I started the thread asking about using the Ultra Stick as a Trainers. One reason I think now think the Stick would be a good trainer is.

1) On windy days you can still fly it.
On windy days the trainer I use is bounded around and is very hard to land It wants to keep floating. So it would seem that you would have more days to train on. I am in Texas and there have been times that it was just to windy for my trainer to fly.

2) A good point was made that the reason trainers were made is that they are easy to mass produce Flat bottom and Flat wing....

3) Money wise it would seem that The Ultra stick is better. If you are able to use it as your 1st and second plane then you will have more money for other things. As most people say after you learn to fly you w ill get bore with that trainer plane. While on a stick you can set the trown and i can grown with you.

4) It would see if you can get your hands on a Good simulator then a stick and a buddy box might be the way to go.

** The one negative I see with the stick is that you will have to use the buddy box a little longer and and if your are older it might be a little harder to see and harder to fly. A nice big trainer is very easy to see.

The debate continues ????? There shoudn't be no debate.

A basic flat bottom wing is generally more gentle on landings.
Depending on the person's learning curve and abilities , a plane to learn with can be several different types of planes.. A basic trainer is not the olny plane to start with although it is a good idea for people starting out. It gives you more time for error recovery because of it's lift and slower flying characteristics.. A fully symmetrical airfoil tends to fly faster with the same engine and prop as the flat bottom.. Less time for error recovery.

I have trained a couple of people with an extra 300s! no joke
As long as the throws are set down and the cg is right on.. Not everbody is like that. You can tell right away if somebody will learn fast or struggle for years.

If you are confused as to which to choose then i would suggest a basic trainer.. They do bounce around in the wind but that will only make you a better pilot..

I starting off on a sport trainer (flat bottom wing no dihedral)..
After 1 day i had already landed on my own. And that was it. Just kept practising every day no matter what the wind was, mind you I had a friend wth me that was experienced.

Untill you can land and takeoff and do 100's of tounch and go's then get a sport, aerobatic plane..

Think about it for a moment, RVD. If the symmetrical and flat bottom airfoil wings are the same in area, how can the symmetrical wing be faster? It's twice as thick!

While a flat bottom airfoil will fly a tad slower, it will now fly as well as a symmetrical airfoil at high angles of attack. The stall break comes much sooner and abrupt with a flat bottom airfoil.

Yes, there are people that truly need flat bottom airfoil trainers. They are few and far in between, however. Most newbies, especially the youngsters, can start with a fully symmetrical airfoil equipped trainer and never look back. They become better pilots because they actually learned how to fly.

I realize that others have different opinions and do not feel threatened if they disagree. That's what makes dialogue fun.

Ed Cragger
"Think about it for a moment, RVD. If the symmetrical and flat bottom airfoil wings are the same in area, how can the symmetrical wing be faster? It's twice as thick! "


I was not going to reply to your post because i am sick of debating these things with people.. I have gone through this time and time again. If you would have read my post and understood it correctly you would have seen what I meant about comparing speeds with a flat bottom and symmetrical aitfoil..



"A fully symmetrical airfoil tends to fly faster with the same engine and prop as the flat bottom.. Less time for error recovery."

I did not once quote a stick's fully symmetrical airfoil. I was stating a symmetrical airfoil in general. Most newbies even youngsters do not learn that quick. There are more people that struggle than there is people that catch on right away.. This is coming from experience. I have trained LOTS of people. Depending on what you consider good flying. There are people that can just get by flying a basic sport plane with a symmetrical wing like a ultra stick. Does that make them good ? Does that mean they are ready for a cap? ya right..
I had kids that wanted to learn to fly so their parents bought them a 40size cap232 or an extra300 arf because they did not consult with me first before going to a hobby shop. The did not learn so quickly with these planes. They struggled to fly a basic circuit.

anyways people have their opinions, this is mine and most experienced pilots would agree.

I can't speak for everyone, but my first plane was an Avistar, my second was a .40 ultra stick, and the first time I flew the ultra stick, I thought "This thing's much easier to fly!! The ultra stick will land just as slow if not slower than many trainers, and it's even a kitten to fly/land with a nasty crosswind,although zero dihedral is a little harder to learn. In a nutshell, I think the ultrastick makes a great trainer with a future too.


Just my 2 cents

JJ

JJ,

Ditto, I also learnt on an avistar, tad bit of dihedral with a simi-symmetrical wing it also teaches entry level acrobatics unlike your basic trainer. Given it is tamer in the air then a stik but offers more then a basic trainer. My second plane was the WM SS 60 which comes with a 64" fuse and an 80" fully symmetrical wing with Hugh wing loading, I call it my kite. The SS 60 was actually easier to fly then my avistar and would make an exultant trainer as it is so slow and very docile in the air.

