FalconAF

Which would be the same as a non-native British English speaker moving to the U.S. asking, "What does 'custom-made' mean?" British English speaking person's answer: "It means 'bespoke". Language is all relative to different cultures. The semantics and word meanings of different languages can often be lost in the translations of them made to another language.

Real world runway use isn't always based on winds alone. It can also depend on local operating procedures or requirements for the airport (for noise abatement or others). Here in Las Vegas (KLAS) it is not uncommon for flights to have up to 10 knots of tailwind component on the departing and landing runways in use, primarily the 26's. With the length of the runways here (needed in the summer months due to really, REALLY hot days in excess of 110+ degrees) there is plenty of length for commercial airliners (in most cases) to take off and land with a small tailwind component on less-than-scorching hot summer days. SimBrief will many times want to create a flightplan for me using the OPPOSITE pointing runway(s) at KLAS when the real world flights are using the "preferred" 26's with a low tailwind component on them. (Edit: I just cross-posted with Farlis above me).

RE : If you "can’t switch to window view after update", here's a possible fix for you, because I had the same issue. Check to see if your Windows Display Settings Display Resolution size is the same as the resolution you selected in the MSFS Graphics options. I had both set to 4096 x 2160 for my large UHD TV and my MSFS2020 in-game screen was "locked" in Full Screen mode after the update, regardless if I chose Windowed or Full Screen in the Options settings. BUT my Windows DEFAULT recommended setting for my TV was only 3840 x 2160. So with MSFS2020 still running, I changed the resolution to 3840 x 2160 in the MSFS2020 Graphics options. That caused the MSFS2020 screen to get SMALLER than my full screen size (because I still had my WINDOWS resolution set to 4096 x 2160), then I was able to SEE the top bar on the top of the "window" to drag the "window" larger to fit my TV's screen size (while STILL in Windowed Mode) AND THEN change back and forth between Windowed and Full Screen mode using the "click-box" in the top right corner of the "window". Note that after I did this I could ALSO reset the MSFS2020 in-game resolution BACK to the 4096 x 2160 (to match my WINDOWS resolution again) and still have the Windowed and Full Screen options work in MSFS2020. It looks like depending on if your resolution in MSFS2020 was set HIGHER than your monitor's "recommended default" resolution setting, the update "locked" your screen to "full screen" and you need to select no higher than your default monitor resolution in MSFS2020 to "get the window back" so you can then use windowed mode and Full Screen Mode settings in the game's Graphics settings. You can THEN select the higher resolution you were using previously in the Graphics Options menu in MSFS, and switch back and forth between Windowed or Full Screen modes. Hope that was clear enough to help some folks.

Yeah, but what doesn't make sense is the files you (and now I) copied to Addons Manager (and removed from the MSFS default OneStore folder now) don't seem to agree in size with the 8 PG Cities files referenced in the "other thread" saying THEY need to be removed. THOSE files are reportedly a total of about 300MB. The (now) 9 folders you and I have moved come nowhere near that size when I do a Properties analysis of them in Windows. "Our" files (the ones you and I moved) are referenced with names "fs-base-coverage-map-(geographic location name)-tin" and seem to be a lot less than 300MB in total size. The "PG Cities Content Manager" items listed in Content Manager (in the "other thread") to remove are referenced as, "Next we go to content manager and remove 8 photogrammetry files WU 1, 3, 4, 6,7,8, 9,and GOTY" and they are said to be 300-ish total MB. So, are the files you and I have moved and deleted the same files the Content Manager would remove? THAT's what's confusing the heck outta me. Are the same files that you and I manually moved from our default MSFS OneStore folder the SAME files that would get removed if I used the Content Manager to "delete" them after searching for "Photogrammetry Cities" as the other thread says? The reason I'm trying to clarify this is I haven't deleted ANYTHING using the Content Manager prior to manually moving the 9 files the way you did. I don't know if I should, or even NEED to, delete anything in Content Manager after manually moving the 9 files you and I have moved from the default OneStore folder to a folder outside MSFS, and linking THEM back to MSFS using Addons Manager. But now, when I start MSFS, I get the UPDATE ("needed") screen saying there is a 387.65 KIB Update needed (if I have ALL the 9 files DEselected in Addons Manager), and a 327-ish KIB UPDATE ("needed") screen if I have all the files ACTIVATED in Addons Manager. And those 2 UPDATE screens only offer me the option to press the Update button to continue and the Download begins. Then I finally get into MSFS and go to the Content Manager and it lists 18 "Updates Available", half of them "Partially Installed" and the other half not installed at all. Where in the heck did I get EIGHTEEN "Updates needed" in Content Manager from when I had ZERO before moving our 9 files from the default OneStore folder? Yes...I'm confused as hell about what needs or doesn't need to be done concerning this "fix". And I did professional IT Security for over 35 years and have been flight simming on home built computers for 30+ years too. So what am I missing here?

