quote:

ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

quote:

ORIGINAL: GerKonig

This is a good second plane.... Easy to see. With over 40 years in the hobby it is NOT my second plane:-) But with a 1.6 electric, it is a warranty of insane fun....


Gerry

Other than being larger it won't fly much different than his Falcon 56 which is his first plane.  His first plane was a good second plane, so he wants a third plane for his second plane.  LOL

quote:

He he, I beg to differ on saying that the falcon 56 flies like a stick (doubt it much)....

quote:

But the truth is that the second plane takes a lot of beating (more than the first, more than the third).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

quote:

He he, I beg to differ on saying that the falcon 56 flies like a stick (doubt it much)....

They are both sholder wing sport planes they fly similer enough.

quote:

But the truth is that the second plane takes a lot of beating (more than the first, more than the third).

Then I would think a $200+ pattern plane would make a better second plane than a $400+ gasser.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ge`rKonig

This is a good second plane.... Easy to see. With over 40 years in the hobby it is NOT my second plane:-) But with a 1.6 electric, it is a warranty of insane fun....


Gerry

Other than being larger it won't fly much different than his Falcon 56 which is his first plane.  His first plane was a good second plane, so he wants a third plane for his second plane.  LOL

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirt_hawg

The bigger the better for a first second or third plane..My Extreme flight Yak 54 50cc plane is the easiest plane ive ever flown..And it will do it all!..But it will set you back 2500$ or better...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deandome

It's a Sr. Falcon...I originally wanted a 56, but had to 'settle' for the Sr. when I couldn't find either one 'til a guy @ another forum PMed me with a nice offer on a NIB ARF! Otherwise, you're dead right; I wanted to (and did...successfully so far) start with a relatively tame intermediate plane & now want to move to a low-wing plane that's 'more' than a typical low-wing trainer.

Which brings me back 'round to a question I hinted at in my first post, before keying on the pattern planes I've always liked. I actually OWN a http://www.seagullmodels.com/ProductDetail.asp?id=60 1.6-2.0...the 71'' wingspan version. I got it for only $125 (half-off), and was thinking of going with a 30-35cc gasser. It's wing is about 945 sq.in, and it will weigh about 12 lbs when ready for flight.

Will THAT be any good at all as my next plane, or are is it that much trickier/more finicky/faster-landing than the one's we've been discussing here? I mean, it LOOKS like a pretty basic low-wing plane, so why would it be that much 'worse' than the other planes?

BTW, thanks to all of you for your replies. I've gotten more out of you talking amongst yourselves than I did w/the posts that directly address me! At this point, my first choice would be if a Goldberg Skylark 70 fell into my lap (hint-hint), but in the real world, I really like that Intruder 90 a lot, and the Pulses (but I was a little off-put by the talk about their delicate nature), the four-star (though it might be that basic trainer I was trying to avoid) and the Dirty Birdy


I think it will depend a lot of you. Different people have different "inherent" skills. Example: at 9, my grandson, when introduced to the flight simulator went for the sukoi, and in 2 hours he was all over the place even landing in high rates... If he would have any interest in real RC models he would learn fast... Maybe it is your case too.

I would read some articles about the sparrow. I think Mr. Petit wrote one. See what they comment about that particular model. Good luck! I am sure the newer (not the old) pattern models must be better as a second model than the old ones. At least the ones I saw (many, many years back) flew and landed quite too fast as a second model. But, again, the newer models must be a lot better than the ones I remember.

Good luck! I like a lot bigger models, I think they fly better. My 2 cents:-)

Gerry

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Deandome)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deandome

Haven't checked in in a while...I've soloed my Sr. Falcon & flying almost every weekend. I actually bought a second plane already...chronologically, at least...my local HobbyTown had an 81'' Miles Sparrowhawk marked @ 1/2 off, and I'm a sucker for vintage looks (i.e., Sr. Falcon).

But although the Sparrowhawk looks to me like a basic low-wing plane, I've been told that it flies more like a warbird & wouldn't make a great low-wing trainer. No biggie, I'll get to it whenever. But now I'm thinking about what WOULD make for a good trainer, but in the same vein as my Falcon is/was; something that might be a LITTLE more challenging than a basic trainer, but would make for a great plane I'll fly for a long time. Once again, I want an ARF, not a kit.

I seem to be drawn to 60s-70s vintage 'pattern' planes, probby because that's what I was seeing when I was growing up, but also because I just like the look. They sure LOOK like they'd make for good low-wing trainers, but I thought I'd ask. And maybe different ones are better/worse than others. I'm talking low wing ones ...I guess I technically have a pattern plane in my Falcon (but was the Sr. 'legal'?).

I like:

Kaos but I'd like to get something more .50-60 size (if not bigger).
Dirty Birdy Maybe my fave, but I've been told it might be a bit 'hot' for a 2nd plane (then again, I've learned about this thing called a 'throttle'....)
Kwik Fly Mk3 pretty nice, a bit pricey, but not too common, which I like

Any other ARF pattern-ers out there (the bigger the better)? Also, it's not pattern, but I really like Space Walkers, and Kyosho has one coming out out that they claim IS good as a 2nd plane (maybe a bit different than the Seagull ones). Is tricycle gear really important here? I mean, you gotta learn how to fly tail-draggers SOMETIME, don't you?

OH, don't worry, the Sig four-star (60 and 120) and Super Sportster/Giant Super Sportster are also on my radar; I KNOW they'll come up as recommendations, and I do like them...but the Four-Star ARFs look to be impossible to find now.

Thanks for your input!

quote:

ORIGINAL: acdii

I just compared the Dirty Birdy 60 to the Killer Chaos 60.  The wing area on the  DB60 is 688 sqi, and on the KC60 its 700 sqi.  The weight of the DB 60 is 7.75 lbs, the KC60 is 6.5 lbs.   Does that mean the KC has better wing loading?   It is also a shorter wing. 

I'm about to order one, but unsure which one still. Leaning a lot towards the KC60 because it can take retracts.  Landing characteristics, does the larger wing area have anything to do with landing speed?  The description on the DB60 says it can slow down for landings. 

While landing speed is not an issue for me, length of runway, is.  If I can get it down on the numbers, plenty of room to slow down, but if it dead sticks, I dont want it to fall out of the sky before I get over the corn.