Improving utilisation of training aircraft - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-05-2018, 06:30 AM   #1
tom1502
Member
 
tom1502's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 251
Default Improving utilisation of training aircraft

I’ve been thinking about this for some time and decided to write down my thoughts on the matter. How could ERD allow greater utilisation of the trainers?

https://79vraf.wordpress.com/2018/08...ssing-a-trick/

I’d really like to be able to use them for their originally intended purpose with new recruits and get them up to a certain level before they progressed with us at EAF, it’s not yet possible without both players owning the module, but maybe there is something that ED could do...I can live in hope!
__________________
  • Windows 10 Home - 64 Bit
  • Intel Core i7-4770K - 3.5GHz
  • 16GB RAM
  • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070
  • Oculus Rift CV1
tom1502 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2018, 10:32 AM   #2
scaflight
Member
 
scaflight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 237
Default

I think you are 100% right in your observation. As I see it, ED should have bundled these with the core game. Yak and L-39 would make DCS properly wholesome.

ED and Lead Pursuit are virtually the only developers that've struggled with this. In Microsoft's FS series and other flight sims, you've had the luxury of fairly high-fidelity aircraft that range from simple trainers to more complex multiengines. They include less and more advanced training courses, they rate their missions in terms of difficulty, and they narrow them in scope. I don't think these civilian-focused developers choose those airframes because they want some arbitrary selection of "small-to-big", but because, as many of them as experienced pilots know, you have to learn the ropes. The Su-25 is clickless and a far cry from a good learning experience. The TF-51 is absolutely not the first aircraft you'd like to learn to get the basics of flight.

Simulators exist because we can't access the real thing, be it for lack of money, for fear of our own lives, that we lack prerequisite knowledge, or it's in other ways inaccessible. It's gotten to the point where DCS modules are so complex, they could do with their own simulators because they are in fact inaccessible.

This point is probably not something that resonates with many daily/weekly users of DCS, because they -do- have that prerequisite knowledge. But, as anyone who's first experience with DCS was the A-10C knows, that was a damned high threshold. Many are the ones that've given up before even switching MFDs, and those people were potential customers for all these other modules.

It's ok to say that no, the threshold should be 'this' high. That the learning curve should be 'X' steep. But it doesn't make a ton of sense to say that and still produce separate trainer aircraft modules.
scaflight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2018, 06:15 PM   #3
Frederf
Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Campbell, CA
Posts: 3,747
Default

I still think it is counter productive to require the student pilot to own the module to fly in it in non-solo operations. Provided one of the two operators own the module this should be sufficient.

I have seen it many, many times: "Hey, want to try DCS?" "Sure, but I don't know how to fly that well." "If you buy a training module I can help you." "$50 to buy a tutorial so I can spend another $50 for the airplane I actually want later? No thanks. I'll put the F-19 Super Killer now instead and just figure it out!" Every time.

By trying to collect money from everyone they collect money from no one.
Frederf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2018, 08:10 PM   #4
vali_grad
Member
 
vali_grad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Romania
Posts: 109
Default

no excuse really, su25 is the best to start on and slowly move to tf with clickable cockpit and more control needed. Yak is not easy, handling is too fast for noobs, not seeing the runway ahead is a no/no, L39 will crash them asap ) as a begginer you want a plane with slow rate ailerons, steady flight, steady power, autopilot, predictable behaviour, easy to use cockpit, airbrakes and/or parachute, great visibility over the nose ! yet again one gamer that only touched war thunder & other arcade needs first serious time in civilian sims like fsx/p3d/xplane
__________________
Su34 & F111 a dream fullfilled in fsx...
i5 5600, 1050ti, 16 GVram, win10 , TM W hotas&rudder, waiting for 1060/1070 price fall or a new gpu family..f*&9 miners