OK, just to see if I understand this all correctly... 1. I just created the same folder links structure shown in GSalden's post above using my Addons Linker (copied the original 9 folders from the main MSFS installation OneStore folder to a different folder location). 2. Then deleted the original 9 folders in the main MSFS installation OneStore directory. 3. The 9 folders are now listed in my Addons Manager ready to be Activated or Deactivated. I normally fly in the U.S. using the sim. So when I'm doing that now, I would DEactivate the other 8 folders, but STILL Activate the "fs-base-coverage-map-us2-tin" folder in Addons Linker? And do the same process for the other 8 geographic file locations if I'm ever flying in any of them sometimes? Only Activate the areas I'll actually be flying in geographically? I'm still a bit confused about "which files" are the "bugged" ones that I should ALWAYS (?) be DEactivating for now. I'm assuming there are some "original" PG files\folders that are OK from what I've read in this thread, but some of the "updated" PG files for the same geographical locations are "bugged" and causing problems? Are the 9 files I just moved to the Addons Linker ALL "bugged" ones? Or just some of them? Or any of them? Thanks for any clarification.

What amazes me is that a new update to fix things can keep breaking OTHER things that weren't broken before, and NOBODY at MSFS knew that until AFTER the release? Current example is after installing this update you can't (for now) use anything OTHER than 100 in the Render Scaling or all the ground night lights get dorked elevation-wise. And even more incredible is when that is presented as a "problem" in the MSFS forum the response seems to be that NOBODY knew that would happen. Really? NOBODY NOTICED that if someone was using a setting of 80 or 120 didn't have ground lights anymore (at 80) or that all the ground lights were floating above ground now (at 120), etc.? WU6 and night lighting broken - Bugs & Issues / Scenery - Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums I'm not a programmer, but gimme a break, eh? I was a Quality Control Manager for numerous years in the Air Force. With MSFS I'm beginning to feel like I paid $120+ to be a beta tester. Don't get me wrong, I think the sim is overall good. But the above stuff is totally stupid from a customer service standpoint, let alone a responsible development team. EDIT: At least I seriously doubt it will take long for them to push out a "hotfix" for it, in as much as it also caused the same problem for X-Box users...who don't even HAVE a Render Scaling slider to do a "work-around" for it right now. So yeah...how was it not noticed by anyone who may have tried the update on an X-Box? Quality Control before release? Uh.... 🤔

Shouldn't the thread title be "upGRADES" instead of "upDATES"? If I had already paid for the Deluxe or Premium product I'd really be p*ssed off if I had to pay for an upDATE for it too (like, if I had to pay for the upcoming WU6). Or are we just trying to confuse the newbies on purpose? 😉

The thing I don't like about that product is that it can be dependent on what the developer of the addon decided to call or "name" things. For instance, which "tags" did they decide to use? Heck, even with the Add-On Linker, the version number of the download displayed in Add-On Linker doesn't agree with the actual version of the file downloaded in many cases, because the developer never changed the version number in the file download after the update. There is not enough "standardization" in file conventions yet, let alone following the SDK, by a lot of freeware developers still.

