The Best BOS Trainer AC?...

[gn728]

Greetings all - I've basically always taken a "lite" approach to flight simming - easy engine management etc. Well , I want to change that - learn all the proper engine management, proper flying techniques - all of it - don't care right now about becoming a SkyKiller - just flying. So my question - which BOS (or BOM) AC do you think is best for this? The Yak-1 seems to have the simplest cockpit, but is it the easiest handling? Was very inspired by finding Requiems AC tutorial library. Any advice very appreciated - thanx..

[Gump]

I think the 109f4 is a more pilot friengly plane. bonus is its arguably better than the ruskie planes

[[CPT]milopugdog]

I started on the LaGG-3. I think starting on worse planes will better prepare you for better ones. 

The Yak-1 is pretty good everywhere, but it lacks a heaviness that are typical of other Russian planes.

I prefer the La-5 for engine management since it has inlet slats, outlet slats, a radiator, 2 gear superchargers, and a boosted mode.

(This is all just my opinion of course.) 

Edited October 8, 2015 by milopugdog

[Ala13_Kike]

For me, BF109F4

[Finkeren]

I think you're taking a very wise approach gn728. Learning how to actually fly the aircraft should always be our first priority, even though it seldom is (I'm guilty of that myself)

 

For pure flying, I'd suggest either the LaGG-3/La-5 or the I-16 (if you have it)

Despite not being the best fighters all these aircraft are very fun to fly, and when it comes to combat it's really important to know exactly how to get the best performance out of these planes, because they need every drop of energy.

 

The LaGG-3 IMHO offers the best flying experience in all of the sim. It's got a spaceous, nicely laid out cockpit with a good view. The Klimov engine has no automatic systems but is easy to manage and fairly forgiving. The handling within the flight envelope is pleasant and it has effective trimming on all control surfaces. Landing offers the most tricky challenge, but is definately manageble.

 

The La-5 is pretty much a more muscular LaGG and offers high performance and great speed especially down low. The Shvetzov engine however is a but more complex with some aditional controls (in- and outlet cowl shutters instead of water cooler and the Forsazh extra boost button) and is much more temperamental and harder to keep cool at lower speeds. Just managing the two sets of cowl shutters to allow the highest speed without overheating too quickly is an art in itself.

 

The I-16 is immensely fun as well. It's the perfect aerobatics plane with awesome agility and surprisingly good performance in every aspect other than top speed. The cockpit layout can be rather annoying because many of the instruments are hidden below the upper rim of the pit. You want to sit all the way back in the pit to see the dashboard properly. On the other hand the view from the open cockpit is great even if it's quite noisy out there in the air flow.

There are a few ways you can tell, that the I-16 is an older design. The landing gear and flaps are manually operated and retract and deploy very slowly, remember to make sure the gear is fully deployed before lining up for landing. The I-16 also have no trim what so ever, so it requires constant attention during flight. On the other hand its handling is pleasant and easy in just about any situation.

The engine is an earlier Shvetzov design and has very similar controls to the La-5, except that it has no outlet shutters. It's also far easier to keep cool.

 

Those are my recommendations. Good luck with the training. It's gonna do you much good going forward, I promise

[keeno]

gn728,

 

I prefer the La5, it has trim for all axis, oil and water radiator is manual operation. Its a very stable forgiving plane when correctly trimmed, doesn't stall and fall from the sky as easily as the Lagg or i16, doesn't bounce around like the 109's. All in all, my fave ride.

 

Just my opinions.

 

Cheers

[gn728]

Fellas - thanks very much for the feedback and advice    I don't have BOM yet but I plan on getting it soon - I really want to check out the I-16

[No601_Swallow]

If you want to be a little lazy, the automation of the LW aircraft (more or less all of them) means you have much less to worry about once you are up up up in the air. I'd go for the F4 myself. Not so easy to take off and land though. For that, I think the Yak with its lockable tailwheel would be the one to go for.

[kendo]

If you want to learn general engine management technique then there is not much point choosing the german fighters when so much is automated (fine to use them later of course once you can appreciate the benefits of their automated systems)

 

I'd agree with Finkeren and go with the Lagg-3 to start with. La-5 is more complex. Haven't tried the I-16 myself.

[Trinkof]

Don't start on 109/190.... You won't learn much, except if you fly manual prop pitch ( difficult, and not so rewarding performance wise, versus auto management)

 

Yak or lagg are a good way to start. LA 5 might seem a bit harder, but not much.

