Best place and aircraft to learn IFR?

[Hammer1-1]

looking to learn actual IFR in DCS, basically learning how to navigate properly using the HSI. what would be the best aircraft to train in as well as where could I find some decent training material to learn from?  Id like to learn the essential navigation stuff before I get too old to learn this stuff and would love to be pointed in the right directions! Theres only one aircraft in DCS I dont own, so pitch an aircraft thats best suited for it if possible. Thanks!

Edited March 5 by Hammer1-1

[Tom Kazansky]

I don't claim that it is the best way for I certainly don't know a lot of ways to do so, but I learned a lot from the training missions of the DCS:C-101 Aviojet.

Lovely simulated cockpit instruments and immersive navigation training missions, imho.

[razo+r]

I think for a start you just need an aircraft that is either slow and or easy to handle. The F-18 is for the beginning good as it has nice autopilot modes and autothrottle, so you can focus 100% on the HSI and understanding it. But of course if you feel comfortable in other aircraft already, any aircraft with an HSI will do.

As for training material, you have to google/youtube. First you need to know what belongs to IFR flight, like departures, arrivals, approaches, airways (or whatever you want). Once you know what is part of IFR, pick and choose what you want to practice. You can for example start off by flying departures followed by 3D approaches (requires and Aircraft that can do it, A-10C or F-16 as an example) and then work your way to the more complex 2D approaches. Arrivals are basically departures but in reverse, so once you know one the other one should work too. Some maps in DCS already come with charts, for some maps (Caucasus is one for example) you can download the countries AIP online for free and it comes with approach and departure charts (though they may not be 100% accurate as DCS is not 100% accurate either and things may have changed between the date represented in DCS and the latest real life specs).

As for ingame training material, some aircraft may have actual training missions for them or other missions. 

[MAXsenna]

I don't claim that it is the best way for I certainly don't know a lot of ways to do so, but I learned a lot from the training missions of the DCS:C-101 Aviojet.
Lovely simulated cockpit instruments and immersive navigation training missions, imho.

I agree with this. The training missions, and the other included missions actually try to teach you this. Even comes with a hood.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, Tom Kazansky said:

I don't claim that it is the best way for I certainly don't know a lot of ways to do so, but I learned a lot from the training missions of the DCS:C-101 Aviojet.

Lovely simulated cockpit instruments and immersive navigation training missions, imho.

100% Agree.

But there is one downside to the C-101. No Autopilot or attitude hold systems. Having the head a lot inside the cockpit trying to set up and figure out the systems can easily lead to loss of situational awareness and upset attitudes. Especially at night or in IFR conditions.

So, basically what I'm saying is, the C-101 is learning IFR in difficult mode. If you want an easier time, use an Aicraft that at least can hold wings level and altitude on its own.

[MAXsenna]

100% Agree.
But there is one downside to the C-101. No Autopilot or attitude hold systems. Having the head a lot inside the cockpit trying to set up and figure out the systems can easily lead to loss of situational awareness and upset attitudes. Especially at night or in IFR conditions.
So, basically what I'm saying is, the C-101 is learning IFR in difficult mode. If you want an easier time, use an Aicraft that at least can hold wings level and altitude on its own.

Extra credit for challenge yes.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Hiob]

The 101 is adorable and really rewarding. So I'd say it's absolutely worth it. 

 

Another plus of it is that you can get some "Airliner feeling" when you want to. Just make it heavy and suddenly you have to worry about runway length/take-off performance and the window between "to fast" and "stick shaker" becomes really slim on approach. 

So no more excessive power surplus in every situation like you get with most fight aircraft in DCS.

Edited March 5 by Hiob

[Minsky]

3 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

looking to learn actual IFR in DCS, basically learning how to navigate properly using the HSI. what would be the best aircraft to train in as well as where could I find some decent training material to learn from?  Id like to learn the essential navigation stuff before I get too old to learn this stuff and would love to be pointed in the right directions! Theres only one aircraft in DCS I dont own, so pitch an aircraft thats best suited for it if possible. Thanks!

The C-101 is the only aircraft in DCS that simultaneously supports TACAN, VOR, ILS, marker beacons and the in-cockpit GNS430. Can't do better than that for IFR.