@captain420, Yup. There are many different ways to get similar results using Add-On Linker. The biggest challenge is learning what they all are to begin with. Then you can use the method that works best for you.

I use it and it works like a charm. But I wouldn't get too anal about trying to micro-categorize stuff to limit what you try to load or not load for a flight. It will just raise your blood pressure and stress levels too much. Here's what I did as far as creating categories: 1. Aircraft Categories: Yes, definitely. Ideally, you would only want to load the individual aircraft you will be using for you flight session. Or no more than a couple different ones at most if you wanted some flexibility. If I'm going coast - to - coast at FL450 in the Longitude, that's all I'm gonna load. If I'm gong lower and slower like to scope out a new local scenery I just added, then I'll load say a helicopter (hover capability) and a slower GA fixed wing prop to go sightseeing. 2. Geographical Areas: I have Continents, Countries, and Regions (like North America, Canada, Eastern USA, Southern USA, Western USA, United Kingdom, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, etc). Creating 50 individual States (for someplace like the USA) is normally going to be massive overkill. If your computer is taking forever to load an entire Region consisting of only something like 10 States (or several smaller Countries in someplace like Eastern or Western Europe), you have more things to worry about as far as your computer performance is concerned. Plus, the last thing I'm ever going to do is try to "figure out" which of 50 separate United States I "need to load or not" for a coast - to - coast flight. That would drive you nuts. If I'm going coast-to-coast in 5 flight hours over the USA, the whole darn country is gonna get loaded. I'll "turn off" the REST of the world in the Add-On Linker. 3. Create subfolders for items that would be in the same geographical areas in #2 above...Scenery, Airports, maybe even Cities if you want. You can then "not install" a whole Continent, Country, Region, etc with one folder click if you aren't going to be anywhere near it. For instance, I have an Eastern USA\Cities\New York (the CITY, not the STATE)\...with an Airports and Bridges subfolder under the New York folder. I also put any city sceneries for New York City there, like the payware SamScene New York City Times. If all I'm gonna do is cruise around looking at the pretty buildings, everything but Eastern USA will get "turned off" and there should still be no problem with "excessive load times" scenery-wise. Are you afraid you won't be able to keep track of all of it? That's what the DESCRIPTION COLUMN in Add-On Linker is for. 🙂 You can use that column to name the addon ANYTHING you want to call it (without changing the actual filename of the addon). ALL my airports in the Description Column are named by the ICAO code of the airport as the first item in each description of it, followed by the real airport name (or whatever else you may want to call it). It doesn't matter what the FILENAME of the addon is that MSFS will load. The Description Column can be used just like a spreadsheet and you can sort and search it alphabetically, etc, to let you "see" everything you have installed in an easy manner. So you created numerous "Airports" folders under numerous different geographical location folders? Do a search using "Airports" in Add-On Linker, and you will get a list of ALL the airports in ALL the different "Airports" folders you created all over the world. It all depends on how you want to do it. But I'm seeing people creating what appears to be way too many smaller "main categories" to start with. Just because I'm only going to be flying in Nevada today doesn't mean I NEED to have 49 other State folders so I could turn California, Utah, and Arizona off. Heck, I'd spend more time turning stuff on and off than the small increase in the loading times the sim will take if I don't turn them off. Think a bit bigger in creating and loading your category boundaries. Or, if you do want hundreds of individual categories, at a minimum create PRESETS for region-sized geographical areas you can turn on/off with one click. There's no "one size fits all" method. Do what will work for you. Bottom line is the Add-On Linker is an INCREDIBLY powerful management tool...IF you take the time to learn how to use ALL of it's capabilities. Take the time to do that and your MSFS life will be a whole lot simpler.

