Whow! Really, if you find the time, don't miss this... FG2.10!

[jcomm 5,890]

Rainy friday from LPPT, and probably what I have long been looking for in a sim lately - no it's not the level of graphics MS FLIGHT offered, no there is no sophisticated Plane-Maker like in X-Plane10 (although you can have a great time building / modifying aircraft models using some available tools and a simple text editor...), no there are no super-complex PMDG-like aircraft (or maybe there are after all - try the 744 by a team that includes some respected PS1 users....), but!!!

 

- In my new system I can run it with all maxed out and I have a World scenery certainly more interesting even if not so sharp, than the one I got with X-Plane10, and at the level of default MSFS x, even better IMHO when it comes to weather...

 

- The flight dynamic models can be as good as the designers want them to. I have used the default aircraft (very acceptable), and some excellent freeware add-on such as a JSBSim-based p51d that behaves almost like my DCS p51d flightmodel-wise!

 

- I have PERFECT lighting effects regarding date and time of the day + location, better than default MSFS x and certainly a LOT BETTER than what X-Plane10 offers...

 

- The rotary flight dynamics, when you try the best add-on helicopters for FG2.10, now also available with JSBSim instead of just Yasim,. are way better than what you can get in MSFS x and at the level of what X-Plane10 offers, given that even the artificial stability systems used on modern helos can be programmed, and some models have them!

 

- A weather model including effects that take into consideration more factors than either MSFSx or X-Plane10 do, including convective and orographic / terrain -induced currents, very nice 3d clouds and effects, visibility, etc...

 

It's FOR FREE, and now comes with an extremely easy to use joystick configuration UI (under the "Help" menu).

 

Try it guys!!!! Really!!!!!

[John_Cillis 2,406]

My own suggestion--for FSX, Xplane or FS9 users--don't expect FlightGear to look better than any of these sims even at its maxed level. You'll be disappointed. FlightGear is worth checking out to see what's been achieved if you have the time to install it. But if you think you'll achieve something better than the commercial sims we have, you won't. It improves with every release. But I feel posts such as this tend to cause people to be disillusioned with FlightGear which won't help support it. Overhyping it won't help it. Yes, FlightGear is free and for someone who just can't get Xplane or MSFS to work right, it's good to have out there. It will get better if the latest version is any indication. And since FSX is no longer in development, in a few years, with attention given to aircraft, ground texturing, water and yes, clouds it may gain ground. I don't think it will ever catch up to X-Plane, since X-Plane is still in development.

 

I don't mean to disappoint or disrespect the author of this topic. It's good to be behind your sim. But out of respect for those who use MSFS or X-Plane I wanted to share my own thoughts as both an add-on developer for MSFS and a follower of FlightGear.

 

John

[jcomm 5,890]

Thx for the comments John. I agree, although I confess I am really enjoying FG2.10.

 

And of course I agree it can't ( yet ) compete with commercial products, with and FSX full of expensive add-ons, etc... but, just as you say, it certainly is worth the try!

[pegger74 18]

Yeah nothing wrong with being enthusiastic about ALL the options available to us simmers. I will probably give FG some more time to mature before I go for a test drive, but I know the support of users like yourself certainly help them spread the news about their progress, regardless of how inferior it may be perceived when held up against the other big guns in the industry.

 

The more options the better IMO. Our hobby is in need of healthy development competition.

But I feel posts such as this tend to cause people to be disillusioned with FlightGear which won't help support it.

Disillusion is a trait brought on by the observer...not the product. Negativity breeds negativity...all that jazz. Any positive comment is exactly the support every developer counts on. You should respect that as a developer yourself.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Yeah nothing wrong with being enthusiastic about ALL the options available to us simmers. I will probably give FG some more time to mature before I go for a test drive, but I know the support of users like yourself certainly help them spread the news about their progress, regardless of how inferior it may be perceived when held up against the other big guns in the industry.

