Have a good day,
=> The v0.7.7 version with the C-FCRR model in addition and 3 repaints more, is available on French-VFR (French-VFR - Downloads)
Well, I have begin a little modification on the fuselage to transform the PBV-5A in PBV-6A so it will be possible (I think) to obtain an aircraft Calypso (fly by the Cdt Cousteau’s son) but it is not my priority !
Many thanks Lagaffe for this fantastic plane!
I have CTD at starting the sim in DX12 beta mode
In DX11 the aircraft works OK but the CTD is on exit MSFS
Tested with only the Canso in Community.
Running on 1.24.5.0
Hi.
I have had the same problem with DX12 but I use SU9 beta but with WU8 and DX12, the use of the Canso was perfect.
Currently, DX12 is not totally implemented in MSFS code (less than 10%). Your CTD is perhaps linked to the driver version of the graphic card (I use a GTX 1070 and the latest driver).
Other problem detected : in VR you can have CTD when you zoom on the dashboard. I don’t use VR for my test so it’s difficult to resolve this … One idea is to add a specific plan invisible to solve this: I will think to this 
Thanks. Lagaffe.
When I change cameras inside, the image freezes and the simu does not respond.
looks great.
Greetings
The PBY-5A Catalina is a nice and fun aircraft, got it today and enjoy it.
@Chiwi60:
I have announced the release of the Canso on several sites I frequent but I don’t want to do support on every forum: it’s counterproductive. Use my e-mail address to contact me, adress that is provided in the 3 Readme of the Documentation directory. I have a FAQ file that will be expanded as I go along, I haven’t published it yet because there was only one version distributed.
The way I recommend to test a new addon:
Currently, my development/test station is in SU 9 Beta with the new 1.2 GB patch released on April 5/6. In this software configuration and in DX12 mode, the Canso now works perfectly.
(*) My specifications:
I use a I9900K, 32 G RAM, a 34"Samsung, a NVidia 1070 GTX card and the latest NVdia drivers 512.15 (basic parameters).
ok, thanks i will try dx12
Downloaded today. Nice job !
Hi, just to mention the axis binding for throttle engine #1 and throttle engine #2 are inverted for the Canso (checked with 0.7.7)
In MSFS, natural joystick axis binding for twin props, is currently Throttle #1 for RIGHT engine, Throttle #2 for LEFT engine, as we see for MSFS stock DA62 / Baron G58 / KA 350i and should be also managed the same internally in the Canso, which is not currently the case. So, currently with the proper binding described above, which is the goal and expected situation to avoid creating additional profile for a Twin Prop like the Canso, when we move forward the LEFT hardware Joystick Throttle axis, it interact with the RIGHT Virtual Cockpit throttle axis and thus increase the right engine RPM, the other way round for the RIGHT hardware Joystick Throttle axis. Again it behave properly for all the three already mentioned Twin Props.
Correct binding for twin props :
Hi,
A clarification: this naming of the engines is not a mistake on my part but a deliberate action.
In the Documentations directory, there is also an explicit image of my throttle configuration so there is no need to go into the code to check this.
All software needs conventions, I agree that Microsoft has always considered in its SDKs that engine 1 was the left one and that the other engines were counted towards the right. It is more simple for us.
That being said, I consider this software to be a simulator and not a game so I try to get as close to reality as possible.
The reality is that on 90% of the videos that show a PBY’s or a DC-3’s engine startup (aircraft very close on the engine side) show a startup of the right engine first and then the left engine.
I am in touch with several former CL-215 and Canso pilots (JM Girard, M. Doré of SAGQ and D. Roy of Fairview Aircraft Restoration Society) and they have never contradicted me on this point.
It is on this basis that I developed my aircraft not to follow conventions but to be as realistic as possible.
