Flightbeam KPDX is out!

[Dave_YVR 968]

56 minutes ago, tamsini said:

I cannot add it to Vector's AEC as KPDX is not in the list.

Why would you want to add it for AEC when it's not needed?

[pete_auau 1,154]

1 hour ago, tamsini said:

Not sure what to make of this but of all my FlightBeam sceneries (5), KPDX is the only one I need to activate in the FlightBeam Manager. I cannot add it to Vector's AEC as KPDX is not in the list. Will this action lessen the scenery imagery in any way?

why   would  you want  to   add it for,  take  you  got  runway elevation  issues  at KPDX

[tamsini 278]

I wanted to add it because I have weird valleys all along the taxiways. Now that I have activated the  Orbx files within flightbeam manager (only for KPDX), it seems to have solved that problem. Which is why I'm wondering what it may affect as far as imagery.

[John_Tavendale 453]

It's great scenery, but I find it quite heavy on FPS. Disabling PNW didn't seem to make much difference.

[GHarrall 494]

7 minutes ago, John_Tavendale said:

It's great scenery, but I find it quite heavy on FPS. Disabling PNW didn't seem to make much difference.

That’s what I was worrying about. PDX area in FTX PNW is quite performance intensive as it is.

whats the impact?

[FalconAF 213]

I bought it.  It's a good scenery.  And I also own all the other Flightbeam sceneries and they are good.

But for cryin' out loud...how long does it take a developer to start allowing their sceneries to be added to P3D OUTSIDE of the main P3D folder using the XML method?  For Flightbeam to still INSIST that their airports MUST be installed inside the main P3D folder is really getting silly.  And it's a bad reflection on how serious they are in making their products P3D "compliant" with the current Lockheed Martin XML installation method.  

C'mon Flightbeam.  You took a major step getting your products dis-associated with the Couatl Addon Manager.  Now get them so the customer can install them in P3D using the P3D recommended XML method.  

[Sartanius 399]

23 minutes ago, FalconAF said:

But for cryin' out loud...how long does it take a developer to start allowing their sceneries to be added to P3D OUTSIDE of the main P3D folder using the XML method?  For Flightbeam to still INSIST that their airports MUST be installed inside the main P3D folder is really getting silly.  And it's a bad reflection on how serious they are in making their products P3D "compliant" with the current Lockheed Martin XML installation method.  

C'mon Flightbeam.  You took a major step getting your products dis-associated with the Couatl Addon Manager.  Now get them so the customer can install them in P3D using the P3D recommended XML method.  

Hey Rick.  Yes, the FlightBeam installer places the scenery files inside the Prepar3D Main folder, but they are added to the simulator via the new XML method.  If you were to completely uninstall Prepar3D, the FlightBeam folders and all their scenery files would remain intact and not be deleted.  I certainly understand what you are saying, but not sure it's a major issue.

Check the add-on.cfg file in the "ProgramData\LockheedMartin\Prepar3dv4" folder that points to the .XML file in the "Documents\Prepar3d v4 Add-ons\FlightBeam -  KPDX" folder.

You can move the KPDX folder out of the main LM folder and put it wherever you'd like, then remember to change the paths in the .XML file.

Edited January 5, 2019 by dmiannay

[UAL4life 237]

59 minutes ago, dmiannay said:

Hey Rick.  Yes, the FlightBeam installer places the scenery files inside the Prepar3D Main folder, but they are added to the simulator via the new XML method.  If you were to completely uninstall Prepar3D, the FlightBeam folders and all their scenery files would remain intact and not be deleted.  I certainly understand what you are saying, but not sure it's a major issue.

Check the add-on.cfg file in the "ProgramData\LockheedMartin\Prepar3dv4" folder that points to the .XML file in the "Documents\Prepar3d v4 Add-ons\FlightBeam -  KPDX" folder.

You can move the KPDX folder out of the main LM folder and put it wherever you'd like, then remember to change the paths in the .XML file.

Would the FlightBeam Manager work after that?

[Dave_YVR 968]

1 hour ago, tamsini said:

I wanted to add it because I have weird valleys all along the taxiways. Now that I have activated the  Orbx files within flightbeam manager (only for KPDX), it seems to have solved that problem. Which is why I'm wondering what it may affect as far as imagery.

It doesn't have anything to do with Vector though. Deactivating the FTX PNW files is all that is needed. 

[tamsini 278]

23 minutes ago, Dave_YVR said:

It doesn't have anything to do with Vector though. Deactivating the FTX PNW files is all that is needed. 

Thanks, Dave. I'll give it a try!

[snapshot21 254]

48 minutes ago, tamsini said:

Thanks, Dave. I'll give it a try!

The flightbeam manager has a troubleshooter utility that does it automatically for you.

[Guevorkyan 69]

I have some problems with Dynamic Lighting. Sometimes it's just too bright on a spot but the splash doesn't go very far and the airplanes are seldom illuminated.

I know it's still WIP, and a lot is still being worked on.

[Sartanius 399]

11 hours ago, UAL4life said:

Would the FlightBeam Manager work after that?

Nope. Here's a link to FlightBeam's instructions on how to preserve the use of the their manager utility when moving their scenery out of the main LM P3D folder.  My point was that FlightBeam was indeed using the new .XML method for loading their scenery into P3D.

[regis9 4,004]

Had my first departure from PDX last night, looks great and performance was good, especially given the dense region it is in.  Overall quite happy to finally have this airport in P3D!

[Sartanius 399]

5 minutes ago, regis9 said:

Had my first departure from PDX last night, looks great and performance was good, especially given the dense region it is in.  Overall quite happy to finally have this airport in P3D!

I agree.  Performed a 737-NGX flight into PDX from Phoenix and a flight out to Minneapolis-St Paul in the FSL A320.  Performance was just fine on all counts.