FalconAF

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.

For the still totally frustrated at getting the FWB320 to load, you can try this. It's what worked (finally) for me. Got it from the developer's GitHub forum. As always with these kind of things, no guarantees. YMMV 1. First, if you followed the instructions for a "clean install", you may have unknowingly deleted an ENTIRE FOLDER you shouldn't have. It's the one in the Packages folder called "flybywire-aircraft-a320-neo". It has a subfolder called "Work" in it with a couple "necessary files" according to the developers. The recommendation was to NOT delete that work folder, but only the files starting with the letter "m" in the main "flybywire-aircraft-a320-neo" folder above it. But it ALSO said it was "up to you" if you wanted to delete the whole main folder, so that's what I did. Problem seems to be if you do that, a new installation (even using the Installer) will NOT recreate the original "flybywire-aircraft-a320-neo" folder. So, first thing is to check if you STILL have that folder. The location of it can be found in the picture of the folder structure at the GitHub site: Installation - FlyByWire Simulations Guides (you may have to scroll down to see it under the "Clean Install Steps" section). If that folder is no longer on your computer, CREATE it again, WITH the WORK folder in it. Now when you finally get the aircraft to load again, it will repopulate those folders with the files needed in them. Another possibility (but I can't guarantee this) is if you still have that folder, just delete the files starting with the letter "m" but KEEP the "WORK" folder and the files already in it. 2. OK, once you know you still have that folder, this is how you *should* be able to get it all working again: a. Make sure you have followed all the REST of the "Clean Install" instructions (primarily, that you have deleted ALL INSTANCES of previous FBW installations). b. Start MSFS. Load a DEFAULT airplane. I used the Cessna 150 at a RUNWAY. (I don't know if it works starting at a gate, but you can try it if you want to find out.) After the Cessna has finished loading and you have selected "Fly Now".... c. Go back to the sim's main Options menu, start the Developer Mode (don't be afraid...it won't kill you, your simulator, or your computer), and in the top left Menu Bar, select "Windows", then in the drop down list "Aircraft Selector", then scroll through the list until you find the CORRECT FBW aircraft to load. There may be TWO of them you will see. The one you want is "Airbus A320 Neo FlyByWire" (note the spaces in it's name). You do not want the one that is named "Airbus A320neo FlyByWire". After you have highlighted the correct one, click on the bottom left "Load" button. If everything works right, the FBW A320 will load where the Cessna used to be. DO NOT HIT "FLY NOW" UNTIL YOU GET THE FIRST VIDEO VIEW OF THE EXTERIOR OF THE AIRPLANE (not just the overhead view of the airport). HOWEVER.....(this is what happened to me then....) d. Once you finally get into the cockpit it might have loaded with all the displays as black screens, even though you can hear the engines running, etc. BUT, I couldn't get any of the "knobs" in the cockpit to turn them on. But when I turned the Parking Brake OFF, they all popped on and everything worked fine after that. Go figure. In any case, using the Developer Mode to "force load" the FBW a320 after loading a default Cessna seems to work for (almost?) everybody now. 3. Finally, it appears you STILL NEED TO KEEP the FBW a320 as the "default loading" airplane in the airplane selection screen in the simulator. If I do that, it loads every time in the sim after that. If I forget to make it the default airplane before closing the simulator, it will CTD the first time I try to load it again. There is something not playing nice with BOTH the MSFS sim and the FBW a320. It's not as simple as only being a "bad livery" or something similar. The developers are looking for permanent fixes yet. For now, the above recommendation is the only thing that worked for me. Hope it may help others here still having the CTD loading issues.

