martinlest2

Thanks, no I don't have that selected.

If cargo has shifted in the hold then I agree, but pilots don't use aileron trim to correct lateral fuel weight imbalance (except in emergency), they use the crossfeeds to balance the weight of the fuel more or less evenly between the right and left side tanks... Indeed! I remember its first commercial UK flight - it flew across my house (we lived near enough to Heathrow that we could hear the afterburner roar at take-off). Still very sadly missed (even if I could never afford to travel on it!!).

I think you are confused. Trim won't help with lateral (left to right) imbalance :wink:

I love the JustFlight Concorde - it models the complex fuel tank procedures perfectly in auto mode (as evidenced if you fly following the real-world Concorde flight cockpit DVD that (I think) came with the FS9 disc. You can also switch to manual control, but you'd better be prepared to concentrate as Engineer! I guess I shouldn't expect too much of the default FS9 aircraft (I don't fly them that often, but with addon cockpits, they can make a change from say PMDG, when you don't want to spend quite so much time in flight preparation). That said, I am flying the FS9 747-400 at the moment (with a much nicer addon panel), and it is emptying the fuel tanks as I would expect, left and right together and the a/c is still nicely balanced after a long flight. Not sure why the 737-400 doesn't do that (which is really why I posted the question, as I thought I had something set up incorrectly).

(The default flight is already set with Fuel at to 'Both')

Ok, that's not a problem. I'll try setting up the default flight now as you suggest Peter and see how it goes.

Thanks. Yes, that's what I've always done in the past, so I'll have to continue doing it I guess. You'd think that this wouldn't be a problem with airports from well-known (payware) developers... Doesn't really explain though why flying into the airport usually shows the problem, whereas loading the a/c at the same airport for departure rarely does.

The 'correct sequence' is the key of course... You are saying that what should happen is that all the right-hand fuel tanks empty before any of the left-hand tanks are touched? (If you were right, and that were the way real a/c work, then most of my FS aircraft have a serious problem, as the tanks empty in a correct controlled sequence - Concorde is an extreme example). Yes, I know that the centre tank will empty first (I should have said that), but then the right auxiliary and after that the right fuel tank(s) empty completely, leaving all of the left tanks full (or however full they were at take-off). The left fuel tanks only start emptying when all the right ones are spent. If you look at the balance of the a/c in the FS Menu, it's very over-heavy on the left side (obviously!). The weight of fuel is massive of course: in the real world it's important the aircraft is balanced laterally - think of how carefully cargo is stored in this respect. Well most of you are well aware of that of course... Yes, I didn't make that clear enough. Sorry. Yes, the way I load FS9 these days, it always starts with the default Cessna, then I load my chosen a/c (prevents all kinds of issues with some complex payware addons). I will try to adjust things as you suggest - though not sure quite what you mean about saving the flight until I go to look in the sim itself. Thanks. Need to check whether I had fuel pumps off - I think I neglected to do that! M.

I've noticed in a number of aircraft that the fuel tanks, rather than emptying concurrently, do so one after the other.. so of course you end up with one heavy tank and the others empty. The a/c is then not balanced, needless to say... My default b737-400 does this, for instance. Opening crossfeed valves doesn't help (is it just a dummy switch?). No way to fix it I suppose??? Thanks.

It is a relatively common problem I think. I just tried the demo version of the Drzewiecki-design Tallinn, EETN, from the AVSIM library. As is so often the case with these 'problem' airports, if you start off from there, the texture usually behave normally. Most often it is when you arrive there that you see runway/ground/apron textures roll or peel back in front of you as you taxi. Sometimes making a flatten file helps, but why does this happen, and especially, why is it usually only upon arrival that the problem shows itself?

No ideas on this? It is quite frustrating with aircraft in front of you queuing for take-off: AI traffic appears, eventually lands and clears the runway but the aircraft waiting are not given clearance to taxi into position for take-off. It's not an AFCAD issue. It seems to be because there is still inbound traffic - but it can be some minutes before the a/c even makes its appearance on the horizon, let alone lands and starts taxiing. Lots of time for probably two AI a/c to take off. Any solution/tweak?

Hi again - thanks for the help. I wasn't very clear in my explanation, sorry. The d3d9.dll file and the error are in my full FS9 folder, with SweetFX, but the other CTD info comes from tests I did using a 'clean' FS9 installation. My fault for not making that clear. Thanks for the link, but I know that issue (FS9 BTW, not FSX). This is spectacularly different - the aircraft leaps and rolls and is thrown perhaps 50' into the air - and I even get fire and flame effects in spot view! I have reinstalled PF3 and gently tweaked most of the settings back to how it was and for now the CTDs have stopped. No idea for how long as I don't know what triggered them in the first place. I have had SweetFX for years, all working fine and I made no changes... The only thing I can think of is that I installed Photoshop CS2 onto the PC. I wonder if that changed something? I only use this PC for FS9 & FSX (Photoshop was to help make a/c repaints), so there is not a lot changes by way of software installations. That said, uninstalling Photoshop and running System Restore didn't stop the CTDs, so I am doubtful PS was in fact to blame...

