• Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

The Catalina X is finally released.

Just love the detailed engine.

Cat02.jpg
 
The sounds are great but:

Cockpit sounds don't seem directional as one pans right or left.

Does not seem to support 4.1 speakers.

I swapped from the Cat to the Goose and got those sound effects then went back to the Cat and those 3D effects were still absent.

Seems the docs mentions an Aircraft Sound Control gauge. Have not found it yet. Maybe it will give 3d sound.

Anyone know how to get 3d sounds?
 
hobofat said:
the manual quotes endurance cruise at about 85 knots and standard cruise is about 110, i do believe the cat moves quite slow in general. according to wikipedia the Qantas non-stop flights between Perth and Colombo during WWII took about 28-32 hours (3,500nm).

good luck to anybody doing the long haul in one of these!
Click to expand...


Yes - the cat would need to be 4 engined given its size/shape/weight to get much more speed in them there days.
 
Hmm I hesitated , but it was the realistic start that sold me , the dutch PBY registered is the closet or least near same aircraft type based at Ardmore , Auckland New Zealand , and she a regular over Christchurch and was based at Wigram before it closher hence , the Cat and i were bumping noses quite regular , guess its time to do a skin off that example :kilroy:
 
I read 90KIAS as being the cruise, somewhere, for an endurance of about 24hrs in the air.

The first flight I did, I just flew using DC-3 numbers for the engines and it cruised at about 90, so I was happy straight off. Turns out from reading the manual that I should have been flying with a higher MP (27-30 inHg) and aiming for 107 to 113. One thing is certain, though. The Cat is no speed demon and never was. :sleep:
 
I managed to get some good stick time on the aircraft last night - what an amazing recreation! The old saying amongst Catalina pilots, "take-off at 90, cruise at 90, land at 90," and it definitely holds true with this flight model. The visuals are of course outstanding, as can be seen by the screenshots. The sounds are spot on, having grown up a few miles away from an active PBY-6A. Rather loud at idle, but cleans up to a very nice hum at higher RPM and MP settings. Cats are rather quiet at cruise power...I used to see the locally based Catalina fly over my house from time to time, and if it was about 2000-3000+ feet up in the sky, you couldn't even hear it, you would just see it barely moving along. On take-off, it feels like it has too much lift, especially if only running on less than half fuel - no wonder it could carry such large payloads of torpedoes, bombs, or downed airmen with that big wing – and on landing it almost doesn’t want to touch the ground…good reason why there is no need for flaps either. Now if only I had more time to experience this wonderful aircraft - job well done Aerosoft!<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
 
yeahhhhhh, i saw the wiki. it places top speed at 195 MPH and cruise at 120 MPH.. Warbird Alley and a few other sites place the top speed at 179 mph which seems more realistic to me than the 195 mph, bbut even the 195 seemed more realistic to me than 110..

Not trying to be a wet towel here, but it's a bit frustrating.. I like the plane to be honest. I like it very much, Thats why i'd like a paint kit, so i can paint my own airplane.. And this isnt anything i cant fix myself, i mean, jeez, i build flight models for a living right?? But i've gotten painfully familiar with the wasp engines over the last couple months and this kinda threw me for a loop.. Please, no flames. I mean no antagonism, or negativity. I just get frustrated is all..
 
just rember that with wiki ANYBODY can edit the pages, so its not exactly a place for rock solid facts :engel016:
 
Roger said:
I've opted for "Standard engines" in the Shift/2 menu and you still have to watch temperatures but it it easier to fly and enjoy some spot view time.

Roger.
Click to expand...

I'm finding that if you open the cowl flaps and turn on fuel boost, it's not as likely to catch fire.. My first flight in her, i didnt open the cowl flaps and was surprised as hell when it started burning. I love it :) . Made feel stupid, but i love it anyway..
 