To quote an old movie.... "If you build it, they will come." It's only a matter of time. Heck, we already have people here saying they bought an XBox for MSFS. The last thing I want to start doing is comparing my PC performance to what they say they are "seeing" on their XBox in a "one size fits all" MSFS forum. It was bad enough when we had to guess (most of the time) what version of P3D a person had in the P3D forum. I lost count of how many times people were making "recommendations" for performance improvements based on whatever version they were running, which could have been a few versions behind what a "hardcore" or "serious sim enthusiast" might have. While I'm at it....it WOULD be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of 2 XBoxs connected to 2 DIFFERENT display-capable monitors/TVs. One connected to an HDR capable display, and one connected to a non-HDR capable (SDR) display. I think that might be very entertaining or enlightening. Or maybe not. 😎

I've been "simming" since the Commodore 64 days. Disappointment comes with the territory sometimes. I'll admit, I didn't jump on the MSFS2020 bandwagon until about a month ago 'cos I wanted things to settle down first. When I bought it it was already SU4 and I was really, REALLY impressed with it. I immediately bought the FlyTampa Las Vegas payware ('cos I live there) and was impressed even more. Then SU5, and the entire state of Nevada looks like an over-brightened water color painting. It is an immersion killer for me, but I'll be patient enough to see what happens (even though I would have every right to think I got "$120+ screwed" in the last 30 days with my purchase). I'm just not purchasing any more "payware" for now from anybody. I'll take my chances with freeware, 'cos it seems some freeware developers are trying their best with the moving MSFS target. My real concern now is the so-called "10-Year Development" thingie. Ten years? I'll probably be dead and buried by then (quit applauding 😄). The sim is already 1 year old, and they still haven't "solved" the idiotic lightening in "few clouds" weather with the Live Weather. To me, that's like buying a car racing simulation and the developer saying "Don't worry that the race tracks all have potholes in them for now. We have a 10-year plan to fix that!". And MS/Asobo being adamant that they have no intention of releasing "weather capability" to 3rd-party devs basically says, "We'll fix the weather thingie when we feel like it" (or when the "contractor" they have an agreement with to provide the sim's weather info can figure out how to do it). When flying an airplane, the weather part of the simulation should be a PRIORITY to get right. For God's sake, being in believable weather where you operate the darn airplane should be a priority. I don't remember even seeing it on their "To Do" list (but I may be wrong about that. But it already HAS been a year for an integral part of a flying simulator, so......).

Wow. I mean, there ARE some things about the SU5 that I don't like on my PC now. But if I really thought I'd been screwed as badly as your post says I have been, the LAST thing I would do is go spend another $600 for one of their XBoxes. Ignorance is one thing, but if I didn't know I was gonna get screwed, then discovered I did get screwed, I sure wouldn't think I could trust the same person who screwed me the first time not to do it again. Your "solution" seems to be a marketer's dream come true. I think your assessment is quite a bit overblown. I can wait to see what MS/Asobo does WITHOUT buying an XBox to solve my disappointment right now.

AviatorMan, I raised the same-ish question way back when MSFS was first released. I figured ORBX's days of "landclass" or "True Earth" were numbered because of the same things you mentioned. I basically got told where to go in the ORBX forum. But it sure seems like ORBX products for MSFS are mostly "lets upgrade the buildings and photogrammetry stuff" nowadays. And still airports. But that would be understandable now.

Seriously? Nope. The original picture was full daylight with very, very few clouds far away on the horizon in FULL daylight sunshine. Your picture is in a total overcast condition with no direct sunshine at all. Plus, if you have ever sat in the pilot's seat of a real airplane, you would know that the POV in your picture shows the instrument panel from the perspective of someone being so far back from it their feet would never be able to reach the rudder pedals. What your picture shows is a view from someone standing at least back by the cockpit door of the cockpit. Get the POV up where a real pilot would be sitting. Then... ...pan the view down (or move the instrument panel up) so the instrument panel has to take up more of the screen (so you can see the whole PFD and MFD then), and add full sunshine with no clouds outside. And get rid of the map overlay. THEN do the comparison. And try it with a darker panel to begin with too, like the default Cesnna 150 or 172. I mean really...those are the default aircraft that come with the sim to begin with that have much darker instrument panels. They should be part of the comparison too. I'm not totally knocking the sim. But your comparison picture no way reflects the conditions where the outside washing out occurs.

