Here are a few suggestions, but please Google "flightgear <aircraft>" to get links for many wiki pages of FG aircraft.

 

--> Heavies:

 

The default B777

 

This Airbus A330

 

The A380, with an interesting tutorial here too

 

--> Military Prop:

 

Many, but I really like:

 

This p51d , particularly the JSBSim FD version!

 

These Spitfires or from this ftp link

 

This Hurricane

 

-->> Twin Piston?:

 

What about the default Seneca (poor single engine performance, I know....), but also this C337

 

Google for it! Then try Scenery areas too ;-)

I saw a very nice site with a very detailed 787 for Flightgear ... but I'm kicking myself for not bookmarking the site. As for what ships with FlightGear, I like the Cub and the 777.

I installed FG last night, and after needing a break from gmax, I spent a few hours flying around in it. I started off in the Cub, then the C-172, then of course I had to install the C337. Carenado's C337 is one of my favorite planes in both FSX and FS9, so this was of course going to be one of the first ones that I really wanted to try out.

 

Of course any comparison to a well-done payware plane isn't really fair, but it's inevitable. I have to say it is pretty well done. It looks decent, and handles pretty well. One thing that struck me in the planes that I tried, is that although they do feel much like the freeware projects that they are, the cockpit resolution, especially in the C337, is very crisp - it's very refreshing and adds a lot to the experience.

 

Overall, I was pretty impressed last night - I have other comments on my experience to make, but since this thread was about recommending, I thought I'd add a relevant two cents.

I spent some time in the DHC6 Twin Otter last night - I'd recommend it. It has a very decent 3D cockpit and the flight model seems okay, if maybe slightly overpowered. Nicer VC than any FS9 options, for sure.

Yep, the Twin Otter is a must!

 

There are also the CRJs... and the 777 with it's systems.

 

I like the Seneca too. I regret the single engine performance is a bit far from real, but when both engines are working it performs nicely :-)

I agree, the Seneca is pretty nice as well. I know it's not necessarily a complex procedure, but I found that starting the Seneca up was rather enjoyable.

 

The start up on the Beaver was kinda fun too, it smokes and groans like it doesn't want to start at all.

jcomm: What aspect of the single-engine performance is incorrect? I'm slightly surprised, as it's the author's own RL aircraft that's modelled, though I suspect he doesn't switch off one of the engines very often!

 

Other aircraft I'd highly recommend taking a look at are the IAR80 (Hungarian WWII prop), A-6 (particularly with our carrier support), and F-14b.

 

-Stuart

jcomm: What aspect of the single-engine performance is incorrect? I'm slightly surprised, as it's the author's own RL aircraft that's modelled, though I suspect he doesn't switch off one of the engines very often!

 

Mostly the yaw, and roll when one engine quits. Even not having a critical engine (it's props turn opposite ways), the Seneca still needs good amounts of rudder / rudder trim correction specially at low speeds / higher AoA if/when an engine quits. The model in FG does not present great problems to control, even under Vmc...

I tried sat in the F14 briefly. It was late, I couldn't figure out how to get it started, and was far too tired to read the docs... It looks really nice inside though, I'll have to spend more time with it.