

[manfredc3]

Any new release pf an aircraft can expect a patch/update shortly after release. even the PMDG ones have. No matter how much beta testing is being done.
So I do not worry about the bugs reported being fixed.

I am now just hoping for the quick release of the paint kit, so that the magicians here can start doing their magic with their paint brushes.

I am enjoying this bird a lot

 

[AussieMan]

I am now just hoping for the quick release of the paint kit, so that the magicians here can start doing their magic with their paint brushes.

Paint kit is available on the JF site.

 

[wombat666]

Ralf, you need to compare apples with apples. If you are seriously expecting PMDG DC6 level simulation with the C46 then no it will disappoint you. But then it has not taken 4 years to develop or cost the same. MJ's C47 is a masterpiece but again, I am envious of the development time and resources that have gone into it. The hobby is rapidly changing and developing into a two-party system - those that require "study-sim" level and those who do not. Both need to be catered for and are. Neither is bad nor wrong.

Something that people should really take into consideration.
Yes, I have the 'Study Sim' DC6 and while it is brilliant it takes me so long to get it airborne another day is done!
And I'm too old to lose a day like that.
Honestly, I'll take an aircraft that looks like the real deal and gets me airborne after a relatively short flight check every time, but that's my preference.
And those who wish to go from cold and dark have the right to do so if they prefer, choice is a wonderful thing.
But given the development time and costs we can't have all the bells and whistles in each and every package.
The C46 is fine for my parameters, a couple of minor bugs but they will be sorted.

 

[banjoman1960]

Ralf, you need to compare apples with apples. If you are seriously expecting PMDG DC6 level simulation with the C46 then no it will disappoint you. But then it has not taken 4 years to develop or cost the same. MJ's C47 is a masterpiece but again, I am envious of the development time and resources that have gone into it. The hobby is rapidly changing and developing into a two-party system - those that require "study-sim" level and those who do not. Both need to be catered for and are. Neither is bad nor wrong.

it is a very nice plane.......and i do not expecting PMDG DC6 level for the price.........i love to pay more for the features i miss........

i found a way to change to the old vc..............maybee i can ad some features myself,is there a way to get realengine to work in p3dv4?

 

[SSI01]

to all,i appologize right up front,this has nothing to do with the C-46,
SS101,a good friend of mine here in California was a fire buff and collected more then 30 fire engines before his death (at a young age i might add,three kids the oldest of them was 6 at his death.),but why imm telling you this,he made a trip to Ypsilanti and bought an old Seagraves fire engine ,he also brought home a jeep fire engine same trip,but he just loved the seagraves and id never would have heard of a town called Ypsilanti had it not been for Dan,i cant look at a seagraves today ,or see the name in print without remembering my friend.

A little off-topic but a fun fact - the original "Domino's" pizza parlor is located in Ypsi. The chain got its start there.

 

[IanP]

A quick question for Baz, if he's lurking around here anywhere... Not just applying to this one, it's something I can't check while I'm overseas or I'd do so myself. Are AH aircraft done with lots of LODs for multiplayer flying?

Ian P.

 

[gaab]

Honestly, I'll take an aircraft that looks like the real deal and gets me airborne after a relatively short flight check every time, but that's my preference.
And those who wish to go from cold and dark have the right to do so if they prefer, choice is a wonderful thing.

The C46 is fine for my parameters, a couple of minor bugs but they will be sorted.

I share this approach and like this C46. I just would like a favor : the "right" to mess up the start sequence.... If I miss one step I never succeed to retry...

I know it is clearly written in the documentation (that I have carefully read several times) :

Although not installed in the real aircraft, we have incorporated a COLD DARK START switch in the overhead
panel. If you use this switch, the aircraft will be placed in a ‘Cold & Dark’ state. This switch can only be used
once per flight and you will need to reset the flight if you wish to use it again.

nevertheless it would be great to be able to "play it again, Sam".

Sufficient priming is also important to the process.

Does this mean we must wait between setting prime and activating the starter ? I noticed I had better chance to succeed when I do it, but I wonder if it is just a "placebo" effect
Can we check on some gauge that booster and prime have done there job. ?

Just few remarks (on civilian panel)
- the primers stay on for ever - should not they automaticaly turn off after a while ?
- most of the time, the right mesh don't automatically switch off (while this happen on the left one).

I also noticed that the gear level is moving the opposite way of the mouse drag. It took me some time to discover it

Thanks for your attention.

Gérard