Can my PC run Flight Gear?

[maker8861]

Okay, so i am really interested in Flight Gear. I have FSX deluxe version, but the thing with FSX is that i can't really enter information into the FMC, cause there is no FMC. By the way i can run FSX without lag. So my Big Question is if it could run FlightGear without lag, and what version i need to make sure i have the best performance as possible.

So Basically can my PC run Flight Gear?
What My Computer has:
Video Card:
Intel(R) Q965/Q963 Express Chipset Family (Microsoft Corporation - WDDM 1.1)
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6300 @ 1.86GHz
RAM: 2.1 GB
OS: Windows 10 Preview
Free Disk Space: 51.7 GB (Also, how much space does FlightGear take up)
Sound Card: Realtek High Definition Audio
DVD-ROM: TSSTcorp CDRWDVD TS-H493A ATA Device
DIRECTX Version: 11.0c

[Hooray]

Hi & welcome !

Here's a list of community-maintained hardware recommendations: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Hardware_recommendations
Here's a list of problematic video cards: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Problematic_video_cards
Here's a list of supported/tested video cards: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Supported_Video_Cards

Your GPU (graphics card) is not particularly well suited for running OpenGL-based software like FlightGear - if in doubt, I suggest to run a forum search using your GPU make/model as the search query (or even a google search with a focus on OpenGL and GLSL support).

search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=Q965
search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=Q963
search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=gma+intel+opengl

For starters, you can also look at this: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.p ... 63+Express
or run an OpenGL benchmark like FurMark3D before downloading/installing FG.

You may still be able to run FlightGear using a custom startup/run-time profile - but it will almost certainly not look/work as compelling as FSX (which happens to use DirectX, not OpenGL).

Regarding your question and its focus on FMC/FMS work flows - that is another area that is highly lacking in FlightGear, and you are unlikely to find sufficiently-completey developed aircraft that would work for you given the hardware specs outlined above - some of our most developer "airliners" are aircraft like the 777, which have fairly high hardware requirements, including OpenGL/GLSL support (think Canvas, which requires FBOs for doing RTT).

In addition, anything requiring shaders/effects (e.g. Rembrandt or ALS) is unlikely to work very well given your hardware specs.


Subject: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

1) nope, FlightGear's support for airliner/bizjet-style "glass" avionics is only just beginning to emerge thanks to the Canvas system, EFIS modeling (PFD, ND, CDU, EICAS etc) and aircraft systems fidelity is non-existent basically and overall FG avionics are far from anything that you can find in (even outdated versions) of MS FS and X-Plane, which applies even more so to commercial add-ons
2) yes, see the website: http://www.flightgear.org

Some of our best-developed airliners have fairly extensive performance problems, i.e. frame rate / frame spacing - for example, the 777-200. In addition, FG itself (and its FDMs) lacks some hooks to support a real performance database, so that related autoflight (M/CDU) VNAV modes cannot currently be implemented (easily). These are the main showstoppers when it comes to modern airliners and bizjets in FG.

Also, we don't have a single aircraft that properly supports VNAV currently: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Implementing ... FlightGear


Overall, given your area of interest (and your background/experience with proprietary add-ons), you'll probably not enjoy FG as much as FSX and/or X-Plane for the time being.

Subject: "triple 7" fmc development status?

he kept refering me to the FMC perf section. so the aircraft would show me F1, F2 etc speeds on decent.
oh boy that was a mistake.

those are limitations in FG itself (and in its supported FDMs), not specific to the 777 - it is true, that we currently do not have any aircraft with a properly working FMS and performance database support.
The changes you saw, were mostly about the cockpit and avionics, more recently, the PFD and ND.

Overall, the 777 remains one of the most developed aircraft/airliners in FG, especially in comparison to hundreds of other aircraft.

But compared to airliners supported by FSX or X-Plane, we are still lacking in that department and do not provide a complete solution (yet).

And it is also not foreseeable when that will change, because it will require changes in the FDMs we're using or use of some 3rd party/proprietary performance database.
Otherwise, it is not currently feasible to come up with VNAV/LNAV modes that properly work for different aircraft.
The 3rd party approach is being used for TPPs data, but in the case of FDMs, we would need 100% accurate FDMs, too - so it would be better to directly use the FDM for computing a performance DB.

For a more detailed explanation, please see: viewtopic.php?f=25&t=21104&p=192038&hilit=performance+vnav#p192038
viewtopic.php?f=40&t=13777&p=140255&hilit=#p140255

Finally, please understand that for over a decade, FlightGear had extremely poor support for any modern avionics (PFD, ND, CDU, FMC/FMS) - in particular in comparison to MSFS/FSX and the plethora of commercial addons - this has recently changed (well since 2.8 ), due to TheTom's Canvas system, which now makes it possible for everybody to easily create modern avionics like a PFD/ND or CDU, without having to be an expert C++ programmer with OpenGL/OSG experience - but supporting VNAV/LNAV still is tricky for other reasons, and currently not on anybody's agenda - it's not just something that can/should be tackled by a single aircraft developer, it requires lower-level changes in FlightGear's architecture and the way FDMs are used.

It really is a long-standing issue and has been discussed hundreds of times (as you'll see when you check out those links), but so far it's not a priority - but please do feel free to file a feature request: http://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bug ... %20request

You would need to be really familiar with FDM internals, airliner performance and have strong maths skills to solve this just for a single airliner.

Also, please keep in mind that there's nothing really wrong about FSX (or X-Plane) - and some of the more established commercial addons are of excellent quality, developed by teams with dozens of fulltime programmers who could often consult back with ATPL holders and type-rated pilots, but also freely use all sorts of data and documentation, we do not typically have this sort of expertise and support available here - which is why some things may takes a while to mature unfortunately... If you should have any expertise/documentation to contribute, I suggest to get in touch with Hyde, who will surely appreciate such feedback and resources!

[maker8861]

Honestly thank you for the reply, but what version can i run for my optimum performance. Version 1? Or in other words my PC can't run Flight Gear.

[maker8861]

Oh and also i am not really a computer geek. I deeply apologize for the inconvenience i present here.

[eadsJose]

Hello. I'm not really an expert about graphics, but i believe that your PC can run v2.4 or v2.6 without lag. But these versions don't have an aircraft with a functional FMC (i don't find any). But, start with the v2.6 and the A330-200 or A320neo. I'm not sure if these airplanes can run a complete FMC in this version.
If v2.6 runs good, try with v2.8, with this video card your PC can't run a latest version that v2.8.

[maker8861]

Thank You very much Sir! Cheers and have a wonderful day.