I'll have a look, but uninstalling PF3 and reinstalling a clean version stopped the CTDs, for a while. As I tweaked things back to how I had them, the CTDs started again, and the a/c jumping. When I say jumping Jim, I MEAN jumping :-) They do cartwheels and end up upside down.... I have started again and will rebuild PF3 bit by bit. The DXTDiag found no problems. If the runtime needed reinstalling, would a problem not show up there? As for SweetFX/ENB, as I say, the crashes occur just the same when I run FS9 from an out-of-the-box setup too..

Thanks Jim, but that now seems unlikely. How did you get to that conclusion, out of interest? I think that it is something to do with the ATC programme I have (Oncourse PF3). It's the strangest thing, and it'd be great if anyone can explain what may be going on: I have tried running a clean (out of the box) version of FS9.1 with PF3, no SweetFX or any addons at all otherwise, and I still get the CTD. But more than that, as soon as I tune to ATIS in PF3 (still in the 'vanilla' FS9), my a/c (any) jumps up and down like a mad thing before the screen goes black and FS9 crashes. Sounds almost unbelievable, but it happens every time I tune in to an airport ATIS frequency - I've tried several airports and the result is always the same. As I say, further ideas very welcome!!

24 hours ago all was fine, but suddenly every flight I (try to) make ends with a CTD. The CTD comes before I push back, as I am preparing the aircraft for departure. This is at different airports with different planes... I wonder if the reports from Event Viewer, below, give any clues? I don't think I have added anything new, but before I start removing stuff at random, if the information below narrows down the problem at all, that would be a great help. Windows 7 x64 BTW... Thanks Faulting application name: FS9.EXE, version: 9.1.0.40901, time stamp: 0x4135a208 Faulting module name: unknown, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x00000000 Exception code: 0xc0000005 Fault offset: 0x00000a0d Faulting process id: 0x88c Faulting application start time: 0x01d194cc060f356b Faulting application path: D:\FS9\FS9.EXE Faulting module path: unknown Report Id: c1bf3089-00c0-11e6-a210-7824af3de903 Faulting application name: FS9.EXE, version: 9.1.0.40901, time stamp: 0x4135a208 Faulting module name: unknown, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x00000000 Exception code: 0xc000041d Fault offset: 0x75194f5d Faulting process id: 0xf94 Faulting application start time: 0x01d194c17fe2dfa5 Faulting application path: D:\FS9\FS9.EXE Faulting module path: unknown Report Id: d9fa9b4a-00bc-11e6-a1ab-7824af3de903 Faulting application name: FS9.EXE, version: 9.1.0.40901, time stamp: 0x4135a208 Faulting module name: D3D9.DLL, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x4ee53333 Exception code: 0xc0000005 Fault offset: 0x0000777e Faulting process id: 0x718 Faulting application start time: 0x01d194bafa301cfa Faulting application path: D:\FS9\FS9.EXE Faulting module path: D:\FS9\D3D9.DLL Report Id: 0d82d474-00b0-11e6-9bb5-7824af3de903 Faulting application name: FS9.EXE, version: 9.1.0.40901, time stamp: 0x4135a208 Faulting module name: unknown, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x00000000 Exception code: 0xc0000005 Fault offset: 0x6e6f2072 Faulting process id: 0x171c Faulting application start time: 0x01d194b765b0cbe4 Faulting application path: D:\FS9\FS9.EXE Faulting module path: unknown Report Id: eed7bd93-00ad-11e6-9bb5-7824af3de903 Faulting application name: FS9.EXE, version: 9.1.0.40901, time stamp: 0x4135a208 Faulting module name: unknown, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x00000000 Exception code: 0xc0000005 Fault offset: 0x00000000 Faulting process id: 0x150c Faulting application start time: 0x01d19426be19118f Faulting application path: D:\FS9\FS9.EXE Faulting module path: unknown Report Id: bc0157df-0021-11e6-b026-7824af3de903

Yes, I did! Don't know why I put 'AoA'... :smile: I find sometimes with the slider that, although pushing it to the top extends the spoilers fully, bringing the slider back down again doesn't bring the spoilers fully down, I have to use the associated key press to complete the task

Yes, when flying in the Alps or Himalayas to get down between mountain peaks, but we are talking about a 'normal' scenerio descending from say 38000' when flying, for instance, Amsterdam to Moscow, no sudden drops necessary. Aircraft do not normally require any spoilers at all right from the TOD, assuming throttles are on idle and a standard -3 degrees AoA. Got another one as I move the sliders (x07E - Saik075C.sys). A bit worrying.

