W.I.P Pilatus PC-21

[Zach Decou]

Geeks,

I decided to take the leap and build my first aircraft for public release. I have seen many a noob post topics in forums stating their intentions to dive into a 747 or A380 or what have you, only to have the local pros say, "Hmm. maybe start with something a little less complicated... like a Cri Cri or something." Well in an effort to preempt such advice, I have chosen a small aircraft with some moderately complicated systems.

I present for your approval the Pilatus PC-21

Isn't she a sexy bird?

Anyway, I have noodled around in blender for a while and made several fictitious aircraft in PM. I think it's time for me to hone my abilities with a set goal.

I would very much like the community here to offer any advice if willing. I will post screenshots when I have something of interest to post.

I am beginning the information gathering stage. Google has pulled up some press releases and imagery on this relatively new aircraft, but nothing with any real meat. I have sent an information request to Pilatus. I am not putting too much hope into that avenue as they very well may find it a waste of time to retrieve and send information to a person who is a non-paying customer. But who knows... [EDIT] Pilatus has contacted me and expressed interest in this project.

If anyone knows of one or more online resources where I might find specifications, dimensions, POH, etc., I would be forever grateful. (I have tried smartcockpit.com already, but they only list the PC-12.)

Now I have a serious legal question. Let's say this project or a future project of mine is of a build quality that reaches into the payware domain. Are there licensing issues that could be raised by the aircraft's manufacturer? Has anyone here or elsewhere ever been hit with a lawsuit, cease and desist order, etc., for building a payware aircraft based on a real world aircraft? What about using logos?

Any help would be awesome.

Also, I suck reeeealy bad at texturing. Maybe this project will teach me what I need to know about it, but most likely, I will need some serious help.

Thanks for your time!

[Cameron]

Looks like a fun little plane, and I think it's a good one to start with!

Now I have a serious legal question. Let's say this project or a future project of mine is of a build quality that reaches into the payware domain. Are there licensing issues that could be raised by the aircraft's manufacturer? Has anyone here or elsewhere ever been hit with a lawsuit, cease and desist order, etc., for building a payware aircraft based on a real world aircraft? What about using logos?

It's typically never a problem, though I have seen it happen once when it came to a bird in development by Cessna. In most cases you can sell in public domain with no problems at all, and no licensing attached. In the instance I've heard it came with a cease and desist, or to pay a ridiculous royalty fee that made the project pretty much scrap worthy.

[Jack Skieczius]

Wow, well for sure, she is a really sexy plane. very slick, nice curves.

hehe.

I wish you luck. she may be a small plane but the cockpit is still pretty complicated. The EFIS displays are interesting. you will eventually want to learn about generic instruments and how they can help you to build those displays. Or you can do some programing to make them, but as with all things, do what you think is best.

There is defiantly a ton of things to learn about making planes for X-plane. I have spent the last 3 months learning about it all and i am sure i haven't learned it all.

It is an adventure and I hope you stick with it, its fun and rewarding and the pc21 defiantly looks like it would be a fun plane to fly around.

Best of luck,

Jack.

[Rafael Fernandez]

Cool project have fun...

[Zach Decou]

I said I was going to post screen shots when I had something of interest to post...

Well I lied. These aren't all that interesting

Well, what do you think?

I have begun the early plane-maker model. The canopy needs to be widened a little bit. I am using the XFCS plugin to stabilize it, as it is naturally very unstable and has a pronounced left roll tendency in high power settings (the real PC-21 has a right-offset prop and other "systems" to compensate for p-factor. I offset the prop and used the plugin in place of the "systems").

Wing chords, spans, and dihedrals closely match the LOW resolution three views I have. Prop dimensions (other than diameter) and blade pitches are a complete guess.

I have NO information on any of the airfoils or prop used on the aircraft (I have the Hartzell prop's model number, but no information otherwise found online).

Again, if anyone knows of an online resource for this information, shoot it my way. I have burned Google onto my screen and retinas over the past week and so far have been disappointed at the quality and quantity of the information I have been able to scare up. Damn me for choosing to build such a new aircraft.

Also, I am curious as to how X-Plane calculates misc wings. I used small misc wings to make winglets and such, but doesn't X-Plane see a bunch of new wing tips? Does XP calculate tip losses for each wing tip? For instance, my PC-21's left wing consists of five wing sections. Thats five wing tips in the airstream rather than one. Am I over thinking this or is there a solution to all those tips in the air?

I'm a sucker for good advice, so don't be stingy!

Zach De'Cou sees "Google" every time he blinks.

[Reuben]

Looks very promising mate. Steady as she goes.

[Zach Decou]

Hello Kiddies!

Pilatus has been kind enough to furnish me with some high resolution three view line drawings of the PC-21 while they review the availability of the information I requested. So for the last three days, I have been working on the nose. As I have mentioned, I have "noodled around" in Blender previously. None of this noodling time was spent doing long curvy shapes. Mostly nuts and bolts type stuff. Let me tell you, it's tough! I'm not happy enough with the mesh to post it bare bones for critique, but believe me, I will soon! I very much value the criticisms of the folks around here.

So here are some prettied up renders of the mess so far. Please note, I don't know a lot about rendering. I think they look cute, and I had a lot of fun playing with ray tracing.

As I said, I will post meshes when I like what I see a little more.

Thanks!

[EDIT] I just noticed I have the spinner cap holes wrong. They do not close in aft of the prop.

[HoHun]

Hi Zach,

>Well, what do you think?

Looks pretty good! :-)

>I have NO information on any of the airfoils or prop used on the aircraft (I have the Hartzell prop's model number, but no information otherwise found online).

Again, if anyone knows of an online resource for this information, shoot it my way.

Unfortunately, the PC-21 is not on the most useful list I know when it comes to airfoil information:

http://www.ae.illinois.edu/m-selig/ads/aircraft.html

However, this list might prove useful in future projects, so I thought I'd mention it :-)

>Also, I am curious as to how X-Plane calculates misc wings. I used small misc wings to make winglets and such, but doesn't X-Plane see a bunch of new wing tips?

No. You can use the option "Output Flight Model" (or whatever it is called now) to write a text file regarding the current flight model. If you open that file, you'll usually see "Wing x joined to wing y" messages throughout the file, showing that X-Plane figured out where a logical wing is connected to another to form a "physical" wing.

One thing where your model might be sub-optimal is the vertical stabilizer. Many X-Plane aircraft are built with a vertical "main" stabilizer and a second one in front of it to make it look like the real aircraft's strake. Austin on one occassion advised against that because this will be treated as two consecutive wings by X-Plane, causing the main stabilizer to be affected by the strake's downwash. The proper way according to Austin to build one lower vertical stabilizer that begins at the root of the stabilizer and runs up to the point where the strake ends, and an upper vertical strabilizer which consists of the strake-less part.

(An additional disadvantage of the separate strake is that it's impossible to fair the strake properly into the stabilizer profile, while this is easy with Austin's method. The visual aspect doesn't matter if you're building a Blender airframe, of course.)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)