 

I agree about the lagg, the yak can be "too much forgiving" and will maybe teach you bad habits

Edited October 8, 2015 by LAL_Trinkof

[MilAvHistory]

Unless you really want to step into a fighter from the off start, give the Ju-87 a go. She'll teach you quite a few things too and keeps in the air nicely. Beyond that, I'd go for something Russian (LAGG-3 is always a good start) and then a German fighter (Bf 109 F-4).

 

Beyond that, take it slow and make sure you learn things consistently in small steps. Make sure you've got a check-list with you (a few notes on a scrap paper suffice) noting down important numbers (RPM/pitch/manifold pressure/engine coolant/oil temp numbers etc) for quick reference. That way you immediately know if you are pushing your bird too hard or can get a bit more juice out of her. After a few fly outs, you will probably know those things by heart. If you are unsure about things, this forum always has good threads and help if needed.

 

Good luck o7

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Since the Lagg is one of the harder planes to land I can't see why anyone would suggest that to start out.

 

The 109s have no engine management and are fairly easy to fly in but not fight in. The Yak is probably a good one to start out in.

[Finkeren]

Since the Lagg is one of the harder planes to land I can't see why anyone would suggest that to start out.

 

The 109s have no engine management and are fairly easy to fly in but not fight in. The Yak is probably a good one to start out in.

 

The OP isn't new to this sim. If you look, he's actually a founder. He just want to learn proper engine management and how to get the most performance out of the aircraft.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

The OP isn't new to this sim. If you look, he's actually a founder. He just want to learn proper engine management and how to get the most performance out of the aircraft.

 

I read it, he asked about the easiest handling plane to learn flying techniques and also engine management.

 

The Lagg isn't the easiest plane to learn the above especially not handling. That mantle must go to the Yak surely.

[Finkeren]

I read it, he asked about the easiest handling plane to learn flying techniques and also engine management.

 

The Lagg isn't the easiest plane to learn the above especially not handling. That mantle must go to the Yak surely.

 

You can argue that. But I honestly think the Yak along with the 2 Bf 109s can teach you some bad habits, which you won't get away with in other planes.

 

I'd still advice the LaGG. It handles really nicely inside its flight envelope, even if it is something of a challenge to land without bouncing a bit, and it's perfect for learning how to fly your aircraft without overstepping its limitations.

[SCG_Neun]

I think he should practice with a Lagg with a gunsite painted on the windshield..and no radio comms.....with a Commissar as a wingman.      

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Defo start with Lagg then when you try other aircraft they will feel like toys

[Matt]

If you want to include landing and taxiing, the La-5 would be the best choice, followed by the LaGG-3. All other planes are either way simpler to control on the ground or when flying or both.

 

(that's all assuming that you want to fly a fighter and not a bomber/ground attack plane)

[Gump]

well, after reading all the comments, it seems i misread the op's intent. but, i think, it could still use some clarification...

.

"flying techniques": that could be interpreted various different ways. ie: combat maneuvers; TO/landing; stall recovery; max fuel economy; E retention; bombing; highest maintainable speed; side slipping; power-off; etc...

 

... different planes have different characteristics, as everyone knows, but i would suggest that learning the "proper" technique in one AC doesn't mean you will know the "proper" technique in another AC. for certain, learning how to fly a more difficult plane, whether in flight characteristics or in engine management is going to teach one about how to manage those things but, i'd argue, the term "proper" is a bit of a misapplication.

.

in combat, "proper" is probably best defined as getting the most out of your specific aircraft's performance, and applying the best possible tactic/strategy for your AC versus the opponent. this is not a one-size-fits-all universal application. in other words, learning how to simply fly and engine-manage a more primitive (less capable) combat plane doesn't guarantee you have learned how to fly "easier" planes. for instance, one may have learned to be very careful with the elevator to avoid a snap/tip stall, but that means a slower attitide change, whereas a plane without that tendency can accomodate a more brisk maneuver - something that the pilot needs to understand ahead of time to apply strategy.

.

i would suggest that "proper" should not be the idea. i would suggest that different planes are different personalities. what is "proper" for one may not be "proper" for another, assuming that "proper" means exploiting the best possible performance in competition. i'm thinking that learning to fly each plane and understand it's 'personality' is the idea. also, learning to apply it's character in combat to a variety of opponents (a long term venture). then, one can choose the "proper" AC to fit the desired effect of application. sometimes one might want to have an advantage in dogfight, sometimes one might want the added challenge of a disadvantage.