PLEASE go to the link in the above post and read the "changes" before you blindly install this thinking it "fixes everything". This "stable version update" does NOT solve many of the current problems encountered that ARE addressed in the current Developers Version (NOTE: That is what the DEVELOPERS are saying themselves...NOT ME). If you replace a current Developers Version with this updated stable version, you may be right back dealing with items that have NOT been corrected in the new stable version, that ARE working properly in the current Developers version. Just an FYI.

It's not that bad, as far as "temp fixes" are concerned. For all I know I may have exasperated my original problem when I decided to totally delete the "do the clean install" folder thing. I kinda think no one even at FBW knew that if somebody did that, the Installer wouldn't recreate the missing folder (after the SU5 update, quite possibly). Why else would they have recommended to only delete the files starting with the letter "m" and not the Work Folder, yet still say "it's your choice if you want to delete the Work folder or not"? There are just so many different people having what are obviously different reasons why they can't get the a320 to load without a CTD now. Some find the solution to be a simple livery. Some, like me, will end up pulling half their hair out in frustration trying to "fix" it, which didn't happen until I found what I posted above in a COMBINATION of 2 different posts on 2 different forums (one of them the developers forum). I had to recreate the missing folder, then reinstall the a320, then load the new reinstalled a320 for the first time using the default Cessna first then the Developer Mode "load an aircraft" thing. Since then it's all been fine for me as long as I remember to keep the a320 as the "default load" aircraft displayed in my flight sim aircraft selection screen. The real scary part of all of this is that even though MS/Asobo on one hand has allowed third-party developers to use the SDK to create addons, they still have a death grip on "proprietary encrypted files" that they obviously have no intention of ever letting "outsiders" use for addon development (like a weather addon). The days of anybody being able to use an SDK to create ALL kinds of addons for MSFS (like we could for FSX or P3D) have ended. I can understand that from the viewpoint of preventing a 3rd party developer from creating a "monster addon" that if added to the XBox platform might sink the whole performance of the XBox sim. But it also raises the reasonable question of, "What if I buy lots of addons for lots of money now for my PC, but NOT from the Marketplace?" And MS eventually gets PO'd about that? (for whatever reason). And in a future update they change the internal structure (encrypt MORE files?) to make those addons not work anymore, with no possible way for the developer to update them? I've lost all of that monetary investment in the sim then. And please don't say, "They would never do that." Over my 45 years of doing professional IT, MS has (eventually...for whatever reason they had) cancelled support for Windows versions more times than I care to remember...along with a couple "New and Improved Flight Simulators" (cough cough). Marketing strategies are aimed at making people believe "The Customer Comes First", but in reality it is always, "Profits come first, so long as we can keep the Customers believing they come first." And that's not a conspiracy theory. It's "Business For Profit 101" Been doing flight sims for almost 40 years. Not the first time I've wanted to beat my head against the wall out of frustration. Won't be the last time either.

Slightly off topic, but since you're here I'll ask. Does REX Wx Force "cure" the lightening and thunder everywhere issue in MSFS? I honestly don't care if WX Force is based only on local METARs. If it stops "THOR the Obnoxious Thunder Lord" from making me watch and listen to "live" thunderbolts and lightening all...day...long in scattered clouds, I'll buy it.

Your POV works for you, Ses. My position is that if I've already got well over thousands of dollars invested in a PC I built primarily for flight (and other) simming, then a company says "Here's our new Flight Simulator for your PC! It's GREAT!", so I spend $120+ for it, then 30 days later they "update" it to look like what their latest and greatest console gaming system can handle, I'll be d*mned if I'm gonna spend $600 to buy their gaming console just to play the sim now. Never owned a gaming console, and don't have any incentive nor intention to buy one. Press on.

It's one of the many, many suggested "This is what I did to fix it!" recommendations being made. But even the developers at FBW say it only "might" work. So you can try it, but there are no guarantees. Nor ANY reason or evidence to think of it as the online traffic actually being an across-the-board problem for everybody.