Could this be a trainer for props?

I watched the first vids on youtube and wondered if this module could act as a trainer for the other props like the spit and the 109 and so on?

I ask because I have the 109 and the mustang, but I dont flew it very much because of the steep learning curve and frustration crashing over and over again when taking off and landing.

So, is the I–16 a bit easyier to fly?

Thank you for opinions!

No, I'd say it's probably the most difficult of the bunch, no trim and if you're going slow she wants to flip over.

I watched the first vids on youtube and wondered if this module could act as a trainer for the other props like the spit and the 109 and so on?

 

I ask because I have the 109 and the mustang, but I dont flew it very much because of the steep learning curve and frustration crashing over and over again when taking off and landing.

I have all warbirds except this new I-16 and find the Mustang the easiest to learn ... these videos helped me a lot when learning it:

Thank you guys!

I think I will stay with the Mustang as my trainer.

Thank you guys!

I think I will stay with the Mustang as my trainer.

Best prop plane in the trainer role of them all is the Yak-52. By far!

Agreed that the yak is a good trainer. But this has been extremely easy to fly and gives me a T-6 texan vibe. I think it would work fine as a trainer.

Yes YAK or even the CE 2 very easy to fly.

I can't comment on the I-16 (yet!), but I note that there are some suggestions to use the Yak 52 as a trainer. The problem is that the Yak has a tricycle-gear configuration. Often the issue for newcomers wanting to learn the WWII aircraft is not just the "prop" but also the "tail-dragger" aspect. Yes, the Yak-52 is no doubt superb, but it may not necessarily help learning the like the 109 or Spit, as the original post asked.

PS: I have the FW190, P-51D and Bf-109... for me, the 190 was easiest to learn (although still difficult and frustrating until I got my head around what is going on with it).

Maybe I will hop into the Yak 52 then. I dont have a problem with the tricycle config, its mainly the tourque on takeoff.

EDIT: It seems I dont do the Yak... I hopped over to the yak forum and it seems this module is abandoned. I dont put money in such nonstarters.

EDIT: It seems I dont do the Yak... I hopped over to the yak forum and it seems this module is abandoned. I dont put money in such nonstarters.

S!

The yak is a good plane that is in need of a few things... But this is the I-16 thread and it has really impressed me so far.

"its earlier so it must be easier"

lmao imagine being this conditioned by videogame logic

"its earlier so it must be easier"

 

lmao imagine being this conditioned by videogame logic

No one said that other than you.

I can't comment on the I-16 (yet!), but I note that there are some suggestions to use the Yak 52 as a trainer. The problem is that the Yak has a tricycle-gear configuration. Often the issue for newcomers wanting to learn the WWII aircraft is not just the "prop" but also the "tail-dragger" aspect. Yes, the Yak-52 is no doubt superb, but it may not necessarily help learning the like the 109 or Spit, as the original post asked.

 

 

 

PS: I have the FW190, P-51D and Bf-109... for me, the 190 was easiest to learn (although still difficult and frustrating until I got my head around what is going on with it).

+1

I see it as a good trainer for any of the remaining taildraggers, with exception of P-51. More than about Props is about Tricycles or Taildraggers.

P-51 could be also, however, it is "too forgiving" for taking off or landing IMO, in comparison to the rest of taildraggers.

I-16 offers a good challenge with a nice torque and seems perfect to start and have a "smooth" transition to 109 or Spitfire.

Is good to start with something quite difficult, after the "complex birds" won't be so difficult to tackle.

Starting with the Yak-52 as a trainer for previous taildraggers is obviously not a good idea as this one is not. Will be only good if you are new to airplane simulation. Then sure, Yak-52 is your best choice.

Hope that this makes any sense :]

seems this module is abandoned

Nope, just the last in the queue ATM I think. ED's a smallish company doing all kinds of stuff other than DCS, so priorities must etcetera.

Just wait is my advice.

@OP: No, it couldn't bloody well be a trainer for other DCS props, on account of it being so bloody twitchy and hard to fly. Thanks for listening a dead (virtual) pilot :D

Yup, definitely something one would learn a lot with, but not the first option if anything else has been flown before IMHO.

S!

@OP: No, it couldn't bloody well be a trainer for other DCS props, on account of it being so bloody twitchy and hard to fly. Thanks for listening a dead (virtual) pilot :D

Your words are heard :) so the death was not useless

"so bloody twitchy and hard to fly" ???

I admit being a "fanboy" of most Soviet machines :], but... I-26 IS NOT hard to fly. It is very nimble and does barrel rolls like no other. Takeoffs and landings are not "easy" thou... Again, like the Spitfire, and many others, requires some severe sensibility tweaks in the axis (specially rudder) until the plane feels like it does what you want. Of course, always depending on your setup.