Last edited by vali_grad; 08-05-2018 at 08:13 PM.
vali_grad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2018, 09:22 PM   #5
defeatist99
Member
 
defeatist99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vali_grad View Post
no excuse really, su25 is the best to start on and slowly move to tf with clickable cockpit and more control needed. Yak is not easy, handling is too fast for noobs, not seeing the runway ahead is a no/no, L39 will crash them asap ) as a begginer you want a plane with slow rate ailerons, steady flight, steady power, autopilot, predictable behaviour, easy to use cockpit, airbrakes and/or parachute, great visibility over the nose ! yet again one gamer that only touched war thunder & other arcade needs first serious time in civilian sims like fsx/p3d/xplane
If the trainers are so bad for training why does everyone use them for training?
defeatist99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2018, 10:58 PM   #6
swagchimp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 25
Default

I find this whole debate a bit pointless. The reason why trainers exist in real life is because students can not afford to make deadly mistakes, and trainers are supposed to be easy to fly and provide a good learning experience. Having said that, you can buy the F/A-18, crash it on your first takeoff and nobody will care. This notion of trainer aircraft in sims is ridiculous. Simulator were conceived as an instrument of training, so we don't need to do it again. Sure, you'll probably become a better pilot if you work your way up from the Yak-52 to the L-39 and then over to any of the more advanced birds, but it's by no means a prerequisite. I often see people recommend the F-5 as a first module because it's "easy to fly and a good trainer". Why? Say if you only had the money for one module, the Hornet would absolutely be my first recommendation just because of its versatility. Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with trainers in DCS. In fact, I'm very glad that there is both a Yak-52 and an L-39 module because I have great personal interest in these aircraft, but suggesting a newbie to buy a plane to "learn how to fly" is counterproductive in my opinion.
swagchimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2018, 11:23 PM   #7
defeatist99
Member
 
defeatist99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swagchimp View Post
I find this whole debate a bit pointless. The reason why trainers exist in real life is because students can not afford to make deadly mistakes, and trainers are supposed to be easy to fly and provide a good learning experience. Having said that, you can buy the F/A-18, crash it on your first takeoff and nobody will care. This notion of trainer aircraft in sims is ridiculous. Simulator were conceived as an instrument of training, so we don't need to do it again. Sure, you'll probably become a better pilot if you work your way up from the Yak-52 to the L-39 and then over to any of the more advanced birds, but it's by no means a prerequisite. I often see people recommend the F-5 as a first module because it's "easy to fly and a good trainer". Why? Say if you only had the money for one module, the Hornet would absolutely be my first recommendation just because of its versatility. Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with trainers in DCS. In fact, I'm very glad that there is both a Yak-52 and an L-39 module because I have great personal interest in these aircraft, but suggesting a newbie to buy a plane to "learn how to fly" is counterproductive in my opinion.
I get the point, but some people want the full realistic learning experience. I would have loved to have someone teach me how to properly fly in a multicrew trainer before I learned the A-10C some years ago by just reading and crashing. Though I do think it would be nice if someone new to the game didn't also have to buy the aircraft. Having one person have the aircraft and the other being able to learn would probably bring more people in to HI-FI modules.
defeatist99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2018, 11:28 AM   #8
dFlow
Member
 
dFlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: LOAV
Posts: 172
Default

the best solution would be to give those birds (l39 and yak52) to dcs world as starting aircraft.
With this you'd be able to use the l39 not only as trainer, but to "show" others the world of flight, by just telling them "download this, hop on my plane and lets rumble a bit"
I bought the l39, and i love it really much, and i wouldn't mind that even after i paid for it, it would be a free module afterwards.
__________________
Virtual-Pilots
dFlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 06:54 PM   #9
vali_grad
Member
 
vali_grad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Romania
Posts: 109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by defeatist99 View Post
If the trainers are so bad for training why does everyone use them for training?
because they are cheap in every way possible, I'm talking about posibility in DCS without breaking the bank if you suck at it, better not invest and look somewhere else ...an informed choice
__________________
Su34 & F111 a dream fullfilled in fsx...
i5 5600, 1050ti, 16 GVram, win10 , TM W hotas&rudder, waiting for 1060/1070 price fall or a new gpu family..f*&9 miners
vali_grad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 07:29 PM   #10
Frederf
Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Campbell, CA
Posts: 3,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by defeatist99 View Post
If the trainers are so bad for training why does everyone use them for training?
Do you mean real operators or DCS users? Because DCS use for training is rare by my experience.
Frederf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:42 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.