Today i did two flights, two with test 3:

Breakfree_Only: No CTD !

Decel_only: No CTD !

One with test 4: No CTD !

So.... i am starting to get some confidence, i did 4 flights with Test 3 without any CTD and one flight with Test 4 without any CTD !

The problem that i can not cut engine 1 & 2 is related to my Go_Flight, not with the DC6 of AFE (when i quit Go-Flight program the engines are cut) i will track that down later.

Quite some clever work Chris !

Kind regards,

Ben

EDIT: Just like Adam, i also have 50% of fuel in all my flights, because i did just short flight only and i also never got any CTD on landing. (Ahum......i don't know if it effects the CTD's on landing and not to be the smart guy here, but i always perform greasers on landing so maybe that's why? I really don't know)

32 minutes ago, Adamski_NZ said:

One thing I've not [ever] mentioned: all my flights were with 50% fuel (they've just been short hops). I'm wondering whether fuel load affects the friction calculations. I could also be why I never got a CTD when landing - being quite "light". Just a thought. I wonder if there's a "division by zero" lurking in there somewhere LOL.

Adam.

I agree I'm just going out to drive around the flag pole a couple times I usually only have half a fuel load on board 

it climbs much better when it's lighter, and approach speeds are a little slower

I'll try a short flight with a full load of fuel and pax

Rick

I also can do another short flight but then with full fuel load. (100%)

Chris, can you let me know if that is of any interest?

(I can do that in 20 hours from now)

kind regards,

Ben

35 minutes ago, Bentree_ said:

I also can do another short flight but then with full fuel load. (100%)

Chris, can you let me know if that is of any interest?

(I can do that in 20 hours from now)

kind regards,

Ben

I won't say no to any offers for testing. I appreciate your time and energy in this matter; thank you for your help.

Regards,
Chris

Hello! Good news also from my side. I go the DLLs this afternoon and just finished successfully a flight that crashed 4x on the weekend (always starting with 50% fuel as well).

Love this bird so much that bought it both for XP11 and P3Dv4.

Thank you Chris for your hard work. 

I am not testing, but reading the post from Chris, does it mean that the advanced ground friction model has to be given up on, in order to get stability? Hopefully not, the ground physics is awesome of the PMDG products.

No it is still working well!

2 minutes ago, kityatyi said:

I am not testing, but reading the post from Chris, does it mean that the advanced ground friction model has to be given up on, in order to get stability? Hopefully not, the ground physics is awesome of the PMDG products.

That's a reasonable question, thanks for asking. The priority now is to ensure a stable, rewarding experience for all. After getting that corrected, I'll dabble more with the ground model. I'll probably ask the same generous CTD volunteers if they're able to contribute a little time to ensure my alterations haven't re-broken the thing. 

Regards,

Chris

Chris...you broke it already (this is a joke...)

I just started up a flight with 100% of fuel in stead of 50% and i am not able to start engine 2 and 1 anymore........ 3 and 4 are running o.k. though.

Don't know what is going on...i use AFE.

Any idea?

Edit:

The problem was caused by the Go-Flight problem, same as on shut down. I will fix that later.

Kind regards,

Ben

Chris, thank you for your efforts.

Is there any testing you think could be worthwhile ? I could easily set up a vanilla P3dv4 and e.g add some add-ons..  Would that help you ?  any addons that you think that could be of importance here ?  Or do I just step by step  recreate/build  the state in which i was having the CTD's ?

Just let me know what would help you..

thx and b rdgs Dick

=

 

 

The 50% fuel comments, worried me a bit, as I almost regularly load 50%. That is mostly because of the high altitude airports I play in.

I have just tried taxies and take offs from the three offending airports, with a full load (100%) of everything, and no CTD's.  (Take offs were not the prettiest at 10,500 ASL!!)

However, another thing that is in the back of my mind is ORBX. It was mentioned as an add on, by several of the folks on the original posts of this thread.

I wonder if we can take a small survey of those who were affected by the CTD's, their use of ORBX for sceneries. Who knows if this might have something to do with this issue.

I have the ORBX FTX  Global Base Pack and the FTX Global OpenLC South America

Roberto

PS: Chris, do you have ORBX?

Hi Roberto. I also have all the ORBX stuff that you mention. ( but I would guess many of us would have this stuff and as far as I can see only a minority is affected here)

My offending airpors (mostly) are EHAM/EKCH-FlyTampa and LOWI/Orbx

 

b rdgs / Dick

=

 

1 hour ago, r_stopnicki said:

The 50% fuel comments, worried me a bit, as I almost regularly load 50%. That is mostly because of the high altitude airports I play in.

I have just tried taxies and take offs from the three offending airports, with a full load (100%) of everything, and no CTD's.  (Take offs were not the prettiest at 10,500 ASL!!)

However, another thing that is in the back of my mind is ORBX. It was mentioned as an add on, by several of the folks on the original posts of this thread.

I wonder if we can take a small survey of those who were affected by the CTD's, their use of ORBX for sceneries. Who knows if this might have something to do with this issue.

I have the ORBX FTX  Global Base Pack and the FTX Global OpenLC South America

Roberto

PS: Chris, do you have ORBX?

ORBX FTX Global+Vector+OpenLC EU and OpenLC NA. But almost everyone has ORBX... on the other hand, people with default sim also reported CTDs...

Chris,

I did another flight, my second with Test 4....... This time with 100% fuel in stead of 50% (as i had in previous tests)...... and again....No CTD !

But it came to me while flying that the aircraft does not have any other behaviour compared to a load up with 50% of fuel, wich it should.

By the 100% of fuel it should be that there is more trust needed to taxi, but it isn't. It should have a longer ground roll before reaching V1, but is doen't.

There's also no different climb behaviour, no other power settings, no other nose position during approach (due to more heavy aircraft), everything is just the same when load up 50% or 100% of fuel.

After landing and taxi back to the stand, i stopped the aircraft and checked what is going on.

I started up the load manager, changed the pax....i see the aircraft is getting more heavy or lighter. (sinks more or less into the under carriage)

I did the same with the baggage load.... i see that the aircraft is getting more heavy or getting lighter. (sinks more or less into the under carriage)

But... when i change the fuel from empty (0%) to 50% or to 100%...the aircraft is not getting more heavy or getting lighter (does not sink at all into the under carriage)

Sorry if i write this a bit weird....English is not my native language. I hope that you understand what i mean.

So...fuel load is not affecting the aircraft anymore, and i think by your changes to the ground model, we lost the fact that fuel load will affect the aircraft now?

Kind regards,

Ben

Chris - is it worth [you] going back to the original files and trying various fuel loads to see if that finally triggers a CTD on your system?

There's a possibly related issue going on in the ORBX forums: http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/140653-kjac-bumpy-runway-surface/#comment-1242826

Also - I've often wondered if I was getting the CTDs when transitioning from one surface to another: eg. taxiway to runway, runway to holding point etc. - or whether there's an underlying difference in elevation, though not large enough to be visible. This could also be affected by mesh settings <??>.

For what it's worth, all my CTDs were from NZHN and NZTG (ORBX NZNI in use).

Adam.