 

The more options the better IMO. Our hobby is in need of healthy development competition.

Disillusion is a trait brought on by the observer...not the product. Negativity breeds negativity...all that jazz. Any positive comment is exactly the support every developer counts on. You should respect that as a developer yourself.

 

I most certainly do. If you look at my posting history, you would know how vocal an advocate I am of freeware and how I rush to its defense when people try to tear it down. In the case of FlightGear I've made several posts speaking out against the FlighGear based ripoffs that try to make a buck off of the product. But advertising FlightGear features as being somehow on par or better than FSX/Xplane, which the above post suggests, doesn't do its developers any favors. I would not expect anyone to suggest my own products do more than they do--I like praise as much as any other developer but I also don't want dissatisfied customers--and believe it or not, I've received email from people dissatisfied with my freeware (which also extends outside of MSFS--I have two programs available on CNet that were written for children). Nothing is "free". It still takes time to download and install products like FlightGear and in that sense, the products come at a price. I would hate to spend the time downloading it expecting something that exceeds FSX or XPlane when the truth is, it simply doesn't. What it does do is serve as a substitute, a good one, for those products for people who've not had success running them. There's nothing wrong with coming here and letting potential downloaders know what to expect. People have done it with my own freeware and I've not taken offense.

 

John

 

Edit: Also to add--when it comes to praising a developer, please take the time to send them a personal email if you can. In all the years I've released freeware--not only for MSFS, but also my two children's program that are available on CNET, I'd say I've received fewer than thirty emails. A personal email means sooooo much--even more than public posts, since we're not always scanning the public forums. I went some months without any activity at all at Avsim recently due to other things I was doing at the time. But I read my email every day and still hope to hear from those who've used my freeware. I recently received a kind email about Soft Horizons and a very kind series of emails from someone who downloaded my children's paint program, Mirrorart. I hope those who love FlightGear flood the developers with emails of thanks, as well as those who keep its website up and running. It will make their day.

[pegger74 18]

I won't be searching your posting history, as I can see it is quite substantial and is probably all very well and good, however there is absolutely nothing wrong with the OP's comments. If he reviewed it and found that it out performed the other sims, then his position and statement is completely valid. How does that mislead other potential users? It encourages other users to try it and form their own opinions does it not? That would be all that I read into the original post and review. He validates the time cost in the thread title..."if you find the time"...so it's not like it's being professed that it is the best thing since sliced bread.

 

I am certainly not offended by your post in the least. Just saying that your post to quickly dismisses the subjective review of current FG product, and serves to foster a negative attitude about it instead of just letting people find out for themselves. There will always be complainers in the world, but as long as we have great freeware developers like yourself, and those that work on FG, lets just offer support and leave the nay-saying out of it. Thanks for the discussion :Peace:

[John_Cillis 2,406]

I won't be searching your posting history, as I can see it is quite substantial and is probably all very well and good, however there is absolutely nothing wrong with the OP's comments. If he reviewed it and found that it out performed the other sims, then his position and statement is completely valid. How does that mislead other potential users? It encourages other users to try it and form their own opinions does it not? That would be all that I read into the original post and review. He validates the time cost in the thread title..."if you find the time"...so it's not like it's being professed that it is the best thing since sliced bread.

 

I am certainly not offended by your post in the least. Just saying that your post to quickly dismisses the subjective review of current FG product, and serves to foster a negative attitude about it instead of just letting people find out for themselves. There will always be complainers in the world, but as long as we have great freeware developers like yourself, and those that work on FG, lets just offer support and leave the nay-saying out of it. Thanks for the discussion :Peace:

 

Fair enough--next time I will hold my comments. For others, please heed my advice above about email--hours and hours of effort are spent on all these products. Even email to payware developers (who receive a lot of flak for the simplest of issues) will make their day. Remember that most payware developers don't make a living releasing payware for the Flightsim market--they supplement their income and sometimes don't even meet costs given the piracy that robs them of their efforts at times.