As for the map, get whichever has the best navaids coverage and charts availability. I would recommend Nevada.

Finally, the training materials. You can go easy mode by looking for specific stuff on youtube (e.g. "how to intercept a radial"). Or do it old-fashioned way with the AFMAN publications, such as the 11-217V1.

[MAXsenna]

The 101 is adorable and really rewarding. So I'd say it's absolutely worth it. 
 
Another plus of it is that you can get some "Airliner feeling" when you want to. Just make it heavy and suddenly you have to worry about runway length/take-off performance and the window between "to fast" and "stick shaker" becomes really slim on approach. 
So no more excessive power surplus in every situation like you get with most fight aircraft in DCS.

Tried the hard level landing scanerios? Haven't tried them after they were updated with the new weather. Lots of fun!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[MAXsenna]

The C-101 is the only aircraft in DCS that simultaneously supports TACAN, VOR, ILS, marker beacons and the in-cockpit GNS430. Can't do better than that for IFR.
As for the map, get whichever has the best navaids coverage and charts availability. I would recommend Nevada.
Finally, the training materials. You can go easy mode by looking for specific stuff on youtube (e.g. "how to intercept a radial"). Or do it old-fashioned way with the AFMAN publications, such as the 11-217V1.

And it comes with missions to practice actual procedures!
The instructor hates me though. "Watch your speed! Sigh.... "

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Lace]

The FAA Instrument Flying Handbook is as good a place as any to start.  Military procedures vary, but the basic principles translate well.

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/FAA-H-8083-15B.pdf

Honestly, if you are learning this for any current or future real-world requirement, I'd look beyond DCS and at one of the civvy sims.  Far more suitable training aircraft there.

[Minsky]

1 hour ago, Lace said:

Honestly, if you are learning this for any current or future real-world requirement, I'd look beyond DCS and at one of the civvy sims.  Far more suitable training aircraft there.

This is very true.

Furthermore, navigation in DCS often feels like an afterthought.

One could spend more time dancing around missing navaids, frequencies that don't match the charts, and beacons that don't work as expected than actually navigating.

It is certainly doable, and could be quite enjoyable. But if OP wants to learn it for something more substantial than finding their way back to base at night, I'd look elsewhere.

 

Edited March 5 by Minsky

[Aquorys]

6 hours ago, Minsky said:

As for the map, get whichever has the best navaids coverage and charts availability. I would recommend Nevada.

 What he said - if you wanna learn flying IFR, you wanna do it on the Nevada map - it comes with IFR approach plates for various airports in the kneeboard. Definitely an excellent choice 

[Hammer1-1]

8 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

I agree with this. The training missions, and the other included missions actually try to teach you this. Even comes with a hood.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

its been a LOOOONG time since Ive flown the 101....I didnt know about the training missions, Ill have a look-see at it, thanks!

As for IFR in another sim, I have MSFS and all those missions there. My biggest pet peeve for that sim is setting up my controls for ANY aircraft. They've made that whole thing an ordeal.

Edited March 5 by Hammer1-1

[MAXsenna]

14 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

its been a LOOOONG time since Ive flown the 101....I didnt know about the training missions, Ill have a look-see at it, thanks!

Make sure to check out the other missions. Especially the landing missions. They come as easy, medium and hard variants for some of the different maps. Hard in the Caucasus, Vaziani, is one of my all time favourite missions.

17 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

My biggest pet peeve for that sim is setting up my controls for ANY aircraft. They've made that whole thing an ordeal.

Couldn't agree more. When I understood the logic of DCS, all else just doesn't make sense. 

[ThePops]

On 3/5/2025 at 7:46 AM, Hammer1-1 said:

what would be the best aircraft to train in

I agree with others about DCS and IFR. X-Plane is IMO the best choice of sim for (learning) IFR, hands down. Having said that, DCS isn't far behind, it's more that it's inconsistent and contains idiosyncrasies regarding this. You will use lots of time sorting out those things instead of learning IFR.

Then, it's a fact that IFR and autopilot fits together like hand and glove. No one in their right mind would today fly "hard" IFR (in the soup) without an autopilot. Learning how to use the autopilot is essential.

