5regal

My Feedback: (1)

Thinking about getting a Tower trainer 40 arf. Anyone had any experience with or comments about this plane? Any info. appreciated.

Jim_Purcha

My Feedback: (8)

Plane flys great. No problems there. The only problem is the cheap covering. It does not stay on very well. Could be the engine oil or the windex affects it during cleanup.Get a Alpha 40 from H9, it's covered in ultracote.

Jim

noveldoc

My Feedback: (2)

If you can find a Butterfly Arising Star, get it. Similar layout to the Tower plane but flies great. Ultra easy ARF to assemble. They even grind the flat on the nose wheel wire for you. Not bad price; got my 46 size at a swap meet for $70. Covering holding up fine so far.

Tom

scooterinvegas

My Feedback: (1)

If you need everything (plane, engine, servos, Rx, controller) this a great way to get started.

http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...I=LXGHD4**&P=0

Its easier to see because of its size, and fly's GREAT! Comes out of the box 99% done. Charge the batterys, install the rear stabs, install the prop and landing gear. Thats it. Comes with a computer controller with mixing too.

3 Easy Pay payments of $126.66

Wait...... Im getting off subject. Sorry.

Tower Trainer 40 is a good plane. I would'nt get a 40 though. Get a 60.

CGRetired

My Feedback: (1)

Or an OS 55 AX.

I had the Tower trainer with their Tower 46 engine. It was a fine combination.

CGr

JPMacG

My Feedback: (2)

I learned to fly 10 years ago on a Tower Trainer 40. It is a fine trainer. I'm not sure how it has changed over the years, but mine had the following minor issues:

The fuel tank was hard mounted within the fuse, with no provision for foam padding.

The nose gear was soft and easily bent. The nose gear was also a sloppy fit in the engine mount holes, which made ground handling a bit difficult.

The covering was shelf paper, and did not hold up well (although it held up well enough for me to learn on).

All in all, I think its a good trainer - better than most others, and you can't beat the price.

jeffie8696

Mine wants to fly tail down and we cant figure it out.

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

I've trained more people on this plane than I can count. I think it's one of the best values out there for a trainer to learn to fly. For the money it's hard to beat this plane. It flies well and is very affordable.

I learned on this plane 15 years ago and I still have it (been recovered twice). I still take it out and fly it a few times every summer as it's a blast to slow down and fly the trainer from time to time.

If you don't have anything the RTF package comes with engine, plane, and radio. Unfortunately the radio is 72 mhz and not  a newer 2.4 radio, but you'll still be able to use it with no problems. One student I had we just couldn't hook up to put his plane together. So finally I had him charge his batteries the night before and bring the plane out to the field. We assembled it in 30 minutes on the tailgate of his pickup and had him flying that mornig. It's pretty easy to put together.

If you want to choose you're own engine and radio then go with the ARF version. A 46 is plenty of engine for this engine, a 55 AX will be overkill here.

You won't go wrong with this plane

Ken

thebest_102

My Feedback: (6)

I learned on this and the 60 both are great planes the 40 RTF is super simple to put together and requires only the most basic of tool.

Jeffie: I would lookat weight and balance and then look at the incidence between the tail surfaces. Maybe the Horizontal stab is off pushing the tail down?

Jim_Purcha

My Feedback: (8)

I've been flying the tower  trainer with a Super Tigre GS40. Plenty of power. Been flying pretty much in high winds all summer long. The OS 40 might be a little lighter in the nose. The new GS40 comes with a pretty big and heavy muffler.

Jim

airtime82

My Feedback: (3)

I think its funny how when you ask opinions on THIS plane people start to suggest a plane they like. Basically a trainer is a trainer, so if you like this one enough to consider buying it then get it. It flys great, has good building(assembly) instructions and is pretty darn tough. All trainers in this size/power range will get you to the same place so just buy one you like from a reputable company and you will be alright.