.

it seems kinda like learning the "proper" load out and technique for bombing - many factors and applications involved, and "proper" is a rather specific term when given so much variety.

[Y-29.Silky]

I think the 109f4 is a more pilot friengly plane. bonus is its arguably better than the ruskie planes

I disagree with the F-4 being the best "Trainer" for the fact that it is too easy. There's absolutely no engine management other than keeping your ATA just below 1.2. OP might as well not learn anything about what's he's asking for. (Edit: Learned later you misread op's post.)

 

The Yak on the otherhand, you have to manage your..

 

A) Oil rads

B) Water rads

C) Manual RPM's/Prop Pitch

 

.. and it responds beautifully to your flight controls. I think it's the perfect trainer aircraft.

 

Lagg as well. Same engine management but a little more ruggid.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[gn728]

Thanks again you guys for all the help /advice. I've taken all of it to heart - I see Gumps point about each different AC having their own unique handling - but I gotta start somewhere, so I'll "train" in the Lagg. I do like the cockpit layout. My current HOTAS is an X-55 - besides the throttle I've mapped the mixture and RPM's to the two large rotary's. Trim control seems to be button only - I can map it to a joystick axis, but it seems to respond like a button no matter what, so they're mapped to buttons along with the cooling systems. Well, I've got Requiem's training videos and Chuck Owl's PDF so off I go.    PS - was gonna wait for the summer map to get BOM - but what the heck - ordering...

[gn728]

Lol - I mean I'll get started after I download a bunch of P-40 and I-16 Skins... 

[Wulf]

All the really hard bastards use the 190 - although of course, the roll isn't quite right.  Just sayin.....

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Yay, that makes me a hard bastard!!!!!!!!!!

 

(I've been secretly flying the P-40 recently though)

[Finkeren]

Yay, that makes me a hard bastard!!!!!!!!!!

 

(I've been secretly flying the P-40 recently though)

P-40?? Pfffft.... EZ-mode plane...

[Y-29.Silky]

All the really hard bastards use the 190 - although of course, the roll isn't quite right. Just sayin.....

Hard bastards: 190

Real bastards: La-5

Crazy bastards: P-40

Soviet batsh*t crazy bastards: I-16

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

For practising taxiing I advise to pick one of the bigger birds - either the Ju87 or the IL+ 2 are well suited for this task.

 

Due to their mass breakout tendencies seem to ve lower and more predictable than on a fighter aircraft which helps understanding what certain accions cause while on ground.

 

Lagg-3 reaches you thr basics of flying, managing and aerial combat as well as defensive flying. Mastering it in combat means mastering the majority of fighters in BoS

Edited October 13, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[gn728]

For practising taxiing I advise to pick one of the bigger birds - either the Ju87 or the IL+ 2 are well suited for this task.

 

Due to their mass breakout tendencies seem to ve lower and more predictable than on a fighter aircraft which helps understanding what certain accions cause while on ground.

 

Lagg-3 reaches you thr basics of flying, managing and aerial combat as well as defensive flying. Mastering it in combat means mastering the majority of fighters in BoS

Cool - thanks for the tip...

[=CFC=Conky]

For practising taxiing I advise to pick one of the bigger birds - either the Ju87 or the IL+ 2 are well suited for this task.

 

Due to their mass breakout tendencies seem to ve lower and more predictable than on a fighter aircraft which helps understanding what certain accions cause while on ground.

 

Lagg-3 reaches you thr basics of flying, managing and aerial combat as well as defensive flying. Mastering it in combat means mastering the majority of fighters in BoS

 

I agree, the IL-2 is a good airplane for learning the basics; it's very forgiving but will bite you in the ass if you get careless. the Laggs are good lead-in kites for fighter stuff. If found that dialling down joystick sensitivity helped a lot. I do it with my stick programming software but I think you can also do it directly in-game. You don't have to dial it down too much, ~15%-20% should do it and you can always ratchet it up again.

 

Good hunting,

=CFC=Conky

[indiaciki]

I think it's the Ju-87 for many reasons. manual engine control.very easyto wreck by too much RPM etc low speed approach etc easy to fly but not too forgiving. and she has a hreat cockpit. and small margins of error while landing companseted by the slow airpeeds during approach. A good trainer. Good trainers are usually underpowered so you learn using energy not engine power to compensate your misjudjments.