Randy

Easy solution: Hobbico Avistar

High mounted semi-symetrical wing with almost no didhedral. I think this is the perfect trainer. It can do everything well and has no problems whatsoever in the wind. Once you get comfortable with it and start playing with the throws it becomes a wild little sport plane.

I have mastered my trainer and now have an ultra stick 40. In no way is that a trainer. I had a sensitive trainer, and this thing will roll with a tap of the stick, Also, trainers tend to survive crashes, rough landings and the general abuse they get from first time fliers. While the plane isn't weak it cannot compair to a sturdy bird or duraplane (what i learned on, and it taught me well, and the crashes i gave it would have destroyed any other plane and ended my modelling fun.) I don't care what other people say about those trainers there great. The ultra stick is a great second plane once you can do basic aerobatics and have had at least 20 flights without incident with your trainer, your good to go. But once you can fly, Ultra stick rules.

The Sturdy Birdy and Dura Stick are two of the saddest flying models ever made. Anyone that can fly one of those things would have absolutely no trouble flying an Ultra Stick in any size.

If your model is too sensitive, any model, you're using too much control throw. Surely, you know what to do about that.

Time and time again it has been proven that someone, somewhere will be able to learn on just about any kind of model. I just think that most people are wasting their money by buying one of those god-awful ARF trainers with the customary plain bearing .40 engine. Neither are good for anything except making profit for those that sell them.

I've said my piece. See you around the forums.

Been flyin' r/c for just over 30 years....I cannot understand why on earth model manuf. expect an new flyer to try and learn the ropes...with an "ill flying, under-powered .40 sized, flat bottom wing, piece of junk...so-called Trainer". I think it has more to do with "training " a new customer in the art of buying....nose-blocks, landing gear, props, spinners, ect.

And why has the market started pushing the .40 size stuff so much...over the last several years ?

"Most" .40 size trainers...fly like poop. The little .40 barely drags the thing into the air in the first place....then the thing sinks like a rock when you bank it....and goes balistic when you turn up-wind ! The new flyer is having enough trouble trying to figure out "left from right", and has this $300. piece of junk...diving, and zooming all over the sky !

Then, eventually comes the "slow, stable" landing. ( yeah, right ) If the little beauty isn't totally greased-in...it bounces about 10 feet in the air...off the wire landing gear, stalls...and lands in about 3 feet. Let's see...epoxy, block, spinner, prop...under $20., no problem.

A friend of mine got into r/c this year...bought a guy "out" for cheaps...4 planes, 3 radios....comes out to the field with a "Dura-Plunker" Trainer, K&B .40, says...the guy couldn't get it off the ground ! When I picked it up to check the C/G I could see why....the thing felt like it weighed 10 lbs, and was way too nose heavy. So anyway we slid the wing forward, and peaked the motor to max, and after about a 20 second run-out, I gave her full-up.
The contraption actually rose into the air. It flew kinda' like a Briggs & Stratton....with a 2X6 strapped to the top of it. I couldn't believe that these "things" were actually purchased by Humans....with "Dreams of Flight".

And..."they"...expected a Newbie to learn how to fly...with this junk ! I could barely keep it off the ground...

Bottom line....if I had to teach "myself" how to fly a plane from scratch...I'd get myself an .60 size Ultra Stick...and a new series .90 Magnum engine...(cheap, good power)...straight ailerons. (no flaps), and tri-cycle gear...

Reasons...
1. BIG...flys better, easier to see...
2. Actually flies...no diving, no zooming...
3. Takes off and lands better than any "trainer"
4. "flat-bottoms" work good on surf-boards

So,...that's my 2 cents worth...

Dave.

FYI: I learned how to fly in a Super Stick 40 w/OS 46 ...

Before learning how to fly planes, I had been flying helis for a while and only ~15 hrs on the sim time where enough to put me though my 1st solo flight w/o trainer cord without "accidents" .... this was on my first plane flight ever.

Again, the above was ME ... as I have also witnessed several pilots who have been flying planes long before me and still can't even do inverted circuits (about 2 or 3 years ago)

I have an Ultra Stick 40 among my fleet and I must agree it flies better than any other trainer and can become wild upon instruction ! I taught my wife how to fly with this plane (and with an Avistar which she dumped as soon as he got a hand in my US) and the ONLY problem I see with it is that to enjoy its full potential one MUST invest more money than what the standard trainer would cost ... it would be absurd if someone flew a US with a cheap 4 ch radio

Either way, I believe its a very subjective issue and should be left to each individual to decide.

Ed Cregger, "most people" well yes that is true, but actually I can think of a couple of things aside just selling them off. They can be used as a float plane or perhaps for club fun fly events.

