FlightGear 2020.3 Released For This Leading Open-Source Flight Simulator

[ermo]

I think this one only has old, boring, passenger jets and grandpa planes. It doesn't have F-22 Raptor, F-35 Lightning II, etc.

... because it is a civilian aircraft simulator?

[StefanBruens]

... because it is a civilian aircraft simulator?

Its not a dogfight simulator. It can simulate Airplanes of different kinds and sizes (F-15, F16, F35, ... B25, ..., Lockheed 1049 Super Constellation, Cessna 172p, Airbus A320, Airbus A380, Boeing 777). All these Aircraft are included in the default repository.

[chocolate]

It's pretty easy to spot someone who doesn't use the simulator for what it's meant to do. This is not an arcade game like MS FS, although MS FS has its own merits, i.e. it's visually stunning.

It may not seem like it to an uninformed person, but FlightGear is top notch community technology in a number of ways.
Please take a look at their workflow with SimGear and TerraGear.
Please take a look at their physically sound flight models.

Please take a look at aircraft that is not only accurately rendered both externally and internally, with nice instrumentation, but also modeled in a physically sound manner.
Doesn't matter if they're "old". You learn a ton from them no matter their age.

People that actually use a proper simulator like this care deeply about the aircraft behaving accurately. It takes time for this to happen, as data comes from people that fly those aircraft and are also interested in FG.

FG can model, and render, orbital flight. You can fly the Shuttle and the Vostok-1. Is anyone going to tell me it's not tremendously and utterly cool just because there is more fashionable spacecraft?
X-Plane sort of could at one moment, but now doesn't, and neither does MS FS.
So yes, this outstanding community project is definitely a leader even compared to commercial, proprietary simulators (X-Plane) and games (MS FS).

[bug77]

It's pretty easy to spot someone who doesn't use the simulator for what it's meant to do. This is not an arcade game like MS FS, although MS FS has its own merits, i.e. it's visually stunning.

It may not seem like it to an uninformed person, but FlightGear is top notch community technology in a number of ways.
Please take a look at their workflow with SimGear and TerraGear.
Please take a look at their physically sound flight models.

Please take a look at aircraft that is not only accurately rendered both externally and internally, with nice instrumentation, but also modeled in a physically sound manner.
Doesn't matter if they're "old". You learn a ton from them no matter their age.

People that actually use a proper simulator like this care deeply about the aircraft behaving accurately. It takes time for this to happen, as data comes from people that fly those aircraft and are also interested in FG.

FG can model, and render, orbital flight. You can fly the Shuttle and the Vostok-1. Is anyone going to tell me it's not tremendously and utterly cool just because there is more fashionable spacecraft?
X-Plane sort of could at one moment, but now doesn't, and neither does MS FS.
So yes, this outstanding community project is definitely a leader even compared to commercial, proprietary simulators (X-Plane) and games (MS FS).

Thanks. I don't use flight simulators at all, I was genuinely curious what this is all about.

[chocolate]

Thanks. I don't use flight simulators at all, I was genuinely curious what this is all about.

Oh, nothing personal. I now realize I made it sound like I was replying to you specifically. Sometimes I don't quote anyone because my reply is meant as a sort of broadcast. I was mainly annoyed because of the "but those old aircraft" nonsense.
It seems to me you just asked a legitimate question.
Please have a great day.

[rmfx]

I think this one only has old, boring, passenger jets and grandpa planes. It doesn't have F-22 Raptor, F-35 Lightning II, etc.

How old are you.......14 ?

[bug77]

Oh, nothing personal. I now realize I made it sound like I was replying to you specifically. Sometimes I don't quote anyone because my reply is meant as a sort of broadcast. I was mainly annoyed because of the "but those old aircraft" nonsense.
It seems to me you just asked a legitimate question.
Please have a great day.

And my question was more for Michael. But you managed to answer it nonetheless, so thanks for that.