Whats the easyest plane to master ?

[ACG_Wobbel]

Hallo gents whats the easyest plane to master or begun your career with ,or your recommandation to learn first 🤓

Edited July 5, 2024 by GA332

[spreckair]

I found the BF109F series to be both easy and effective.  Much of the engine management is automated, and it is relatively smooth and stable.  Also, having all of the weapons in the nose make for easy aiming and leading.

[ACG_Wobbel]

Ah thx wil check it out 😁👍

[Hook_Echo]

The only quirk with the 109's is the stabilizer trim. You will need to adjust that a lot to be most effective. If you are in a turn fight the plane really comes alive with nose up trim. There's a little indicator by the trim wheel that is very helpful. I hated 109s until I learned that.

 

Ground handling is very difficult with the 109s so don't get frustrated if that is hard to master. If you learn on a 109 or spitfire all the other planes are easy to control on the ground.

[ACG_Wobbel]

Thx for info 😁👍

[Hoss]

The one you fly the most.

[R33GZ]

10 hours ago, GA332 said:

Hallo gents whats the easyest plane to master or begun your career with ,or your recommandation to learn first 🤓

109 and yak I think. 109 has great engine automation. So long as you stay within it's limits you will get good performance. The yak has a VERY tolerant engine. You can pretty much run it full out and manage temps with the radiators.

[ACG_Wobbel]

Thx looks like the 109 and the yak stands out for this 😁👍

 

Is all the 109 models the same or the F4 the easyest ?

[1Sascha]

Used to be Spitfires in older sims, but since we're - thankfully - past the days of unrealistic/simplified engine management, I'd agree with other posters and recommend the 109 F-4 or G-2. The G-2 makes things even simpler or more fool-proof by running a restricted version of the DB605-engine. Meaning it won't allow you to run it on WEP but since you'd only ever get a minute of WEP at a time without risking engine-damage/-death, one could view this restriction as a plus for learners: You don't really have to worry about killing your engine by leaving it on WEP for too long. Just slam the throttle to 100% whenever you're in combat, and you'll be good for 30 minutes or so. It also feels a tiny bit more stable or less twitchy in the air than the F-4 - which might be a problem once you start to get the hang of things, but is probably a plus for a beginner.

 

If we're just talking about being able to take off, fly around/maneuver a bit and land, I'd also recommend the 190 A-3. It does have its quirks and it's certainly not a good candidate for the bank-and-yank approach to air combat, but its level of built-in/historical automation is at least as high as on the post E-series 109s and it does have a few advantages over the 109 when it comes to ground-handling. It also has better visibility than the early/mid-war 109s and has a much more potent armament.

[Avimimus]

I suppose it depends on what you seek to do.

 

Are you flying with complex engine management? (then how durable and automated the engine is matters)

 

Are you flying in the campaign (then the difficulty of that time of the war, the opponents being met etc. matters)

 

Are you flying aerobatics?

 

Not knowing, I'd be tempted to recommend something like the U-2VS... as it was used as an actual trainer.

If one is just starting out, it is good to have an enjoyable experience - and something like the Sopwith Triplane might actually make a reasonable starter.

 

P.S. The Bf-109 was well known for its narrow landing gear and difficulty with take-offs and landings.... so I'm not sure it is the easiest.

[AndyJWest]

For anyone with no prior flight-sim experience, I'd recommend either of the early IL-2 Sturmoviks - the ground-attack plane the sim is named after. The later (1943) version that comes with Kuban is a little more tricky to handle. The early IL-2s are mostly docile and forgiving, but with enough power to teach you how to deal with torque effects etc.  

 

I'd advise against buying Flying Circus aircraft with the idea that they are easy to fly. Most aren't.

 

 

[Isra]

U-2VS ... 

[ACG_Wobbel]

4 hours ago, 1Sascha said:

Used to be Spitfires in older sims, but since we're - thankfully - past the days of unrealistic/simplified engine management, I'd agree with other posters and recommend the 109 F-4 or G-2. The G-2 makes things even simpler or more fool-proof by running a restricted version of the DB605-engine. Meaning it won't allow you to run it on WEP but since you'd only ever get a minute of WEP at a time without risking engine-damage/-death, one could view this restriction as a plus for learners: You don't really have to worry about killing your engine by leaving it on WEP for too long. Just slam the throttle to 100% whenever you're in combat, and you'll be good for 30 minutes or so. It also feels a tiny bit more stable or less twitchy in the air than the F-4 - which might be a problem once you start to get the hang of things, but is probably a plus for a beginner.