Pams pulling a 'Pierre the french fighter pilot', yeah cowl flaps help dissipate the heat that having the boost on adds, only place you shouldn't need to in theory is Antartica, cold enough there to freeze the nuts off a brass monkey... anyways, back to getting the little 'cat' then treating it to some milk.... well fuel anyways. she's a beaut nice work everyone involved :ernae:
 
There will be paint kits, many of them, Stefan and me are preparing all master textures for all the schemes featured in the release. I am not sure when they will be released but I have been asked to provide for my two schemes no later then Friday this week.
Mathijs is talking about an SP with fixes and more models. I have 3 more schemes in the pipeline for release with custom models. Two Norwegian AF ones (I had to have some :mixedsmi:) and one Brazilian AF SAR aircraft in painted silver. All these will have "gunless" turrets and there's one floater among them with radar. I also think the heath exchanger exhaust shrouds (the long ones) will be modelled.
Some say next week but I'm not sure..

Thanks
 
Smoothie said:
Pams pulling a 'Pierre the french fighter pilot', yeah cowl flaps help dissipate the heat that having the boost on adds, only place you shouldn't need to in theory is Antartica, cold enough there to freeze the nuts off a brass monkey... anyways, back to getting the little 'cat' then treating it to some milk.... well fuel anyways. she's a beaut nice work everyone involved :ernae:
Click to expand...
French hell.. ::lol:; Nahhh, i ran into similar problems with Miltons Howard, although it didnt exactly burst into flames.. Real world wise, i used to work ground safety and parking at the watsonville airshow for the bombers, and had a couple very nice conversations with the engineer on the none O nine. Learned a lot about radials from him.
 
warchild said:
yeahhhhhh, i saw the wiki. it places top speed at 195 MPH and cruise at 120 MPH.. Warbird Alley and a few other sites place the top speed at 179 mph which seems more realistic to me than the 195 mph, bbut even the 195 seemed more realistic to me than 110..

Not trying to be a wet towel here, but it's a bit frustrating.. I like the plane to be honest. I like it very much, Thats why i'd like a paint kit, so i can paint my own airplane.. And this isnt anything i cant fix myself, i mean, jeez, i build flight models for a living right?? But i've gotten painfully familiar with the wasp engines over the last couple months and this kinda threw me for a loop.. Please, no flames. I mean no antagonism, or negativity. I just get frustrated is all..
Click to expand...

No worries at all! It might be worth inquiring on the aerosoft forum if you suspect something might be out of order, I have found from past experiences that they tend to pay attention to such posts when coming from a knowledgeable person, which you clearly are.
 
@Dag.
You guys are awesome!!!.. thank you .. will be drooling in anticipation of those paints and kit.. :)..
 
hobofat said:
No worries at all! It might be worth inquiring on the aerosoft forum if you suspect something might be out of order, I have found from past experiences that they tend to pay attention to such posts when coming from a knowledgeable person, which you clearly are.
Click to expand...

Welllll, by nature, i'm a real quiet and shy person, and raising hell over something tends to put my nerves and blood pressure ( from worry ) over the threshold.
Truth told, i'm walking a very thin line on this one. The LAST thing i want to do is slam another engineer. I know all too well how much work and how many sleepless nights can go into perfecting a flight model. I also know the frustration that the engineers feel when after three thousand or so hours of brain melt, all anyone ever says is that the plane looks really good, and all that work we do gets shoved aside as an extra things done by "the flight model guy".
SO, i want to raise questions, present evidence to support my argument, and create a dialog, but i'm terrified that if i do, all you guys are gonna get this idea that i'm just some know it all bitch who should mind her own business and stay out of the boys realm and in the kitchen..
I'm not out to upset anyone, but here we have evidence that this plane didnt fly at under 100 mph since the xpy3 version in 1938, but i'm afraid that if i present that evidence, i'm only gonna get slammed, and i already have to sit under not only the publics scrutiny of my own work but my own, which can be a lot harder..
 
warchild said:
I'm not out to upset anyone, but here we have evidence that this plane didnt fly at under 100 mph since the xpy3 version in 1938, but i'm afraid that if i present that evidence, i'm only gonna get slammed, and i already have to sit under not only the publics scrutiny of my own work but my own, which can be a lot harder..
Click to expand...

Pam,

If you are concerned about it but don't want a public argument send a PM to Mathijs, either here or at the Aerosoft Catalina Support Forum. That way you can provide your information for them to study and you avoid getting slammed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top