Nevertheless, the basic skill is hand flying without external references. This means zero external references, like in a thick cloud. The main instrument is the AI, Attitude Indicator (artificial horizon), with other instruments as secondary. Traditionally this is the "six pack". AI, ASI, alt, turn coordinator, VSI and heading indicator. Today it's typically a Garmin G1000 glass panel or similar. It contains all of that in the main screen, but with a different layout. The principles are the same though, AI is the principal instrument. Then it's just a matter of training until you can fly, turn, climb etc. at will using only those instruments. This can be done in almost all planes in DCS.

Then you can start navigating, flying ILS's and so on. I don't know what the best plane for practicing is. In a sim you can just hit esc and start over. I like the Mirage F1 CE. It has it all regarding avionics and it has a good autopilot. But it's also fast of course, things happens fast. Perhaps a good practice is the F-5E shooting some TACAN approaches. TACAN is perhaps the most intuitive navigational instrument there is (same as VOR/DME), and you learn to use the HSI, setting vectors looking at distances, in combination with the AI. It's all hand flying, but it's also rather simple because there's only one instrument, TACAN/HSI. The F-5 is nice to fly as well. When you can fly the F-5 with TACAN, then everything else is simple. It's more a matter of learning the instruments/navigational aids than actually learning something new in flying the plane. The F-5 is in many ways as simple as it gets because you don't have to think about anything else but TACAN, but also as hard as it gets due to lack of autopilot, LOC, glideslope, GPS and INS.

[Hammer1-1]

14 hours ago, ThePops said:

I agree with others about DCS and IFR. X-Plane is IMO the best choice of sim for (learning) IFR, hands down. Having said that, DCS isn't far behind, it's more that it's inconsistent and contains idiosyncrasies regarding this. You will use lots of time sorting out those things instead of learning IFR.

Then, it's a fact that IFR and autopilot fits together like hand and glove. No one in their right mind would today fly "hard" IFR (in the soup) without an autopilot. Learning how to use the autopilot is essential.

Nevertheless, the basic skill is hand flying without external references. This means zero external references, like in a thick cloud. The main instrument is the AI, Attitude Indicator (artificial horizon), with other instruments as secondary. Traditionally this is the "six pack". AI, ASI, alt, turn coordinator, VSI and heading indicator. Today it's typically a Garmin G1000 glass panel or similar. It contains all of that in the main screen, but with a different layout. The principles are the same though, AI is the principal instrument. Then it's just a matter of training until you can fly, turn, climb etc. at will using only those instruments. This can be done in almost all planes in DCS.

Then you can start navigating, flying ILS's and so on. I don't know what the best plane for practicing is. In a sim you can just hit esc and start over. I like the Mirage F1 CE. It has it all regarding avionics and it has a good autopilot. But it's also fast of course, things happens fast. Perhaps a good practice is the F-5E shooting some TACAN approaches. TACAN is perhaps the most intuitive navigational instrument there is (same as VOR/DME), and you learn to use the HSI, setting vectors looking at distances, in combination with the AI. It's all hand flying, but it's also rather simple because there's only one instrument, TACAN/HSI. The F-5 is nice to fly as well. When you can fly the F-5 with TACAN, then everything else is simple. It's more a matter of learning the instruments/navigational aids than actually learning something new in flying the plane. The F-5 is in many ways as simple as it gets because you don't have to think about anything else but TACAN, but also as hard as it gets due to lack of autopilot, LOC, glideslope, GPS and INS.

I havent flown X-plane in such a long time either, mostly because Im really not much into civil aviation and there are no training missions for it. About the only thing I use MSFS for is the gliders (yeah that shts fun for me as its more of a science than anything else). The reason why I ask this question is because I really want to learn the F-4E, but you're basically navigating by the HSI and using the TACAN for the most part. The one thing I cant wrap my head around is how to navigate to a certain point from your current location using only the TACAN as a reference. Lets say Im near wp2. I want to navigate to wp3, and wp3 is bearing 135, 15 miles from TACAN X. The only thing I know how to do is change my radio to TACAN X and follow the needle...but that will take me directly to  the station. I can do it if I have the map right in front of me, but thats really not an option. I would think this is what a flight plan is for, but most flight plans I see use only LAT/LONG appendices, not course lines or things like TACAN X radial 135, 15 miles. Guess I can simplify that question to how can I navigate from my current position using only the HSI and TACAN to get to TACAN X with the appropriate radial and distance?