It's OK, it is working just fine now, but only so far in my default a/c - I've been using the 747 to set up and test. I have one of the switches on the X52 ("T4") set to spoilers up/down and one ("T3") to Arm Spoilers. It was also easy to programme the slider (why did I have trouble before? i can't remember, but no matter) and now it works brilliantly (though I got a BSOD at one stage during the testing!) - the spoilers move gradually from fully down to fully extended as you move the slider upwards to its full extent. Great! 'All' (?!) I have to do now (as I rarely fly default FS9 planes) is to see how to get it all to work like that in my add-on a/c like PMDG Boeings and PSS Airbuses. (In the PMDG I get no spoiler movement at all; in the PSS a/c, things work up to 1/4 spoilers, then they suddenly 'snap' to Armed mode. Did you get your slider to work with all your a/c OK (assuming you also use PMDG etc.)? (Yes, the Saitek drivers and programming software are installed!) :-)

Me too. Surely in any case not the A350!! The 'manual' for this a/c is just the usual ReadMe.txt, so no information there. Well, not necessarily. I use PF3 for ATC and the descent planning is fairly sophisticated. What it really comes down to is an aircraft that will not descend, even at TOD, at more than about 7-800ft/min without accelerating, throttles at idle of course. I haven't in the past been able to map anything to the slider - how did you do it exactly, including arming, on the slider? I'd like to do the same. I have tried today using FSUIPC to create incremental speed brake extension/retraction, and it works up to a point in some aircraft - early days though, I only just started testing. My ideal would be to have the slider increase spoilers as you move it forward and decrease as you pull it back. I could use a different button for arming. Presumably yours is still an all-or-nothing affair, or do you also use FSUIPC to get incremental movement of the speed brakes??

Yes, I usually set my rate of descent manually too, so as to hit 250 comfortably at 10000'. The FSUIPC works just fine in the end - I was testing on the ground (where incremental flaps won't work) rather than in the air (where it is pretty cool!). I mapped the key presses to one of my X52 buttons and so now I can increase and decrease spoilers in the same way as flaps.

Yes, that's what I do at the moment. Even with the mouse, a number of a/c have very 'jumpy' spoilers though, which seem to like to go to 100% with the slightest excuse: you have to be ultra-gentle. Other a/c work just fine... I already have 'Arm Spoilers' set to my Saitek X52. What I am trying to do though is to programme spoilers to extend and retract incrementally, via FSUIPC (as 'advertised' as possible in the FSUIPC manual) and a key press (and hence to my X52). It's not working all that well at the moment, so I posted on the FSUIPC forum...

I think that with this a/c I shall have to employ spoilers to descend. They are not very subtle on this plane, but I can experiment a bit. I suppose real-world pilots do use them at higher altitudes (just because I have never witnessed it doesn't mean it never happens, I agree - maybe a touch of spoilers is, as you say, hardly visible anyway), though trying to mimic everything that happens in real-world aviation is really not my holy grail in FS9 or FSX! I am reasonably OK with much of the data in the aircraft.cfg file (and use the AircraftContainerSDKFS2004.doc to help out as needed), but many values in the aircraft.cfg file are inter-dependent and although you may 'cure' one thing, changing settings can have unwanted side effects. That said, I can easily edit the air file to tame the a350 spoilers a bit if necessary - and I always make a backup before I make any changes of course...

I can't recall the few previous examples (I'll note them down next time I encounter them!), but currently it is (actually an FS9 aircraft) - the CamSim a350.

Hi, thanks for the replies. Most of my a/c (I am talking about Boeings/Airbuses etc. here, I should have said, not Cessnas) will descend just fine at say 2000ft/min (or more) and still lose speed until they get to the A/Thr setting; or if I use VNAV (Level Change), the a/c will maintain both a satisfactory rate of descent and the selected air speed. A few others though, as I say, although they will slow down and maintain the air speed I select for a short period by doing the things suggested here, will only lose speed if my descent rate is less than about 800ft/min, which is never enough to get to the required altitude for approach and landing (I use PF3 for ATC and follow their instructions, so I cannot 'realistically' start a descent before the TOD, to compensate). Yes, throttles are at idle of course, I also cut the speed well short of the TOD: I do add a touch of speed brake if necessary, and I extend some flaps as soon as I can (which usually does the trick), but my preference would be to tweak things a little so that speed brakes and flaps are not necessary at that stage. I have never seen in real world aviation (and I fly pretty regularly, usually nose glued to the window!) spoilers employed apart from during approach. For me to have to use spoilers at 30,000' to avoid accelerating even during a relatively gentle descent in FS9 doesn't seem 'right'.

I would like to make a change so that one or two a/c I have do not accelerate so much as I descend - it is almost impossible to get down to the altitude and speed required for landing without using spoilers all the way down: if I try to descend without spoilers at much more than 1000ft/min, the a/c eventually reach overspeed. I tried increasing the parasite_drag_scalar and induced_drag_scalar values in the aircraft.cfg, but that seems to have had little effect and I am not sure what other parameters there to try tweaking. Can anyone help with this? Thanks.