Board index FlightGear The FlightGear project

What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Questions about the FlightGear organisation, website, wiki etc.

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby ludomotico » Thu Jun 26, 2014 2:05 pm

1) Who knows? Can you describe your experience in FS9 without requiring us to take a degree in clairvoyance? Take into account many of us have never run FS9, and rest assured most of us have not spied on you while you were running any application on your personal computer.
2) No. You can acquire the base simulator on discs but not the complete scenery or the third party content. Just like in FS9 or Doom. Unless, of course, by "entirety" you actually mean "base simulator". In this case, check the webpage.
3) bells and whistles are nice. My cats enjoy them a lot. But to enjoy FlightGear completely you'll require plenty of RAM memory, a modern video card and some external hardware like a joystick.

(Seriously, man, you realize your message doesn't include any useful information to get any appropriate answer from us, do you?)
User avatar
ludomotico
 
Posts: 1018
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:01 pm
Version: git
OS: Debian GNU/Linux

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby hvengel » Thu Jun 26, 2014 6:58 pm

Besides why ask when for zero cost and a little of your time you can download and install FG and a few aircraft and give it a go. But avoid any aircraft that are rated at less than *** in any category since those with lower ratings still need a lot of work and if one of these is all you look at you will not get the correct impression of FG.

If you have trouble installing FG then you have your answer the second part of #2 but I have found installation to be very simple. Also there is, now days, absolutely no reason for needing FG on CDs if you have internet access. Everything is on-line and setup to be accessible for average users and only those users with no internet or very poor connections will have a use for FG on CDs. But if you really really want it on CD then by all means download it and burn a CD.

Also aircraft quality is all over the place. So only use the better aircraft to make judgements about FG itself. There are a few truly great aircraft (perhaps a few dozen in all available hangers) and there are a lot of really under developed and very crappy ones. And a bunch of them (but fewer than the under developed crappy ones) somewhere in between. So on the aircraft download page focus on aircraft that are "early production" or better - there are a few real gems in that group.
hvengel
Retired
 
Posts: 1128
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:35 am
Location: Minden Nevada

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Hooray » Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:10 pm

xpressbooks wrote in Thu Jun 26, 2014 1:38 pm:1. I have derived a great deal of enjoyment with FS9 and the PMDG 737-800: will Flightgear match these without requiring me to take a degree in software engineering.


Just to put some context around my previous response (I honestly wasn't trying to "bash" FlightGear, I was just trying to provide an accurate description of the situation with regard to the background the OP mentioned (FS9 & PMDG 737-800), while also keeping in mind that we don't need more "frustrated" FSX/XP users around here...):

http://www.precisionmanuals.com/pages/product/738.html
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
Minimum - PIV 1.4GHz, 256MB RAM, 32MB Graphics Card

Best Performance - PIV 2.5GHz, 512MB RAM

The PMDG 737NGX features an unprecedented level of systems fidelity. Developed over three years with technical input from Boeing and a team of real-life 737NG crew and maintenance advisors, we have painstakingly modeled nearly every system on the real aircraft in a fully dynamic and realistic manner.

PMDG works with some of the biggest names in aerospace and partners with some of the world's largest airlines in order to produce highly detailed airliner simulations that are capable of reproducing the complex world of of the modern flight deck in finite detail.

PMDG is a global business with employees and contractors working in Canada, Belgium, Germany, Greece, Russia, South Africa and the United States.

In addition, PMDG currently has employees and contractors located in the following US States: Utah, California, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, and Washington.

http://www.avsim.com/pages/0504/pmdg_73 ... eview.html





Thus, I'd honestly say we''re not quite there yet :lol:
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11329
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Johan G » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:03 pm

Sorry for the late response.

Johan G wrote in Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:52 am:You will probably find that the number of polygons have less impact than you would expect...

hvengel wrote in Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:55 am:On modern hardware you don't see much difference in frame rates in an aircraft with 150K polygons than one with 10K if they are otherwise very similar feature wise.

On the other hand older/lower end graphics hardware can be very sensitive to things like texture size and polygon count.

I want to point out that my laptop/notebook is neither modern nor mid-end (even when I bought it, see my profile). I was just lucky enough to have a decent enough integrated graphics card/chipset (in this case Nvidia).

This also means that I have to use FlightGear with reduced graphics settings and in another context can only watch YouTube videos up to 720p (when on a stable Internet connection).

