October 21, 201411 yr Just in case you weren't aware of it :-) http://www.flightgear.org/news/flightgear-v3-2-released/ Flying gliders since 1980 Flightsimming since 1992 AMD Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, GPU Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB, 1 TB and 500 GB nvme2 SSD drives, HP 27" 60Hz LED monitor @ 1920x1080, T16000, Hotas from old X52 Pro, Saitek Combat Rudder Pro (2010 model)
October 21, 201411 yr Thanks for the headsup Abd-Elrahman Nagy AVSIM Deputy Library Director@A_Elrahman_Nagy
November 15, 201411 yr I've downloaded it "again". I've tried it last year (3.0 I think) and I was not conformtable with it. But this time, I told myself "Plz try it more than one shot" and I listened to myself! I admit that more I use it, more I like (Love?) it and what a nice weather engine !!!! This is IMHO, the most realistic (stock) sky / fog ambiance i've ever experienced. This FG beast will stay on my hard drive
November 16, 201411 yr Author I make this video May encourage someone to try FlightGear 3.2 Excellent! Thank you! Flying gliders since 1980 Flightsimming since 1992 AMD Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, GPU Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB, 1 TB and 500 GB nvme2 SSD drives, HP 27" 60Hz LED monitor @ 1920x1080, T16000, Hotas from old X52 Pro, Saitek Combat Rudder Pro (2010 model)
November 16, 201411 yr Great to see FG continuing to be developed. Every version makes it more enjoyable to fly. Thanks also for the vid. Ben
November 16, 201411 yr I have downloaded all the previous versions and installed all previous FlightGear and then uninstalled them because they were not a good as FSX. Is this version better? Gerry Howard
November 16, 201411 yr Author Complex question :-) Well, actually, there are many possible answers... From the flight dynamics PoV, FG has the same and actually more potential than MSFS, specially if used with the JSBsim framework. As you certainly know, in FG you can use 2nd order derivates for Cl, Cd, ..., so, if you have access to good aero data, at least theoretically you can come up with more detailed and realistic flight dynamics.... Unfortunately only a couple of the many aircraft models I tried for FG really convinced me of this potential, but I still find FG a promising platform. Graphically, IMHO, it can't still compete with the best available for FSX, or X-Plane 10. Flying gliders since 1980 Flightsimming since 1992 AMD Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, GPU Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB, 1 TB and 500 GB nvme2 SSD drives, HP 27" 60Hz LED monitor @ 1920x1080, T16000, Hotas from old X52 Pro, Saitek Combat Rudder Pro (2010 model)
November 16, 201411 yr It seem a simple question to me. I shalln't bother downloading - it's still seems to be a matter of hope against experience. Gerry Howard
November 19, 201411 yr It seem a simple question to me. I shalln't bother downloading - it's still seems to be a matter of hope against experience. That's what i was thinking also. I did a first try and said: Nah! it's not good. But I've keep trying and found out it's not that bad and now i'm find myself using it more and more. As JRcomm mentioned: It doesn't have the bells and whistles of a FS or an X-Plane in term of graphical entertainment, but the realism is there, especially the weather and sky rendition and that's the reason I appreciate it. This is not for the casual simmers who wants a "world and life and everything spectacular" simulator
February 7, 201511 yr I tried today FG 3.4 RC1 and DHC-6 And I have to say that I now have a lot of fun
February 7, 201511 yr Author Thx for the nice video Radino. Indeed nice features coming with 3.4: http://www.flightgear.org/info/a-preview-of-features-for-flightgear-3-4/ Flying gliders since 1980 Flightsimming since 1992 AMD Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, GPU Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB, 1 TB and 500 GB nvme2 SSD drives, HP 27" 60Hz LED monitor @ 1920x1080, T16000, Hotas from old X52 Pro, Saitek Combat Rudder Pro (2010 model)
Create an account or sign in to comment