Re: The endless influx of low-quality, low-realism, quantity-over-quality aircraft into FGAddon

> an average user can certainly become an expert, maybe even a developer or
contributer. But if their initial experience is tainted because planes are
broken, that user may be gone for good.

Exactly. If we want to be used by more people (which is equivalent, in the
long term, to getting more contributors, which I think is something we can
all agree on is something we want), we have to target the average user, who
will install FlightGear, open it up and be presented with an alphabetically
sorted list of aircraft, from which they will either select one randomly,
choose the first one on the list or want to try out their favorite
aircraft, whichever that may be. And I think it is better, if that average
user opening FlightGear for the first time, gets presented with aircraft
that have a nice-looking, detailed 3D model, a usable FDM that is at least
somewhat similar to the real thing, and most importantly, Just Works TM -
i.e. no Nasal errors making the nav freq selection knob do nothing or even
crashing the simulator. And this is exactly what we have the entire
multi-hangar system for - we can have a default hangar with aircraft that
fulfill the above criteria, and then we have a second hangar that includes
all aircraft in FGAddon.

> You're going to be in the middle of a pleasant flight around a cute
little island, then your engine is going to quit because you didn't check
for water in the fuel in the gamer airport of your gamer airplane
That is NOT a JSBSim problem, there are lots of JSBSim planes that don't
have it implemented at all, and there are YASim planes that do implement it

Am Fr., 22. Mai 2026 um 17:38 Uhr schrieb David Hudach <[email protected]>:

> Personally, this is inappropriate for this discussion: *Nice troll though
> ;)*
>
> And that your 10 year old son enjoys FG is great. But my guess is he
> doesn't know the difference between game playing and realistic flight. But
> that doesn't mean that difference doesn't matter. It does matter because as
> I understand it FG is intended to be a realistic flight simulator. So
> because someone doesn't know the difference doesn't address the issue being
> discussed.
>
> And it's great that you wrote a module for your RC plane. But you are no
> longer talking about the expectations of the average user who wants to
> download FG and experience a real flight simulator without needing to know
> how to write modules or figure out which planes work.
>
> Sorry, but I don't think the opinion you are presenting has relevance to
> the problem being discussed.
>
> The point is an average user can certainly become an expert, maybe even a
> developer or contributer. But if their initial experience is tainted
> because planes are broken, that user may be gone for good.
>
> Thank you,
> Dave
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 11:13 AM eatdirt via Flightgear-devel <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> My 10 years-old son has essentially tried all of them, including the
>> citroen, the jeep etc... He does not care about the FDM, he's just
>> enjoying to fly them. How more innocent can he be? He is just
>> complaining when the plane does not work or when it crashes flightgear.
>> Oh, we have a ticket system to try fixing that!
>>
>> You want good FDM, most realistic aircrafts? Well, you're already not
>> innocent anymore then, and I guess you would have no difficulties to
>> understand which ones are most realistic.
>>
>>
>> Concerning what *might appear* useless, obsolete etc... Well, that's
>> completely suggestive. I've found not so long ago the RASCAL 110, with
>> its wheels rolling under the ground. Guess what? I've fixed it, wrote an
>> RCview add module, and that's my favorite plane to train my remote
>> control skills with a real remote control, on flightgear!!!
>>
>> So, sorry to completely disagree with your opinion.
>>
>> Nice troll though ;)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Flightgear-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel