Porpoising problem in FS2004 (707-320)

OK .... try my FSUIPC suggestion please .... when you get time.

Also .... I must have the dates of those AIR.FILES for just the affected aircraft. I want to establish beyond all doubt that the files you have are indeed those uploaded during last August.

Thanks !

Mark

Mark, the 707-120 .air file is dated 10/15/2006 and the 707-320 airfile is 5/23/2006. All files as I said were recently redownloaded and reinstalled. The base pack file dates are 2/25/2008 for the -120 and 9/3/2007 for the -320. FSUIPC is version 3.7.8.3 dated 1/29/2008, unregistered. I'll download and install version 3.8 and see if it works.

Nick, I'll keep those changes in mind. Right now I'm just too tired to even think about messing with my .cfg files. Once I hang the load of laundry that's in the washer I'm hitting the sack!

"TARASDAD" .... I've just sent you a PM !

Mark C
AKL/NZ

Despite my previous insistence that ¨POPOISING¨should never ocurr .... today I experienced a little of this for the very first time ever.

Until now .... all my flights with these aircraft models have been conducted at default gross weights .... as established per FS at the start of any flying session and without any fuel/payload adjustment whatsoever. I typically perform all my test flying this way .... because I figure it's what the majority of users are probably doing, and if so, it allows me to relate firsthand to whatewer problems might be experienced by some folk as a result.

Flying up to FL310 in high gross weight conditions I've ¨NEVER¨experienced any porpoising whatsoever during AP controlled flight .... save for exrtremly rare occasions when I've made careless altitude captures .... as discussed in my previous postings (on another thread) and which I've long since learned how to avoid.

Anyway .... today I was test flying some FDE adjustments being made to our C135-A. The first flight at high gross weight passed perfectly although climbing required extreme care and concentration .... constantly adjusting the ROC as necessary to maintain a good speed throughout the climb. Once established at altitude and in AP controlled flight cruise performance was perfectly stable and smooth .... just as always I've experienced previously with all of our aircraft.

My 2nd flight with was performed with a reduced payload .... so as to remain inside the realworld MTOW limitations of these aircraft (and KC135-A) .... 316,000 LBS. Even so T/O performance was expectedly slow/long and the climb to altitude required similar precision and care per constant ROC adjustments. Upon acquiring FL310 the AP ALT HLD mode was engaged .... and for the first time ever I experienced very mild ¨PORPOISING¨.

I managed to resolve this by disengaging ALT HLD (not the AP) .... then trimming to reacquire my desired altitude (31,000 FT) .... then re-engaging ALT HLD again. The selected altitudue was recaptured and no further ¨PORPOISING¨ocurred during the remainder of my 2 hour high altitude AP controlled flight test which passed with perfect stability.

After this experience I began to wonder if any tendancy for these aircraft to ¨PORPOISE¨during AP controlled flight might be in some way related to reduced payloads .... or perhaps more appropriately .... encouraged by bad selected payload adjustments/configurations and maybe a little excessive speed.

I started my C1335-A test flight with a fuel load reduction to promote a 316,000 LB MTOW (overload) .... then climbed to FL310 .... then maintained a cruising speed of MACH 0.835 / 320 KTS IAS.

Just my 50 cents worth !

Mark C
BOG/CO

go to www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=2da43d38-db71-4c1b-bc6a-9b6652cd92a3&DisplayLang=en
This is the place for the latest Direct x9C which was revised August 2008 it may help resolve anthing that SP3 may have done??