Then of course some cards are better at texture sizes, other at number of polygons etc.
Low-level flying — It's all fun and games till someone looses an engine. (Paraphrased from a YouTube video)
Improving the Dassault Mirage F1 (Wiki, Forum, GitLab. Work in slow progress)
Johan G
Moderator
 
Posts: 5513
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Sweden
Callsign: SE-JG
IRC name: Johan_G
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Windows 7, 32 bit

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby patstan » Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:16 pm

Anyone know the approximate release period of 3.2 version?
patstan
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:27 pm
Callsign: patstan
Version: 3.0
OS: Windows 8

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Gijs » Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:59 pm

Around August 17. See our release plan for details http://wiki.flightgear.org/Release_plan
Airports: EHAM, EHLE, KSFO
Aircraft: 747-400
User avatar
Gijs
Moderator
 
Posts: 9365
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Amsterdam/Delft, the Netherlands
Callsign: PH-GYS
Version: Git
OS: Windows 10

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Saga » Thu Aug 14, 2014 11:26 am

Do you plan to include the best aircrafts (707, Tu-154, DR-400 dauphin, and olders (p51d, ...)) in the 3.2? Because I was suprised they were not in the RC1.
And I'm not sure the new users will instinctivelly go to the wiki, the FlightGear hangar or the Aircraft Center to download them.
Host and maintainer of fgcom.flightgear.org.
Saga
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 2:52 pm
Location: Loire-Atlantique, France
Callsign: F-G0z
Version: Git next
OS: Win7, ArchLinux x64

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Hooray » Thu Aug 14, 2014 11:48 am

nope, simply because coming up with a list of "best aircraft" is a highly subjective issue in and of itself.
Traditionally, people used to conduct polls on the devel list to decide which aircraft to include, and more often than not, other criteria -beyond "quality"- needed to be considered, such as for example the size of an aircraft - for instance, some of the "most completely-developed aircraft" (a term, which I'd prefer), take up literally hundreds of MB of space.
Also, 3.2 will be the first FlightGear release to include an integrated "Aircraft Center" which allows people to easily download/install aircraft from the web, without having to use a browser, or even a disk manager - and people can even switch to installed aircraft easily:

http://wiki.flightgear.org/Aircraft_Center
Image

Thus, the merits of including possibly dozens of aircraft are questionable - there's an increasing trend to modularize FlightGear, which includes its base package.
The people who worked out "Catalog metadata" and the "Aircraft Center" are also contemplating to use the same method to install/maintain and manage other FlightGear resources, i.e. beyond just aircraft, including possibly scenery and/or "mods" (addons, like bombable, FGCamera etc).

This is a trend that is in line with online package management, as most people will know it from their own operating system, browser and other online games/simulators.
At some point, it might even be possible to distribute FlightGear updates this way.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11329
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Saga » Thu Aug 14, 2014 5:14 pm

I understand your choice. Thanks for the answer. :)
Host and maintainer of fgcom.flightgear.org.
Saga
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 2:52 pm
Location: Loire-Atlantique, France
Callsign: F-G0z
Version: Git next
OS: Win7, ArchLinux x64

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby patstan » Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:15 pm

Is it going to be released today? Or is it going to be delayed?
patstan
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:27 pm
Callsign: patstan
Version: 3.0
OS: Windows 8

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Jabberwocky » Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:18 pm

Will there be an Ubuntu package?
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Curtis » Sun Aug 17, 2014 5:46 pm

patstan wrote in Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:15 pm:Is it going to be released today? Or is it going to be delayed?


still no 3.2 version today :(
Curtis
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:09 pm
OS: archlinux 64 bits

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Jonathan C » Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:19 pm

Well, a successful Linux(291), Mac(473) and Windows(142) release were/are done today. However given that no one used RC in naming them on this cycle (hosting site(s) – not Jenkins), I suspect there is going to be some confusion. Jenkins is busy rebuilding windows components now, with some failures happening. So unless your in a weekend rush I would wait for the official posting on the web site. (with the forecast of a rain delay, possibility of clearing late tonight ) < just a bored and confused guess.

Side note: I'm actually impressed with 3.2 so far, a least Linux, win32/64 no Mac. Although I'll go out on the limb here and predict there will be complaints coming from the win32 crowd unless they use the old scenery and 777 and even then. :shock:
Jonathan C
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:17 am

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby Jabberwocky » Mon Aug 18, 2014 12:07 am

So how would I get this on my Ubuntu? Will there be a package? A deb? What? I am kind of confused
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: What to expect from FlightGear 3.2?

Postby elgaton » Mon Aug 18, 2014 8:56 am

@Jabberwocky: one of the FlightGear contributors maintains a PPA for Ubuntu, I think you should be able to get the latest FlightGear version for Ubuntu from there when it's ready.
NIATCA 2nd admin, regular ATC at LIPX and creator of the LIPX custom scenery
elgaton
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:58 pm
Callsign: I-ELGA/LIPX_TW
Version: Git
OS: Windows + Arch Linux

PreviousNext

Return to The FlightGear project

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests