PBY-5A Catalina
- Thread starter pplace
- Start date
willsonman
Well-known member
Just wanted to ask here before I rate... was it intended to have the spinners wobble a tad?
pplace
Well-known member
willsonman said:
Umm......err....geee.....Yes!!
That spinner wobble caused trouble from the first time I imported it into G4. I re-made the spinners several times, adjusted the pivots countless times.....for some reason I can not get it to spin perfect. The problem has to come from the engines, nacelles and the spinner being at a 3 degree angle....something must be a tad off center...and all the adjusting and re-doing I did, couldn't solve it. It's better than it was. But I figure those big radials have some "vibrations" built into them!
willsonman
Well-known member
I figured it was something along those lines. I know that in some models with spinners like that its hard to see that it is actually spinning unless a unique texture is applied in the CS. I wanted to make sure it was not an oversight before I gave a rating.
pplace
Well-known member
As far as I can tell the PBY-5A is converted over to G3.5! I had Big Guy JT test it out. He noticed the retracts were backwards compared to what he was used to. He described them exact opposite of what I was seeing with the same file on my computer??? So I re-did the retract switch..so hopefully it's correct now. (If not just reverse it)
I also removed the different throttle curves that were mixed with the float location. Since G3.5 does not have water fields....I didn't find it necessary to need the extra "boost"
Download it now and I hope you all enjoy it.
I also removed the different throttle curves that were mixed with the float location. Since G3.5 does not have water fields....I didn't find it necessary to need the extra "boost"
Download it now and I hope you all enjoy it.
pplace
Well-known member
I just took a little time to go fly the G3.5 version PBY around. I'm very amazed at how much difference there is between the G3.5 and G4 flight physics. The only physics I adjusted (quickly) was reducing the engine size...as I felt it was flying too fast in G3.5. Tonight I was doing some landing approaches and it seems you really have to smoke this baby in or it'll drop out of the sky. In G4 I feel it had a nice glide (while still feeling like a heavy aircraft) you could control your final with the throttle and settle it down nice and easy.
Mainly I just wanted to comment to the down loaders of the G3.5 version...that the physics might have to be tweaked (more so than the G4 version) to suit your needs. Mainly I just converted it straight over without changing any parameters.
Mainly I just wanted to comment to the down loaders of the G3.5 version...that the physics might have to be tweaked (more so than the G4 version) to suit your needs. Mainly I just converted it straight over without changing any parameters.
willsonman
Well-known member
Law
Banned
Do I understand correctly that you're complaining about a couple of ratings below a 10?
As pplace pointed out the physics for the PBY aren't the same from G4 to G3.5 and they'll have to be tweaked. That fact alone indicates a rating someplace below a 10, doesn't it?
All of these models, the ones done by pplace and the ones done by willsonman are great models. Why be concerned about a few people who don't think they're perfect? Perfection should always be an unachievable goal anyway. A goal to strive for but never quite achieve. Because once you achieve it there is no more reason to strive for it, no more reason for improvement.
I just downloaded the G3.5 version of the PBY yesterday and changed the engines and props. It does seem to drop pretty fast without power. But, since I don't own one, I don't know if this can be considered normal behavior. It seems to fly very scale and looks great in the air. I'll take a closer look at some of the weights and such and see if anything looks out of pace - if not I'll consider the behavior normal until someone else points out that it's not.
It's too bad we don't have catagories to rate the different models. I'd love to be able to give the PBY a 9 for modelling expertise, an 8 for physics, a 9 for colorsheme ... and a 10 for effort ... etc. Instead we have to give the EA one rating for all of those factors. And then you have the issue of criteria. What judging criteria do we use to determine a 10, 9 , 8, etc? Because obviously not everyone uses the same criteria.
As pplace pointed out the physics for the PBY aren't the same from G4 to G3.5 and they'll have to be tweaked. That fact alone indicates a rating someplace below a 10, doesn't it?
All of these models, the ones done by pplace and the ones done by willsonman are great models. Why be concerned about a few people who don't think they're perfect? Perfection should always be an unachievable goal anyway. A goal to strive for but never quite achieve. Because once you achieve it there is no more reason to strive for it, no more reason for improvement.
I just downloaded the G3.5 version of the PBY yesterday and changed the engines and props. It does seem to drop pretty fast without power. But, since I don't own one, I don't know if this can be considered normal behavior. It seems to fly very scale and looks great in the air. I'll take a closer look at some of the weights and such and see if anything looks out of pace - if not I'll consider the behavior normal until someone else points out that it's not.