KitBuilder

[*]I built the kit and had to add rudder for a nice grooved turn.[*]I added a hatch on top b/c I beleive the kithad it as one unit and I justlike to have easy access to the tank area.[*]I flew mine on a .40 and it was plenty of power.[*]Other than that it was indestrucible in kit form. I'm talking cartwheels not hurting it. Not sure about the ARFs.[/list]

OzMo

My Feedback: (3)

Hi,
As an instructer I am a big fan of low cost trainers. This one included. It flys well and is easy to repair.
Most ARFs need a little reincforcement at the landing gear mount area, firewall and sometimes the area where the wing mounts.
I'd say go for it.

aerofly0610

My 2 cents... I had a tower trainer arf.  Flew well on a GMS 47, but it broke down so I put a OS 40la on it... didnt fly so well.  Put a magnum 52 4 stroke on it,,, flew awesome.  Lost the plane from a bind drop on radio.  Got a Tower Trainer 60 and put an OS 91 on it, ooo so much better than the 40 size. 

jp_boud

My Feedback: (2)

My first trainer lasted about 4 flights before I was shot down by a new radar antenna from the navy base 100 yds behind our old field, I replaced it with a tower .40. I thought it was a fine plane at a great price. Did everything I asked it to.  I'm not one to spend big time on a first trainer, that is after all the most likely plane to end up returning to earth against your will. My advice.....buy the $75 plane and the evolution trainer engine for another $80 and your set up for success. Both are from good companies with a reputation for taking care of customers and parts are available for each with it costing more than replacement.

TruBlu02

Yeah the Tower trianer is a great plane. I had mine for about three years and just used it to let my buddies fly when they came out to the field with me. There was a few covering issues but I just some strategically placed clear packing tape to seal down the problem areas. Oter than that it was a touch reliable plane that took alot of abuse with me at the controls and still looked good till I sold about a week ago. Good luck!!!

shaggy48

I have the 40 size arf and still sometimes fly it although I've done quite a few mods to it this past summer. I think it is good trainer but I've flown others I think fly better as trainers go. It is built quite strong and can withstand the abuse a total novice will dish out. I now fly mine with an OS 55ax and it flys much better. The tower trainer will work just fine.

bigedmustafa

My Feedback: (2)

The Tower Trainer 40 MkII ARF is a terrific value and it flies as nicely as any flat-bottomed wing trainer I've experienced. I often recommend the Tower Trainer MkII ARF to friends, along with the Thunder Tiger GP-42 2-stroke engine, which I believe is a perfect match for the airframe.

JollyPopper

My Feedback: (6)

I still have a Tower Trainer 60 size with a GMS .61 on it. Fine combination. It flies very well for a trainer including mild aerobatics. Like a few of the other guys, alas, the covering is crap. Mine now has more MonoKote on it than whatever the original crap was. However, the airplane flies well enough that it has earned a complete recover job in due time. If the forty flies as well as the sixty, go for it. I like the sixty size better because it is easier to see, it handles wind better, and sixty size planes are just easier to fly than forty size. IMHO

dakoris73

I have the 40 size Tower Trainer with a 52 Magnum 4 stroke on it, and I really like it. with dual rates, you can do some basic to intermediate aerobatics with this plane, although some of it does look pretty "ugly". But I like it well enough that its usually my first plane of the day each time I go out. Then of course I move on to the faster, more daring planes....... but I still come back to this trainer for some peaceful and relaxing stick time. So go for it. get this Tower trainer, and you won't be disappointed in it at all.

Dax

jeffie8696

This isnt my first trainer. The balance was checked and changed and tried to no avail. The incidence is the only thing left to change and I cant figure why it should be off in the first place. You can only install the tail and wing one way. The tail goes in the slot , it could only be off if the factory made it wrong.

Ken Kehlet

My Feedback: (89)

Hello:

I performed the Product Review on the TOWER TRAINER KIT for the December 1999 edition of RC Modeler Magazine. The complete write-up starts on page 168 RCM December 1999 issue.

I had a OS F.S. 52 Four Stroke for Power. Total weight 4 lbs, 15 oz.
18.2 Oz/Sq. Ft.

Very nice flying model. No surprises and No Bad habits, just a very nice combination with the OS F.S 52 for power.

I built this Model form the Tower Trainer Kit. Covering is Red, White & Blue MonoKote.

Merry Christmas,
Ken

Scar

My Feedback: (3)

Ken,

I agree, the Trainer 40 was a great kit. No longer available, alas.

Dave Olson

ramboy

The kit and the ARF are 2 different planes. I have both. The kit version has a larger fuselage.

thebest_102

My Feedback: (6)

I understand it goes in the slot but arf's are not always cut exactly right that is why they have those measurements you are supposed to do and why you look at the level of everything. if the level is off you should sand it to level. Almost every arf i have seen has those check and sand steps just to ensure that it all goes together correctly. If the backside of your tail is higher than the front side then that could certainly cause your model to fly funny. I would certainly look there and look at the centering of your elevator and ailerons. if these surfaces are off they could cause a tail low attitude. I am not trying to insult but you posed a question and I tried to help.