 

If we're just talking about being able to take off, fly around/maneuver a bit and land, I'd also recommend the 190 A-3. It does have its quirks and it's certainly not a good candidate for the bank-and-yank approach to air combat, but its level of built-in/historical automation is at least as high as on the post E-series 109s and it does have a few advantages over the 109 when it comes to ground-handling. It also has better visibility than the early/mid-war 109s and has a much more potent armament.

Nice thx 😁👍

 

[Zooropa_Fly]

I'll say FW190.

[HazMatt]

As with most things "it depends"

 

One of the planes I liked when I first started was the Hurricane. I would open the cooling to 100% (which tends to slow down planes) but it's not a problem with the hurrican as it's slow already. In my opinion it has good ground handling (if you can get used to the crazy Brit differential brake) It's pretty forgiving to fly, has decent guns if you use the 4 hispanos and can carry a couple bombs. I would give it a shot and see how you like it.

 

I edited this because somehow I had a quote here that I didn't mean to quote.

Edited July 6, 2024 by =HazMatt=HazMatt

[Hanu]

Hmmm, almost any russian plane I would say; you usually can slam everything to max with practically no negative effects or overheats.

[CountZero]

39 minutes ago, Hanu said:

Hmmm, almost any russian plane I would say; you usually can slam everything to max with practically no negative effects or overheats.

exept you have to do everything manualy what is automated on 109s, set correct mixture, set correct supercharger, and you cant just close your radiator and fly without thinking about it, you have to open it on climbs, slow turns, summer maps and so on, while you take 109 and everything is automated and on top 109G2 you dont have any boosts just slam to max and you go... 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

2 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

For anyone with no prior flight-sim experience, I'd recommend either of the early IL-2 Sturmoviks - the ground-attack plane the sim is named after. The later (1943) version that comes with Kuban is a little more tricky to handle. The early IL-2s are mostly docile and forgiving, but with enough power to teach you how to deal with torque effects etc.  

 

I'd advise against buying Flying Circus aircraft with the idea that they are easy to fly. Most aren't.

 

 

I must disagree with that.  WW1 Planes were much simpler.   Engine management is basically either setting mixture or operating radiator.   Flight controls are far simpler as well.  Stick, rudder, and throttle is all you really need to fly.  Some of the rotary engine planes (Dr1, Camel,  Sopwith Triplane, etc) require a little finesse to turn sharply to the left, but all in all, the aircraft are much easier to learn than the WW2 birds.

Albatros or Spad (Flying Circus) are both great planes to get started with.  But don't underestimate them. In the right hands, they are deadly opponents. 

Edited July 6, 2024 by RNAS10_Mitchell

[AndyJWest]

1 hour ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

I must disagree with that.  WW1 Planes were much simpler.   Engine management is basically either setting mixture or operating radiator.   Flight controls are far simpler as well.  Stick, rudder, and throttle is all you really need to fly.  Some of the rotary engine planes (Dr1, Camel,  Sopwith Triplane, etc) require a little finesse to turn sharply to the left, but all in all, the aircraft are much easier to learn than the WW2 birds.

Albatros or Spad (Flying Circus) are both great planes to get started with.  But don't underestimate them. In the right hands, they are deadly opponents. 

 

I'm going to respectfully disagree. Yes, the controls are simpler, but for a complete beginner, trying to learn the basics - most of all, how to take off and land successfully - they really aren't ideal. Poor forward visibility. Slow acceleration. Poor directional stability. Most have no trim control. Many have no airspeed indicator, or an indicator placed so badly it is largely useless. Some require throttle blipping to land. No brakes. The Albatros is probably the least problematic, but I'd still rate an IL-2 as considerably easier to take off and land in. I wouldn't wish the Camel on my worst enemy as the first plane for a beginner. 

 

I suspect most forum regulars have been flying for so long they've forgotten how difficult it was just to get airborne and back down again when they started. Things that come automatically to us - coordinated turns, anticipating a stall before it happens, and even simple things like maintaining a constant rate of descent on approach, and then getting the flare right - need to be learned. 

[HazMatt]

I think this discussion is an example of "it depends"

 

I would say to try stuff and see what you like. Just because I or somebody else likes something doesn't mean you will like it

[JG4_Moltke1871]

I am pretty sure the most easy plane in the game is the Halberstadt D.II

 

Easy going in every behaviour and all have to handle is the throttle, stick and pedals 😊

 

For a really beginning beginner the Halberstadt D.II is the best choice ❤️

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

1 hour ago, AndyJWest said:

 

I'm going to respectfully disagree. Yes, the controls are simpler, but for a complete beginner, trying to learn the basics - most of all, how to take off and land successfully - they really aren't ideal. Poor forward visibility. Slow acceleration. Poor directional stability. Most have no trim control. Many have no airspeed indicator, or an indicator placed so badly it is largely useless. Some require throttle blipping to land. No brakes. The Albatros is probably the least problematic, but I'd still rate an IL-2 as considerably easier to take off and land in. I wouldn't wish the Camel on my worst enemy as the first plane for a beginner. 