OK, now show us a screencap from INSIDE the cockpit WITH the instrument panel panned up on the display so you can see the instruments. Is it still "not overly bright" outside? Is the instrument panel so dark you can hardly see it anymore if your outside view ISN'T washed out because of the gamma 80 setting? And if you have to adjust your gamma to 80 from OUTSIDE the sim itself using MORE than just your monitor's native settings, how on earth can you imply MSFS is the "real thing" all by itself? That violates every principle of logical "Cause and Effect" reasoning. It's like all the people who said they got their P3D's looking good, but ONLY after invoking third-party shader addons (that worked differently for different people). I'm happy for you that you're happy with what you had to do to be happy. But the conclusion you draw about the current state of the sim doesn't revolve around your own computer and how you decided to "fix" it. Just sayin'

OK, I'll grant that observation. But if that's the road we are going to go down, we all (simmers) should quit comparing any XBox version with using the sim on a PC platform. They are two completely different animals. AVSIM should create separate MSFS XBox and MSFS PC forums. If not, we are going to be arguing about differences in performance, appearance, and "scaleability" (slider availability) between the hardware platforms. It's already bad enough that PC users argue with each other about how flight sims should look and perform based on the user's own wide range of hardware capabilities. Now we are comparing a gaming console version with a PC version of the simulator. It gets mind numbing doing that with all the different opinions about "It should look this way on my PC!" followed by, "No! I have an XBox and it looks great!" Next thing you know somebody is gonna say, "Well, I just watched a YouTube video of it on my iPhone and it looked fine to me!" 🤣

With the new(er) brighter outside textures, what is really needed now is the ability for the user to SEPARATELY change the brightness and/or contrast of BOTH the outside cockpit view AND the inside Instrument Panel view while sitting in the cockpit. With the way it is now, your choice is basically "Do I want to be able to see the outside view OR my instruments on my monitor with reasonable brightness and contrast?" Because depending on your hardware capability (HDR or not) it can be impossible to do them both at the same time now. I would think that in as much as the Instrument panel is "overlaid" on the outside view, a programmer should be able to allow separate brightness/contrast settings for each of them to be displayed at the same time. Thus you could have a "toned down" outside view WITH an inside "I'm not in a dark closet" instrument panel view at the same time. But I'm not a programmer, so..... 🤔

I agree with the OP. But the new "brighter" outside textures now contribute to another problem combined with the way Asobo implements the "my eyes adjusting in the cockpit when looking out the window vs looking at the instrument panel". When I'm flying my real airplane (real-world pilot since 1972), my eyes adjust based on where my EYES are LOOKING...NOT where I position the instrument panel on a viewing screen. In MSFS, the outside view gets even MORE washed out now when I have the instrument panel even only splitting the screen 50-50 vertically with the outside view. Which makes it almost impossible now to see anything with reasonable contrast outside the window if I have the panel displayed high enough to see the required instruments I should be visually monitoring while flying (especially in VFR conditions). Try panning your forward cockpit view up and down, and notice how much the outside view does get almost totally "washed out" the higher the instrument panel gets on the screen (vs how "less washed out" it gets the lower the panel is). The problem with the way Asobo implemented THAT is that in the real world, if I just raised my EYES to look out the front window, my eyes WOULD re-adjust and the outside view would not still be "washed out". But the only way to correct it in the sim NOW is to pan (or lower) the instrument panel back down far enough to eliminate the Asobo implemented "outside washed out even more" effect. That is NOT how the real world works as far as your eyes adjusting to brightness/darkness differences. (Note: Yes, I know about the supposed "eye adjustment fix" in the .cfg.opt file...change the number value to zero...but that doesn't solve the problem depending on whether you can use HDR or not). And as the OP also stated, most real world pilots will wear sunglasses in high(er) altitude daylight conditions due to the "glare" or "out the window light intensity" in sunny conditions. But I can't even do that (have an adjustment for it?) in the current sim. I applaud Asobo for trying to implement the "eye adjustment" effect, but they implemented it *ss backwards by basing it on the instrument panel position on your screen/monitor. With the instrument panel up far enough to see the instruments, just raising my EYES to look out the window doesn't re-adjust the outside super-washed-out view now. I have to re-pan (or lower) the panel down, and that is a PITA. Short of using some kind of actual eye-tracking device, it is a fiasco for a regular monitor user who wants to be able to see the instrument panel AND have a reasonable view outside the cockpit window at the same time in sunny conditions.