It's too bad we don't have catagories to rate the different models. I'd love to be able to give the PBY a 9 for modelling expertise, an 8 for physics, a 9 for colorsheme ... and a 10 for effort ... etc. Instead we have to give the EA one rating for all of those factors. And then you have the issue of criteria. What judging criteria do we use to determine a 10, 9 , 8, etc? Because obviously not everyone uses the same criteria.
pplace
Well-known member
Law,
I don't worry or get disappointed by a rating below 10, all of my models have below 10 ratings. I was just pointing out that a particular rater is active again. In the past the rater always left a 1, but since KE made mandatory comments on any rating below a 5......the rater now rates 5's as his low figure. I just find it ironic that his ratings are always on the lowest possible.....without being "uncovered" (i.e rate a 4 and he'd have to leave a comment...thus revealing his screen name)
As far as the physics. I've never flown a PBY, never seen a model of one fly, never built anything similar in my life.....so I just "fudge" the physics so it flies "scale like" in the air. I've always admitted that my physics unfortunately aren't dependable.....more so I set them up as a good flier (a lot of people like how my aircraft fly, but I don't feel they could be a "stand in" for a real world model? Maybe close...but not exact) Lastly like I explained in Junkboy's Citabria thread.....I think getting the EA (visual 3D model) out is more important....then the AV "smart people" can have at it.
As far as different categories to rate in.....good idea as it would help with more "feedback" but unfortunately it would making rating more of a task and would only lower the already low number of raters.
I don't worry or get disappointed by a rating below 10, all of my models have below 10 ratings. I was just pointing out that a particular rater is active again. In the past the rater always left a 1, but since KE made mandatory comments on any rating below a 5......the rater now rates 5's as his low figure. I just find it ironic that his ratings are always on the lowest possible.....without being "uncovered" (i.e rate a 4 and he'd have to leave a comment...thus revealing his screen name)
As far as the physics. I've never flown a PBY, never seen a model of one fly, never built anything similar in my life.....so I just "fudge" the physics so it flies "scale like" in the air. I've always admitted that my physics unfortunately aren't dependable.....more so I set them up as a good flier (a lot of people like how my aircraft fly, but I don't feel they could be a "stand in" for a real world model? Maybe close...but not exact) Lastly like I explained in Junkboy's Citabria thread.....I think getting the EA (visual 3D model) out is more important....then the AV "smart people" can have at it.
As far as different categories to rate in.....good idea as it would help with more "feedback" but unfortunately it would making rating more of a task and would only lower the already low number of raters.
Last edited:
Law
Banned
Thanks, pplace for the explanaition on the five ratings. I can understand a little frustration on your part just because you'er having to put up with this jerk. But, you make excellent models. And you have no reason to feel slighted by some kid playing games. Don't let it bother you.
Your models speak for themselves and without exception they are up there with the best that's ever been produces - and if anyone on these forums knows me, it would be you - I seldom hand out compliments - even minor ones.
I don't find it unusual that the PBY requires a bit of power on the landing approach. Most scale airplanes that I've flown need that little bit of power for landing. I've never flown a PBY, or even a twin for that matter, but your model flies very scale and you should be proud of your efforts. Like I've said elsewhere on these forums I still prefer the physics in G3.5 over those of G4 and I think that your PBY actually flies better in G3.5 then it does in G4. I don't think you should see the floating on that particular model that we see in G4 ... but that's just my opinion.
Your models speak for themselves and without exception they are up there with the best that's ever been produces - and if anyone on these forums knows me, it would be you - I seldom hand out compliments - even minor ones.
I don't find it unusual that the PBY requires a bit of power on the landing approach. Most scale airplanes that I've flown need that little bit of power for landing. I've never flown a PBY, or even a twin for that matter, but your model flies very scale and you should be proud of your efforts. Like I've said elsewhere on these forums I still prefer the physics in G3.5 over those of G4 and I think that your PBY actually flies better in G3.5 then it does in G4. I don't think you should see the floating on that particular model that we see in G4 ... but that's just my opinion.
pplace
Well-known member
Thanks Law I appreciate the compliment.
The rating (misuse) can be a bit frustrating at times...I am pretty confident I make some pretty nice models.....but when a rater is allowed to do that (especially for the extended period of time it's been going on) I feel he thinks he's always getting the last laugh and needle in. Nothing has really been done to really get him out of the "fox hole" he hides in.
Thanks again
The rating (misuse) can be a bit frustrating at times...I am pretty confident I make some pretty nice models.....but when a rater is allowed to do that (especially for the extended period of time it's been going on) I feel he thinks he's always getting the last laugh and needle in. Nothing has really been done to really get him out of the "fox hole" he hides in.
Thanks again
pplace
Well-known member
josh0987 said:
I don't want to start anything and bring up this topic again (and wreck my PBY build thread)
But mandatory comments are too over the top. I've always thought visible screen name to any person that leaves a rating would be nice. For instance on a public poll....you can see how each member voted, carry that concept over to the ratings. I would suggest only having the "member list" visible to the file up loader.
i.e. Currently if I upload my PBY and josh0987 rates it a 5 (and leaves no comment) I don't know who left the 5.
but
If member names were visible: I upload by PBY file and josh rates it a 5 (and leaves no comment) I (only me, because I uploaded the file) can click and view who has left ratings.