 

I suspect most forum regulars have been flying for so long they've forgotten how difficult it was just to get airborne and back down again when they started. Things that come automatically to us - coordinated turns, anticipating a stall before it happens, and even simple things like maintaining a constant rate of descent on approach, and then getting the flare right - need to be learned. 

I would agree the Camel is not for a beginner.   Same with the Dr1, or any rotary for that matter.  But never suggested either.  WW1 planes are much simpler to fly and learn the basics on. Sure the operation is primitive,  relying a lot on feel, rather than a cockpit jammed with instruments and various controls.   But that's what makes it simpler IMHO.  Less things for the novice to learn and become familiar with.

Takeoffs?   No tail wheel to lock/unlock.  Give it full throttle,  apply a little rudder to keep it straight  as needed, a little forward stick once your rolling, and it takes off pretty much by itself.  Landings? No flaps to lower. Drop your RPM,  lineup the runway and slowly set it down.  Cut throttle, apply a little back stick pressure and you come to a stop.  Really does not get much easier than that..

Edited July 6, 2024 by RNAS10_Mitchell

[EAF19_Marsh]

The 109F, the -2 va. -4 is not relevant as they are essentially the same.

 

Pros:

- Engine essentially is throttle only, so once you learn the ata balance (power settings) it is very easy

- All other engine elements can be left on ‘automatic’

- Has no particular handling peculiarities

- Something about it ‘feels’ right

 

Cons:

- Narrow landing gear and strong torque (tendency to push the aircraft in opposite direction to propeller rotation) can make take-off and landing tricky at first

- No rudder trim (what di Germany have against rudder trim?) so you often have to balance the rudder to keep it straight

- Slow elevator trim

- Slow flap movement

- Somewhat on the fragile aide

- core armament wea while adding underwing cannon impacts performance

- Cramped cockpit with less than ideal view

- Relative performance declines against 1943 opponents

But it is a great little thing and my ‘go-to’ for 20 minutes of messing around.

[Trooper117]

I suggest you fly the Waco...

 

 

[Hanu]

7 hours ago, CountZero said:

exept you have to do everything manualy what is automated on 109s, set correct mixture, set correct supercharger, and you cant just close your radiator and fly without thinking about it, you have to open it on climbs, slow turns, summer maps and so on, while you take 109 and everything is automated and on top 109G2 you dont have any boosts just slam to max and you go... 

Sure, ingenious design there like you said.

[Enceladus828]

14 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

Many have no airspeed indicator, or an indicator placed so badly it is largely useless

Most just use the in-game instrument panel for airspeed information so not that big of a deal.

 

14 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

Things that come automatically to us - coordinated turns, anticipating a stall before it happens, and even simple things like maintaining a constant rate of descent on approach, and then getting the flare right - need to be learned.

Most players don’t even care about any of what you said.

[BOO]

1 hour ago, Enceladus828 said:

Most players don’t even care about any of what you said.

 

Also appears many postng in this thread seem not to care that te OP was primarily asking about WW2 aircraft.

 

Personally Id go with either the 109Fs or Gs or IL2 as a decent aircraft to learn the basics and "git gud" in. The is also present accross all the WW2 DLCs unlike the WW1 stuff which would require further purchases. 

 

TBH though, even the more "complex" WW2 types are not too hard to manage once you have the basics given how rudimentary the games's engine managment is implemented

 

I agree with @AndyJWest that the IL2 is probably one of the better circuits and bumps models for a complete beginner but, even then and given its a game, there are no hard and fast rules about anything and its just as valid to pick the thing you like, watch a couple of online tutorials by Requien or Sherriff and go from there. 

[ACG_Wobbel]

18 hours ago, CountZero said:

exept you have to do everything manualy what is automated on 109s, set correct mixture, set correct supercharger, and you cant just close your radiator and fly without thinking about it, you have to open it on climbs, slow turns, summer maps and so on, while you take 109 and everything is automated and on top 109G2 you dont have any boosts just slam to max and you go... 

So the 109G2 is nothing to monitor Just hit throttel and go ? Is this online for G2 what about the rest of rhe G series ?

