Not all low-wing "trainers" are the most forgiving. They are heavier than the Stryker, for one thing. And they are also more likely to stall. I built a kit last year, and it will snap, roll, and loop a lot quicker than the .40 sized Citabria I recently started flying. The Rapture 40's higher stall speed reduces the amount of time I have to set up for landing should the engine quit. The Citabria has a wider fuselage, less wing area, and slightly thinner airfoil. Yet, it will still glide like a sailplane (in my opinion) under the same circumstance. I credit this to the added stability of the high wing and lighter weight, even though there is more drag. Neither of these planes are trainers, and the Citabria is in fact a standoff sport-scale model. In spite of what I know, I still have a healthy dose of respect for the Sundowner, to the point where I would be afraid to fly it.

The Sundowner is very slippery; as it's designed for speed. The wing is thin and tapered with a narrow cord. Pylon racers use a similar setup: Thin wing, slippery aerodynamics, and high pitched props with powerful engines. They go fast, and do not take well to slowing down. Over the last year, there have been at least two threads on this forum with the authors pleading for the less experienced pilots to stay away from this model, after many of them have experienced what it does: Cruise at a high rate of speed with little margin for error. We have a highly experienced jet jock at our field who has been in this hobby for over 20 years and is a full-scale pilot. His Sundowner just fell from the sky and spun in when the engine died; he couldn't maintain enough airspeed when trying to make a turn. Sundowners have a well deserved reputation.

NorfolkSouthern