What makes the Best Trainer.

A while back I was helping another new student, Grant. He has a PT60 with a OS FP60 and a Focus 4 four channel radio. He got everything as a package. Teaching him to fly with this plane is almost impossible. The engine is great, the plane takes off and lands ok, but it is a pig in the air and difficult to fly. He built it according to the instructions with an obscene amount of dihedral. We were flying in a moderately stiff breeze, 12-15mph. The plane had slightly more throws than recommended. Turning down wind tool a little aileron and let go of the sticks and it completed the turn and headed down wind on it’s own. Turning up wind was almost impossible without coordinated use of aileron, rudder, and elevator. Flying it seems more like fighting the plane to get it where we want it than having it fly where we tell it. It does not respond to control inputs in a uniform manner. It is difficult to teach a skill when identical actions get different responses. I will again start a thread on what makes a good trainer.

The current dogma says to learn to fly RC model airplanes the best way to start is with a “Trainer” that has a high flat bottom wing with generous dihedral so it self corrects. I believe this is wrong! I believe the following are the best characteristics for a trainer.

1. Flies Slow (light wing loading)
2. Flies Very Stable
3. Responds to controls in a uniform fashion (Does What it’s told When it’s told the same way every time)
4. Inexpensive and easy to repair

Take note, nowhere in that list do I list the type of plane, high wing, low wing, mid, wing shoulder wing, doesn’t make that big a difference as long as it is slow stable responds to it’s controls uniformly. It is an easy task to limit the amount of control to get the control rate at an acceptable level for a beginner.

Nowhere in the list is the term “Self Correcting”. Planes designed to self-correct are harder to fly. If you try to allow them to self correct they will crash long before finish correcting themselves or you fly them so high you can’t tell what the plane is doing. “Self Correcting” also means that you will have to fight the plane to turn up wind, fight the plane to turn it in general. We are teaching people to fly R/C models not guide free flight models. The early days of RC we used modified free flight models. Current Trainers reflect our free flight heritage.

My experience has shown that people who learn with typical Trainers all learn in about the same amount of time as somebody who learns with a “Sport” plane. I know a lot of people have successfully learned to fly with Eagle II’s and the like but from what I’ve seen the people who learn with a “Trainer” crash more after they solo, especially when they go to something sportier. After learning with a “Trainer” they pretty much have to re-learn to fly anything else. People who learn with a “Sport” plane learn to fly just as fast, crash less after they solo, and can fly a larger variety of aircraft sooner.

Planes I think make good trainers and that I have successfully taught people to fly with:
1. Four Star 40 (probably the best trainer ever!!!)
2. American Flyer (ARF)
3. Ugly Stick (any of several variations)
4. Easy Sport 40
5. Airmidillo Trainer
6. Sig LT25 (very slow, very responsive, way better flier than LT40)
7. Thundar Tiger Wold Trainer 40H (semi-symmetrical high-wing low-dihedral ARF – This one looks like a typical “Trainer” but flies like a typical “Sport” model)

All these planes are very stable, don’t tip stall, can fly very slowly, respond uniformly to controls, and have fairly light wing loading. These characteristics make better trainers than typical Trainers. Now all we have to do is get instructors to take a critical look at Trainers. I don’t buy arguments like: “The XYZ trainer has worked great to train zillions of students for years”, or “I learned on a SR. Kadet, so that’s the best trainer”. Doctors used to bleed people that didn’t make it right. With the absolutely dependable radios of today, and buddy cords, we don’t need to learn with glorified free flight models.

Tom Rhodes