Edited July 7, 2024 by GA332

[ACG_Wobbel]

12 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

I suggest you fly the Waco...

 

 

He he thx for the confidence 😁

[ACG_Wobbel]

Im not totaly rookie but verry rusty. Flown back in the days with Aces high in 2000-2003. Flown il2 1946 but thats over 10-15 years ago. So Basic i think i can handle it but need a simpel plane to handel for time to fokus on flying the plane 😁. Looks like the 109 series is probely my kind of plane here from your feedback . Is the 109 F2/F4 totaly automated beside the wep , and the 109G2 is all automated without wep so this wil just have hit throttel and go ? 

Edited July 7, 2024 by GA332

[BOO]

1 hour ago, GA332 said:

Im not totaly rookie but verry rusty. Flown back in the days with Aces high in 2000-2003. Flown il2 1946 but thats over 10-15 years ago. So Basic i think i can handle it but need a simpel plane to handel for time to fokus on flying the plane 😁. Looks like the 109 series is probely my kind of plane here from your feedback . Is the 109 F2/F4 totaly automated beside the wep , and the 109G2 is all automated without wep so this wil just have hit throttel and go ? 

 

Pretty much. Just respect the ATA,  have a convienient button bind to the stabilizer and remember to use it in a dive to avoid lawndarting . if you are using rudder, keep it true for the speed and pay attention to it to avoid swing on takeoff.. Using the tech chat, at least intitally, is a good visual aid to learnthe varous timers and limits that the game imposes in differing engine states. 

[Enceladus828]

13 hours ago, BOO said:

I agree with @AndyJWest that the IL2 is probably one of the better circuits and bumps models for a complete beginner but, even then and given its a game, there are no hard and fast rules about anything and its just as valid to pick the thing you like, watch a couple of online tutorials by Requien or Sherriff and go from there. 

Exactly, do we need to do a flight test or a Pilot Proficiency Check (PPC) of each aircraft type before we can fly it for MP and all other SP content? No. Even casual players of X-Plane and MSFS don’t care about anything that Andy listed. They just want to fly over their house (the shed and hammock at the house I grew up in are even depicted) and see the world without getting out of their chair. The only thing these simmers would actually care about is not crashing, colliding with an object, making a hard landing and overstressing the airframe. If you turned Realism off then none of that quartet matters.

 

I find the U-2VS, IL-2 and most multi engine aircraft (Ju-52 included) easy to master.

[BOO]

9 hours ago, Enceladus828 said:

Exactly, do we need to do a flight test or a Pilot Proficiency Check (PPC) of each aircraft type before we can fly it for MP and all other SP content? No. Even casual players of X-Plane and MSFS don’t care about anything that Andy listed. They just want to fly over their house (the shed and hammock at the house I grew up in are even depicted) and see the world without getting out of their chair. The only thing these simmers would actually care about is not crashing, colliding with an object, making a hard landing and overstressing the airframe. If you turned Realism off then none of that quartet matters.

 

I find the U-2VS, IL-2 and most multi engine aircraft (Ju-52 included) easy to master.

Yes and no. And it expressly depends on if a player wants a more casual experience or not. Personally Id spend a few hours flying something before using it in MP. In GBs early days more of the was spent taxi-ing as that was perhaps the most hazardous occupation back then but I'd also get familar with bombsights, engine failures, flapless landings etc. 

 

I flown MP with players who do both. And those that like doing it more by the book are not that few in number in comparison with the John Waynes. Going back to my CloD days, there were guys flying Hurricane 87 octane twin speeds who could still hammer 109E4s simply because they knew the aircraft inside out, its best rate of climb, its best optimum turn speed, the most appropriate tactics for a given situation and when to run away. Not slavishly learned from pilot notes perhaps but from hours of flying in the game and paying attention. The same chaps could nurse home a crippled Ju88 or 111 when the rest would end up a smoking hulk in the kent countyside just as in GB, those that paid a little more attention could get a holed 109 or 110 back more often in TAW.   

 

Its horses for courses. I dont think you need to start with the basics by any means but the more you put in, the more you get out. 

 

So Id still subscribe to Andy's view of picking something easy and getting the basics down. Even if its only for the first hour. 

[PatrickAWlson]

On 7/6/2024 at 8:28 AM, Zooropa_Fly said:

I'll say FW190.

FW-190s are my favorite, but they have a nasty high speed stall.  Usually a quick recovery, but I can't even begin to say how many times I have lost it in a 190.  IMHO the 109 is much more docile once it's in the air.