[razo+r]

1 hour ago, Hammer1-1 said:

I havent flown X-plane in such a long time either, mostly because Im really not much into civil aviation and there are no training missions for it. About the only thing I use MSFS for is the gliders (yeah that shts fun for me as its more of a science than anything else). The reason why I ask this question is because I really want to learn the F-4E, but you're basically navigating by the HSI and using the TACAN for the most part. The one thing I cant wrap my head around is how to navigate to a certain point from your current location using only the TACAN as a reference. Lets say Im near wp2. I want to navigate to wp3, and wp3 is bearing 135, 15 miles from TACAN X. The only thing I know how to do is change my radio to TACAN X and follow the needle...but that will take me directly to  the station. I can do it if I have the map right in front of me, but thats really not an option. I would think this is what a flight plan is for, but most flight plans I see use only LAT/LONG appendices, not course lines or things like TACAN X radial 135, 15 miles. Guess I can simplify that question to how can I navigate from my current position using only the HSI and TACAN to get to TACAN X with the appropriate radial and distance?

Google "intercepting radials".

Basically, dial in the radial you want to go. Read your current radial via the bearing pointer. Depending how big the difference is, you fly a correction, 45 degree intercept or a 90 (then 45) degree intercept.

Or if you want you can also do a station passing, which is somewhat similar. Just fly to the station, over it dial in the new radial and intercept that.

Like already mentioned, you can easily find many of the basic IFR stuff on the new.

Edited March 8 by razo+r

[ThePops]

Indeed, TACAN is about intercepting radials and following those radials. There are tons of Youtube videos about all of this. It's mostly VOR/DME I would think (MSFS and X-Plane and real flying), but VOR/DME is functionally identical to a TACAN. A TACAN is also a "VOR"/DME, only the VOR is a bit more accurate, but the DME part is the exact same thing. It doesn't really matters what flight sim you use as long as the technology is represented correct. Different aircraft may have different ways of visualizing, but the principles are still the same. I haven't flown the F-4 much (yet), but it seems to be a good IFR platform.

Another important point is that TACAN/VOR is no substitute for GPS and INS or even DME/DME. It's an archaic form of navigation used before GPS/INS. Today it's RNAV. RNAV is short for random navigation, meaning you can set waypoints at "random" and fly between them, preferably on autopilot. "Random" points is what comes out from the ME, and that is really only good for RNAV or VFR. You can in principle do the same with TACAN, but not without transforming points to radials and distances to TACAN stations. The Mirage F1 has a function where you can set a random point out from a TACAN station. You set the radial and distance from the station, and the needle points to that point instead of the TACAN station. With a switch you can switch between that virtual point and the station. You can do the same thing manually, but it requires substantially more brain cells, and preferably a paper map.

TACAN will pinpoint your position. The problem boils down to the fact that this information has to be transferred to a map. Paper maps were used for this, an essential part. To do it "properly" you really need a stack of paper maps. A second screen with maps will also do of course. Lots of usable maps on the net. 

You have to plan differently using TACAN/VOR than what is possible or "default" with the ME. DCS isn't the best sim for this, but with some manual adaption and tweaks it works OK. 

[Hammer1-1]

16 hours ago, razo+r said:

Google "intercepting radials".

Basically, dial in the radial you want to go. Read your current radial via the bearing pointer. Depending how big the difference is, you fly a correction, 45 degree intercept or a 90 (then 45) degree intercept.

Or if you want you can also do a station passing, which is somewhat similar. Just fly to the station, over it dial in the new radial and intercept that.

Like already mentioned, you can easily find many of the basic IFR stuff on the new.

The hard part is knowing what to look for. Ill put that in the youtube player for some review later!