Who wants to take their prized plane and slam it down on the runway trying to be the first person on the ground and back up in the air again during the Musical chairs event? or fly it under a piece of paper tape stretched across the runway getting it as close the the ground as possible without touching the ground, tape or shredding a wing off from hitting one of the poles during the limbo event? or even getting it as high as you can in 30 seconds dead sticking it for the time and glide event.

Not all trainers are the perfect plane for these events but at least you can have fun trying without the worry's of destroying one of your most prized planes, not to mention learning how to fly off of water.

Randy

Don't judge a Stik that is owned by a veteran pilot. Those Stiks are probably overpowered and have high throw rates. That Stik would not be a good trainer.

But a Stik with the recommended engine and low rates will make a very good trainer. It would rarely be bothered by wind in the air and on the ground that would normally prevent a flat bottom trainer from flying. With its large "Hershey Bar" wing it will fly at a snails pace. I learned 13 years ago on a GP Big Stik 60 with trcycle gear and I still fly a Stik.

What type of plane to use as a "trainer" is nowhere near as important as getting one with a very light wing loading (i.e. <14 Oz/sq.ft.). The rank beginner needs a plane that can fly slower than the speed of thought - until the hand-eye-brain reflexes are trained sufficiently to take over.

I agree that the SuperStars and Avistars (typically 18+ Oz/sq.ft.)make poor primary trainers in that newbies have next to no chance in hell of flying one without an instructor on a buddy box. For that, you'd need a Kadet Senior or a sailplane, something with <12 Oz/sq.ft. wing loading, that flies slower than a student can self-correct a mistake. And if you are learning with an instructor anyway, skip that SuperStar and get a high-wing sport plane. Just be sure it still has very light wing loading. It doesn't have to be a Stik, but many Stiks fit the category quite well.

Mind you not all Stiks are a like. I personally much prefer the World Models Super Stunt 40 and 60. These planes have some of the lightest wing loading of any Stik-type aircraft (14 and 12 Oz/sq.ft., respectively). Plus they are BIGGER than most 40- and 60-size planes, which is important for a newbie. It doesn't matter how well the plane flies, if the newbie can't read what it's doing, he can't control it. Even more importantly, he can't learn how the plane responds to control inputs.

Although it's a lot of money... I wouldn't even be afraid of someone learning on H9's US120 (discontinued ). I'd put weed-whacker power on it (G23) and call it a day.

If you don't need something that big, try the US60. It's bigger than the PT-40 I have and I'm now finding it much easier to fly. I move the sticks, it moves. It goes where you point it. If that's straight down, well... I guess that's the learning curve kicking in

Maybe the reason my US-60's quicker than my trainer is because I power it with a .65 running 15% whereas my trainer is powered by 5% and has a bushing .46 on it. I also have a bigger diameter / lower pitch prop than recommended on my trainer. Only by 1 inch each way. (11x5 instead of 10x6). The US60 weighs the same as my PT40 if I take the muffler off the engine.

I recommend the stick... I just love mine. I don't know yet myself if I'll be the quick learner or the years-long struggler but I'm flying my stick just the same. Eventually the trainer may be equipped with floats (an EXCELLENT use for a trainer) to help me learn to fly a kit I'm working on. I need to learn to fly off the water, and those specifics so I can get my 110mph northstar going.

I can train anybody to fly using any plane!

That being said, let's qualify the statement. It's going to take somene a hell of a lot longer to learn on a P-51 than a SIG Kadet. But that doesn't mean you can't use a P-51 as a trainer. You want a trainer to have certain attributes that makes the learning process easier and more forgiving of mistakes that newbies make.

Self-righting or positive stability is one of the most desired traits of a trainer followed closely by a light wing loading (not too light though; 14-15oz/sq ft is a good starting point). The trainer should have tricycle gear for good ground tracking on takeoff and landing rollout. And it should have a reliable motor that transitions well from idle to full throttle and doesn't flame out.

I see no problem using a stick as a trainer. If that's what you have then I say go for it. There's no need to spend extra money on a dedicated trainer. I flown many a sitck in my years and have trained a few pilots with them and have had great success. they have a wide speed range and have either nuetral or some positive stability. As long as you set the control throws accordingly they are fine trainers. Plus their wing loadings are relatively light. It takes a bit longer to solo someone with them but that's not really a big issue. A few extra times with the buddy box isn't a factor.

And let's not forget the student's aptitude for R/C. I've seen some guys that couldn't fly worth a damn even if the plane had a FMS Co-pilot installed. Then I've trained guys that could solo after the 2nd or 3rd time out. The individual themself is what determines the rate of progress for a student to progress.

So take that stick, grab a student and go fly.

Jeff