Best "trainer" jet in DCS

[Ornithopter]

Seems like the C-101 is the community favorite according to the poll.   I agree.  It's a great plane whether one uses it as an actual trainer or as a light attack plane.

3 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

To me, a trainer must be two seat capable, so that a more experienced pilot can instruct the beginner.

But in practice, I would think a lot of people learn the basics of DCS offline, before they even consider taking it into multiplayer, and before they even have a passing aquaintance with anyone else playing the game.  To that end, a second seat only matters if you have another human being to crew up with. Otherwise it's just an empty seat. 

 

[Rudel_chw]

44 minutes ago, Ornithopter said:

But in practice, I would think a lot of people learn the basics of DCS offline, before they even consider taking it into multiplayer, and before they even have a passing aquaintance with anyone else playing the game. 

 

I agree, I learned the basics on the Su-25T over a decade ago, but as the topic is about "best trainer" I will stick with my requisite of two seats 

,

44 minutes ago, Ornithopter said:

To that end, a second seat only matters if you have another human being to crew up with. Otherwise it's just an empty seat. 

I matters to users that belong to virtual squadrons, or even to those users that are being introduced to dcs by a more experienced friend where they would do MP without a public server

[Hiob]

Again, that‘s nothing to be dogmatic about, but just as food for thought:

Trainers are not only trainers, because they have a second cockpit, but also, because they have manageable performance, are usually not FBW (so that they offer very „basic“ stick and rudder experience to build fundamental skills etc….

 

[Ornithopter]

This is just my late night opinion, after having a few drinks, but the F-5E and the C-101 aircraft couldn't be more opposite in flying character.  The C-101 is like you're floating in the air, and couldn't be more docile.  The F-5E, by contrast is "oh F***, I'm behind the power curve!".

So I think if you want to become an F-14 or MiG-29 pilot, and fly a very capable pussycat of a fighter, then the C-101 would be the closest trainer in handling.  If you want to fly a brick like the Phantom II, and don't mind dying a lot during final approach, on your way to getting good, emphasize the F-5!

[Bananabrai]

Interesting thoughts. I’ll give the 101 and maybe the 339 another go. My boys and me are mostly doing/trying milsim if anything.

Ideally I would like to offer the whole lot (again), BFT/IFT on the YaK, BQT on the 101 or 339, IFF would be 100% on the F1BE for me (it’s just so much better suited for training than the F-5, in any regard), and then the B-Course on anything. ATM we’re doing a B-Course on the Hornet.

But having resources for the whole lot is so difficult. I offered an IFT some years ago on the YaK, but instructors are rare, I did mostly everything alone and people went away after some BQT sorties on the 101, as I had to jump between the yak and the vacuum cleaner. Plus multi crew sync was really s… for years in the Yak. That much in terms of complete vs patched vs abandoned… 

We tried the 339 two tears ago. They took ages to fix bugs as well. We kept using the 101 then. 
Maybe we should do a GT, lets ask @OPEC again XD.

[Hiob]

8 minutes ago, Bananabrai said:

Interesting thoughts. I’ll give the 101 and maybe the 339 another go. My boys and me are mostly doing/trying milsim if anything.

Ideally I would like to offer the whole lot (again), BFT/IFT on the YaK, BQT on the 101 or 339, IFF would be 100% on the F1BE for me (it’s just so much better suited for training than the F-5, in any regard), and then the B-Course on anything. ATM we’re doing a B-Course on the Hornet.

But having resources for the whole lot is so difficult. I offered an IFT some years ago on the YaK, but instructors are rare, I did mostly everything alone and people went away after some BQT sorties on the 101, as I had to jump between the yak and the vacuum cleaner. Plus multi crew sync was really s… for years in the Yak. That much in terms of complete vs patched vs abandoned… 

We tried the 339 two tears ago. They took ages to fix bugs as well. We kept using the 101 then. 
Maybe we should do a GT, lets ask @OPEC again XD.

The free T-45 could also be an option. It literally IS a navy trainer.... (and therefore carrier capable, which the others are not)

 

[Bananabrai]

23 minutes ago, Hiob said:

The free T-45 could also be an option. It literally IS a navy trainer.... (and therefore carrier capable, which the others are not)

 

Thanks mate, although we’re not using the Hornet for NAVY purpose, but will go for the Typhoon when it drops. 
We are doing RCAF Germany style field ops in EDAM. EDAL is sadly not in yet.

[Hiob]

54 minutes ago, Bananabrai said:

Thanks mate, although we’re not using the Hornet for NAVY purpose, but will go for the Typhoon when it drops. 
We are doing RCAF Germany style field ops in EDAM. EDAL is sadly not in yet.

Then I would definitely go for the C-101. It has one caviat though - it has no AP, only FD. IFR can therefore be very exhausting.

(that would be a point for the MB-339 when I think about it. But the systems failure simulation is the real crown jewel of the C-101 if that is your cup of tea.)

[Beirut]

I'm a big fan of the L-39. The C-101 gets a lot of love on a regular basis and might be a better module, but I enjoy the L-39 more. Just threw in the NS430 and I like the way it sits in the instrument panel, as if it belongs right there. I have the MB-339 in the civvy sim and I really like it, but not so much in DCS, not sure why.

 

For me: L-39 FTW!