If you read the entire thread, there is indication it may not be an across the board issue. Rather just at EGNX. In any case, I wouldn't consider it as anything like a "Magic Bullet Fix" that some seem to be implying. More factual evidence needed yet as to whether it is sim-wide everywhere in the sim.

OK, let me ask if anyone else is seeing this... After SU5, I used Content Manager to uninstall all the Aviator Club liveries for the default aircraft. There was ONE addon listed as only Aviators Club. But SU5 seems to have added separate "XBox Aviator Club" livery entries for each default aircraft too. So now my Content Library shows (33?) uninstalled Aviator Club liveries. But in the MSFS aircraft selection, there is STILL an Aviator Club livery shown for every default aircraft. Why? There are no "Installed" Aviator Club entries in my Content Library now. They all show as "Uninstalled" since I did that, so I would expect those liveries to not be a selection in the aircraft selection screens anymore.

Yes they would (but historically THAT ISN'T the case in previous flight sim versions)...if there was only ONE slider to move that would cause a user's desired effect to occur. But look at all those previous flight sims you mentioned. With the plethora of sliders that are available. Being "mentally healthy" alone didn't prevent (and still doesn't prevent) users from moving the WRONG sliders...and COMBINATION of sliders...until they have screwed up their settings so badly the sim starts puking it's guts as far as display and performance is concerned. I'd bet a months pay there are users today...both new and with previous years of flight simming experience with previous flight sims...who STILL couldn't tell you what moving several of the CURRENT available sliders in MSFS actually DO to/for the sims display/performance. And the "pop-up" explanations shown in the General Settings window when you mouse-hover over a slider setting doesn't explain it to anyone who doesn't already understand it. At best, the pop-ups just imply, "your changes may improve or cause problems depending on your chosen setting". Don't get me wrong. I agree sliders would work for people who know the consequences of using them incorrectly. But let's face it. Historically, they are ABUSED more often than used correctly. Forums are full of evidence of this from all previous flight sim versions.

Another possibility why it isn't working for you... Make sure you have not disabled the Microsoft Store app on your computer, or when you start MSFS it won't tell you about any update. And it won't provide you the "click on" link that will take you to the Miscrosoft Store to download it. Once you get to the Microsoft Store, click on the MSFS2020 icon on the page. It will start the download. Note it will say it is an update to the default MSFS version, regardless of what version you have installed (Premium or Deluxe). That's OK. Just do it.

That's why us real pilots tune in the airport's ATIS comm frequency when getting closer to the destination. It will "read" him/her the current METAR for the airport. That said, using the default ATC to do that for "real weather" in MSFS may be a YMMV situation.