Document: AN 01-5MA-1 - Pilots Handbook of Flight Operating Instructions - PBY-5A (05-06-1944).pdf from http://www.usaf-sig.org
Page 45 : “Start starboard engine first because hydraulic system pump is on this engine”
For those who don’t know: starboard engine is the right engine ! 
Real startup step:
Startup made on the AeroplaneHeaven addon:
The second and the main reason is the fact that if a user starts with the keyboard shortcut “CTRL+E”, with such a naming of the engines, the automatic start respects the standardized approach of the pilots on these aircraft (right then left).
That this goes against most of the realizations, the fact that Microsoft relies on standardisation to simplify its work does not matter to me, I agree but I repeat for me it is a simulation not a game.
It’s obvious that it offends some people who are forced to modify their settings (or create a new profile) but this plane I make for me and a small group of enthusiasts and “icing on the cake” I offer it to all as freeware, so I would not change anything on this point.
This week, I will released v0.7.8 with first VR support.
I fully support you doing whatever you choose to do 
Ok, no issue whith the way you want to handle it, it’s your choice
One point : I’ve never said that we have to start one engine or the other at first, this is is only a feedback on Throttle axis assignment number made internally in MSFS, not my numbering, other could only be some assumption or interpretation.
In many aircraft we may have to start engine #2 (here in this case, none throttle axis number is mentioned) where there’s an electrical generator concern or any additional essential and required component, like for the 737 where we mostly starting the engine #2 at first outside any specific SOP procedure.
So it could be there’s a confusion in the engine start process I didn’t mentioned and never thought in any case and the Joystick hardware axis which is the real and only concern in my case
Now do at you best for this great aircraft
Thanks again
Hi,
I had perfectly understood your remarks and had made the connection with the habit imposed by Microsoft as FS was released (FS98, FS2000, FS2004, FSX, P3D, etc)
You mention the 737, I’m not familiar with liners as I much prefer older aircraft and it may well be that these new aircraft do not have the same constraints as those dating from the second world war.
Yours liners use external APU’s which are dependent on airports whereas the PBY had an internal APU located in the centre compartment which made it autonomous. I am thinking of modelling this internal APU as well and perhaps also its electrical function.
Discovering MSFS in 2020, at the beginning after the first reflections I fixed myself this naming for the assemblers because it seemed to me simpler to solve my problem.
I think now (after 2 years of discovery) that it is possible to revise this to be compatible with the habits except that it would require a lot of work, this naming convention applies to
Approximately, there would be more than 5500 lines of code to review, that use nearly 30 different variables paired to each engine so it’s too much work 
Looking forward to the PBY coming to the marketplace so we all can enjoy this wonderful plane.
thanks for the plane, am using it a lot in the forum, hope it attracts people:
Bush Flying in Papua New Guinea - Community / World Discovery - Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums
The Last African Flying Boat - Community / World Discovery - Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums
any update and more liveries are highly appreciated!
RF
Hello,
I have reach a new step and a new version has been released this morning: v0.7.8j
The links is the same, don’t forget to choose English version of French-VFR home site in order to download without trouble.
You can read about all improvements by reading the Readme_WIP v0.7.8.txt in the Documentation directory.
I want for the next version modify the fuselage to represent the N427CV which which should appeal to many of you
Lot of improvments! Thanks a lot.
Hello, the first thing is to thank you for your work. It’s a great plane, but this latest version crashes msfs when I try to change interior views. I haven’t had that problem with any other aircraft.
Since the beginning of this project, i have never implemented any functions in my XML code about views as it is possible via the SDK. On the last version a user had troubles when he used “Last view/Previous view”. I made some researchs on this forum and find that others propose experimented same things with theses sim functions. Why this appear with PBY and never with others aircraft: I don’t know.
For me, after several hours spended to find a solution I admit that it is a MSFS bug.
PS Can you try to edit the camera.cfg file and delete “Camera.XX” entries after backup of this file?
So just delete all the items that say [CameraDefinition.0], 1], 2], 3]… etc etc and everything beneath them?
