Posted in: News, Other Simulations Tags: , ,

Flightgear new developments

Open Source Flight Simulator FlightGear is continuing to make steady progress, with a number of new features and planned projects being highlighted in their December newsletter.

If you still haven’t tried FlightGear, it costs nothing more than the time and bandwidth required to download and install it, so it’s always worth taking a look at what progress they have made and, if you have development skills, you might even want to lend a hand?

Guest
Joop
Saturday, January 11, 2014

@Ian, FlightGear runs on Linux, Windows, Mac OS X as well as some more exotic OS.

Saturday, January 11, 2014

Sorry I haven’t replied to this thread for a couple of days – I’ve had other (rather more critical!) things on my plate to deal with.

I will challenge you on one thing, though, Paul. Freeware add-ons for a freeware sim, especially if they’re developed using freeware tools, have no requirement or link at all to payware.

I don’t know offhand whether FlightGear works on Linux (with or without an emulator), but if you could do Linux, Flightgear, Blender, GIMP, documentation all in Open Document format… What’s the downside?

Guest
Alex
Friday, January 10, 2014

I have to disagree with FG being a waste of effort. Payware addons were born of the best freeware developers. Freeware made the FS world go round. They pushed the FS boundaries from it’s very begginings. And they can always keep doing that. With no mainstream flight simulator being developed (MS out of the game with FSX slowly dying (but i hope not in a long time yet), LM “agreeing to let us play with P3D although we are not their target market) and X-Plane still not being able to convince everyone…. There’s a door open for FG.

Guest
Paul
Friday, January 10, 2014

I guess we will have to see how that door swings. Remember this, freeware add-ons are nothing without the pay ware (since FS1) simulator itself.

Guest
Alex
Thursday, January 9, 2014

In my opinion, FS98 does not compete with FG at all, 3D elevation was sketchy at best, if I remember correctly, with mostly crude 3D mountains on addon sceneries. FG includes great virtual cockpits, something only FS2004 gave us reasonably. So FS2002 cannot compete if you don’t like 2D panels. Finaly: “whole earth photoscenery streaming”? I don’t say I like it (I want to still be able to fly the sim even when internet is offline!) but it sure is an inovation. FSX, P3D, X-plane cannot compete with that.

Guest
Paul
Thursday, January 9, 2014

Alex, most (not all) of the points in favor of FG have been about price, and for the price FS98 includes the whole world and a vast amount of free 3rd party additions to make FS98 exceed FG. Comparing the FS98 default Cessna 182 and the current FG default 172 cockpits is comparable, but my main point is FG is *current*. FS98 is extremely old pay ware. Look how many versions (and patches) have been released in MSFS history. So lets go apples to apples and take FG back in 1997 to be fair and compare it to FS98 back then. Well you would not want to do that now would you? Of course not because there is no comparison. The same is true today; take FG current version and FSX, there is no comparison, FSX blows FG out of the water pound for pound. Yes FSX costs some money but its worth it, just like clean water is better than the dirty river.

The latest version of FG will always be too far behind the latest P3D as long as both exist and all things remain as they always have. Unless there is good fundamental change in the way things are done FG will be a waste of effort. I would agree that if P3D or XP were no longer being developed then FG or would suddenly be a good cause. However, I believe that there will always be a company filling the pay ware ($50-$100) simulator market, which will always be ahead of any open source option.

Guest
Joop
Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Not sure if you read up on FlightGear, but it’s been.around (for free) since 1996. And unlike those other simulators, source code for the entire poject is public under an open license. Even if some of the main developers would start asking money, the source would still be available for anyone, to continue the free way. What a difference with MSFS (or any other commercial sim); if they pull the plug, your stuck.

Guest
Paul
Thursday, January 9, 2014

Thank you for the facts Joop, they further prove my point in that its taken since 1996 to get FG where it is now and it will need at least another 18 years to compete with FS2002, let alone catching up with P3D.

It is not that I don’t want FG to be better than P3D, I’m just saying that its hopeless as long as things continue as they have since 1980.

I know all about the open source (free) facts, my point is not that its free, my point is that its a waste of development effort; all alone in a desert wasteland frozen in time. Its too little too late because of what we have had available to us for many years.

FS98 is practically free ($1-2 in a bargain bin) and it competes with FG pretty well. But FS 2002 is also very cheap it is better than FG in my opinion. You can get FSX for about $20 today and it blows FG out of the water in my opinion. But this opinion of mine is practically fact given the facts of where FSX/P3D is and where FG is.

Think of it this way would you rather have clean water that costs money or would you rather drink the free water that is not so clean or at best your not sure whether is clean. Parents would pay because they care about their children, correct? Well simmers have proven that they prefer to pay because of they care about realism; this is why FG remains behind the times.