 

John

[jcomm 5,890]

All good points, and I agree that I should be more careful about my sometimes overdone exclamations...

 

Anyway, I keep that in some aspects FG 2.10 is indeed doing a better job than either XP of FSX.... I'll give you just two examples:

 

1) Weather in X-Plane10 vs FG. Cloud variety and systems is very limited in XP, clouds do not move wind wind, poor thermal modelling (simplistic), poor haze/fog effects. IMHO FG does this all better + takes into consideration in it's advanced weather algorithms not considered by either XP or FSX (well, good weather injectors make FSX better in this area of course...but there are none to XP10, and I believe the kind of features I would like to see modelled in XP10 will not make it's way in before XP11...)

 

2) Time of day / date / position on Earth, and the daylight. This is a serious issue in XP10 (as it was already in previous versions...) It's pitch dark in the afternoon/dusk when in RL there is still plenty of light, Also the Moon phases out of sync with reality, and the Moon being visible through fog/have layers and even bellow the horizon, is something that does not plague FG2.10...

 

And of course, JSBSim is powerful enough to allow for the modelling of more accurate flight performance of an aircraft provided the required aero-data is available! As Ron Freimuth ( rip ) once pointed out when I asked him to give a look at the files that made up an FG "airfile" already around 2005, he showed me where exactly there were differences, and a lot of room for having very credible flight performance for a well designed aircraft!

 

But of course, the bare bones FG2.10, even pushed to the limits and maxed out, can't ( still ) compete with an FSX with good scenery / weather / environment add-ons in terms of eye-candy!

[John_Cillis 2,406]

All good points, and I agree that I should be more careful about my sometimes overdone exclamations...

 

Anyway, I keep that in some aspects FG 2.10 is indeed doing a better job than either XP of FSX.... I'll give you just two examples:

 

1) Weather in X-Plane10 vs FG. Cloud variety and systems is very limited in XP, clouds do not move wind wind, poor thermal modelling (simplistic), poor haze/fog effects. IMHO FG does this all better + takes into consideration in it's advanced weather algorithms not considered by either XP or FSX (well, good weather injectors make FSX better in this area of course...but there are none to XP10, and I believe the kind of features I would like to see modelled in XP10 will not make it's way in before XP11...)

 

2) Time of day / date / position on Earth, and the daylight. This is a serious issue in XP10 (as it was already in previous versions...) It's pitch dark in the afternoon/dusk when in RL there is still plenty of light, Also the Moon phases out of sync with reality, and the Moon being visible through fog/have layers and even bellow the horizon, is something that does not plague FG2.10...

 

And of course, JSBSim is powerful enough to allow for the modelling of more accurate flight performance of an aircraft provided the required aero-data is available! As Ron Freimuth ( rip ) once pointed out when I asked him to give a look at the files that made up an FG "airfile" already around 2005, he showed me where exactly there were differences, and a lot of room for having very credible flight performance for a well designed aircraft!

 

But of course, the bare bones FG2.10, even pushed to the limits and maxed out, can't ( still ) compete with an FSX with good scenery / weather / environment add-ons in terms of eye-candy!

 

All features I'll have to experiment with. I DL'd and installed this latest version just last night but was too tired to really give it a good look. I think if I find an aircraft with a high def VC I'll feel more comfortable with the sim. Also, if I can find a way to adjust the haze so the clouds look more like they do in FSX with Soft Horizons. Right now the clouds don't have any "wispyness"--they look too solid and lack depth. It may be a setting I haven't adjusted yet. Also, is there a way to make the water reflective? There's a slider that adjust the crispness of the water texture but I can't seem to make it reflective in any way.

 

Last questions, is there a way to disable mouse control of the aircraft? It's activated while my joystick control is activated and conflicts with control movements. Also is there a way to change aircraft without exiting a current flying session?

 

John