The problem with the slider concept is that it becomes a nightmare for the developer of the sim because of "The Sim S*cks!!!" complaints from users who simply don't understand there is no such thing as a "free lunch". It happened (and still happens) with people using sims like the old FSX. A majority of the graphics settings could be controlled by using "sliders" in the settings. And people being people, they would just crank them up to max settings that their computers never had a prayer of handling. And the complaints about "poor performance" and "lousy frame rates" would fill the forums. What on earth makes anybody think that wouldn't happen with MSFS if people could "max out" a "pop-up distance" slider to the point it began choking the computer hardware to death and burying their beloved frame rates? The thing about MS and Asobo having the XBox version of MSFS is that THEY will be able to prevent most of the "user induced" things that cause poor performance in the sim. Every XBox user will have the SAME hardware platform, with a "certified by MS/Asobo" list of addons in the Marketplace that they SAY will work in advance, so there shouldn't be any confusion about performance because of a plethora of different video cards, chipsets, overclocking, "non accepted developer software addons", etc. MS and Asobo could (and in the case of the XBox version...SHOULD) tell XBox users, "Hey! Quick asking us to include settings for you that if you use them incorrectly can screw up the entire platform." So why should they be expected to provide "setting adjustments" to PC users that historically just cause problems because many PC users will abuse them? They should (and rightfully so, too) cringe at giving the PC community (consisting of everything from 10-year old computers/hardware, to systems with $3000 for the latest and greatest GPU), ANY "slider control" that would allow the user to "jack up" the graphics settings to a point even the best computers might start choking themselves. Let the performance complaints begin as soon as that happens, and it would be NO FAULT of the sim software. What people are asking is for MS/Asobo to develop and market TWO totally DIFFERENT versions of MSFS....one for XBox and one for PC users. That probably isn't going to happen. Which one is going to get the marketing preference? My guess is the one that causes the fewest headaches for MS/Asobo. And currently, that means the MS/Asobo stance is (and should be), "Hey! Developers of addons! Either follow the SDK LOD requirements for objects or quit developing addons that are just aggravating the community...AND US!" And sorry...but no...MS/Asobo should not be giving anybody any "pop-up slider setting" for use even if an addon already has 4-level LOD settings. People would STILL try to max the slider out to see "leaves on trees on the horizon".

I have absolutely no idea what to make of your reply. I guess after almost 35 years of professional computer IT and flight simming on home computers, getting some people to take the time to read included Release Notes is about the same as trying to get them to RTFM. Whatever.

Same here. Menu items all work fine in cockpit. There was also a "fix" keyboard keypress posted somewhere to hide the menu bar icon, but I don't remember where I saw it. Pretty sure it was in this forum though.

Yes, I'm gonna rant for a moment. Forgive me. But there are continuing, repeating "This is Bad!!!" or "This is Broken!!!" or "The Panel Knobs Are Now Blue!!!" complaints threads about the SU5 update. And many of them could have been avoided if the poster would have just read the Release Notes that are INCLUDED in the MSFS download area for the SU5. C'mon, people. If you are gonna use a $100+ piece of software update, at least READ the darn Release Notes to see what has changed in it. You'll save your fellow simmers a lot of time answering your questions that should have never BEEN a question in the first place. Like, "Why do all the panel knobs have blue lights around them now???!!!". (Note: It will also eliminate your need to overuse the Exclamation Point on your keyboard in your created thread post titles, too!!!). Rant over. 😩

Please don't let them be a Medical Decision Maker for you in any of your living wills.

1. No. Many people still use 20 year old technology. 2. Maybe, but not for "decades". 3. Depends. Do you still enjoy watching late night marathons of "I Love Lucy" on cable TV?

Also double-check whatever virus/security scanning software you are using. Depending on how it is designed, a large change in your hardware may default the virus scanning software settings back to a "default" setting where your "Exclusions" for any P3D files/folders/drives may have been removed (I'm assuming you do exclude your P3D stuff from realtime virus scanning. If not, go do that now and see if it helps).

Got it and it works great now. Thanks for your assistance. 😊

OK, I'll resend using the "support" email address. Just be advised that when the pop-up box comes up after installing the program in X-Plane 11, it says to send it to you at "register". Also, I couldn't find an edit button to edit my post for you (I think the time expired for an edit). So I reported my original post instead and asked a moderator to edit it for me. Hope that works. EDIT: Oh heck...I only asked the moderator to fix one of the addresses in the post. I forgot there were several times I did it. I'll send them another request to clarify it. EDIT 2: Oh heck heck 😟 It won't let me report the same post more than once. I think you may need to report it now and ask a moderator to either fix all of them or maybe better yet just delete the whole darn thing. Sorry!!! 🤕