12 hours ago, ThePops said:

Indeed, TACAN is about intercepting radials and following those radials. There are tons of Youtube videos about all of this. It's mostly VOR/DME I would think (MSFS and X-Plane and real flying), but VOR/DME is functionally identical to a TACAN. A TACAN is also a "VOR"/DME, only the VOR is a bit more accurate, but the DME part is the exact same thing. It doesn't really matters what flight sim you use as long as the technology is represented correct. Different aircraft may have different ways of visualizing, but the principles are still the same. I haven't flown the F-4 much (yet), but it seems to be a good IFR platform.

Another important point is that TACAN/VOR is no substitute for GPS and INS or even DME/DME. It's an archaic form of navigation used before GPS/INS. Today it's RNAV. RNAV is short for random navigation, meaning you can set waypoints at "random" and fly between them, preferably on autopilot. "Random" points is what comes out from the ME, and that is really only good for RNAV or VFR. You can in principle do the same with TACAN, but not without transforming points to radials and distances to TACAN stations. The Mirage F1 has a function where you can set a random point out from a TACAN station. You set the radial and distance from the station, and the needle points to that point instead of the TACAN station. With a switch you can switch between that virtual point and the station. You can do the same thing manually, but it requires substantially more brain cells, and preferably a paper map.

TACAN will pinpoint your position. The problem boils down to the fact that this information has to be transferred to a map. Paper maps were used for this, an essential part. To do it "properly" you really need a stack of paper maps. A second screen with maps will also do of course. Lots of usable maps on the net. 

You have to plan differently using TACAN/VOR than what is possible or "default" with the ME. DCS isn't the best sim for this, but with some manual adaption and tweaks it works OK. 

Im familiar with VOR/DME, m just not familiar with what the F-4E has AT ALL...its also one of the things that put me off the Tomcat of all aircraft. Pilots nowadays have it good, I recognize that...but navigating by HSI and VOR/TACAN with offsets is a survival skill and Im trying to learn the hard way!

[MAXsenna]

Im familiar with VOR/DME, m just not familiar with what the F-4E has AT ALL...its also one of the things that put me off the Tomcat of all aircraft. Pilots nowadays have it good, I recognize that...but navigating by HSI and VOR/TACAN with offsets is a survival skill and Im trying to learn the hard way!

Like I wrote. The C-101 has quite a few missions that "covers" this. If you look at the kneeboard charts, you can see what they're trying to teach. You're even supposed to do this in the included campaign IIRC. Also there's a special mission, (training?) for the EE that covers more instruments, because it's different from the EE. And, the F-5E has a training mission where you land in low visibility after taking off using TACAN. And in the user files there are a navigation mission in Nevada, using TACAN for flying between waypoints.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[IvanK]

Tacan point to point using the HSI was a bread and butter technique for most Cold war pilots... no maps involved.

[Bremspropeller]

12 hours ago, IvanK said:

Tacan point to point using the HSI was a bread and butter technique for most Cold war pilots... no maps involved.

Is there any quick way of wrapping one's mind around fix-to-fix (or point to point), or will it always require spending some time with a couple of sheets of paper and a pen to visualize several situations and coming up with a couple of rules of thumb? Fix-to-fix is pretty much black magic to me

I mean, it's all about relative bearings since you're not intercepting the radials first, but going there directly instead. Easy in the F1 with the TACAN (or waypoint) offset function, but a great deal harder in any other jet.

[ThePops]

6 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

I mean, it's all about relative bearings since you're not intercepting the radials first, but going there directly instead. Easy in the F1 with the TACAN (or waypoint) offset function, but a great deal harder in any other jet.

It's also a matter of what a "fix" really is. If it's given as lat-long coordinates as in the ME, then good luck translating that to bearing and distance vs a TACAN station without a map or some "black box magic"   In modern jets lat/long coordinates makes sense, because this is what modern not ancient avionics understand. Nevertheless lat/long is simply too abstract, cryptic and error prone also for everyday civilian use. IFR waypoints are used instead. Even for VFR (which is completely "random" flying), the best way to report your position to ATC when asked, is distance and bearing (in S, SW, W etc) relative a IFR waypoint. 

[Bremspropeller]

In this case, it's supposed to mean "radial X + DME" to "radial Y + DME" direct without intercepting the radials first.

Normally, fixes are defined by two navaids (or some ancient RNAV stuff), but this is advanced sheet