Next plane
#1
Thread Starter

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: St. Louis,
MO
I was wondering if I can get some feedback from you all with some suggestions for a good next plane. After a high wing trainer, I currently have what most call a low wing trainer: Golberg Tiger 60 (deluxe kit w/retracts) which is very nice and I'm still getting better with for the last couple of seasons.
I next went to a H9 Cessna Skylane (discontinued) which promptly went into the ground on the second flight after an unexpected snap.
The club instructor though it might have been an aileron hinge come loose, but I'm not at all sure it wasn't radio interference. I have been told that those kind of scale planes could tip stall.
So I'm looking for what you would reccomend for the next safe transition. It would be my first taildragger as the Tiger set up as tricycle.
I'm looking at possibilities such as Aero Works Edge 540 .46/.61 I have seen great reviews on this.
Or Goldberg Edge 540 67"
Or H9 Funtana X 50 I think it looks good, but have seen all kinds of negative reviews here about how it acts and having to modify the wing, etc. which is not what I want to have to do.
Any suggestions on these or others would be helpful for something that's not going to "bite" me when I least expect it!
Thanks.
I next went to a H9 Cessna Skylane (discontinued) which promptly went into the ground on the second flight after an unexpected snap.
The club instructor though it might have been an aileron hinge come loose, but I'm not at all sure it wasn't radio interference. I have been told that those kind of scale planes could tip stall.
So I'm looking for what you would reccomend for the next safe transition. It would be my first taildragger as the Tiger set up as tricycle.
I'm looking at possibilities such as Aero Works Edge 540 .46/.61 I have seen great reviews on this.
Or Goldberg Edge 540 67"
Or H9 Funtana X 50 I think it looks good, but have seen all kinds of negative reviews here about how it acts and having to modify the wing, etc. which is not what I want to have to do.
Any suggestions on these or others would be helpful for something that's not going to "bite" me when I least expect it!
Thanks.
#2
The problem with scale planes and advanced aerobatic models is they're exactly the kind of plane that is most likely to "bite you." Scale planes, whether a Super Decathalon, a Spitfire, or a CAP 232, will need to be flown in.
Your Golberg Tiger .60 is a wonderful aircraft, and a good platform for learning aerobatics, but it lands as easily as any high wing trainer. You can simply cut the power and float down to the deck for a picture-perfect landing. The advanced planes that you want to fly don't land this way.
My advice would be for you to buy a pattern ARF. Like your Tiger .60, pattern planes are very stable and track straight and true while being capable of a wide array of aerobatic manuevers. Most pattern planes won't typically tip stall, or drop a wing if they're slowed down too much, like your Tiger .60. The big difference is they have to be landed faster than a trainer or sport plane. You can't just chop the throttle and float down, pattern planes are like scale aerobats and warbirds in that they need to be "greased in" a bit to be landed smoothly.
An airframe like the Great Planes Venus .40 or Venus II or one of the Groovy/Aeropet airframes from World Models would be a great, reasonably priced airframe for you to learn 1/4 throttle landings and to practice your aerobatics for when you finally have your Edge 540 or Giles 202 scale aerobatic ARF.
Your Golberg Tiger .60 is a wonderful aircraft, and a good platform for learning aerobatics, but it lands as easily as any high wing trainer. You can simply cut the power and float down to the deck for a picture-perfect landing. The advanced planes that you want to fly don't land this way.
My advice would be for you to buy a pattern ARF. Like your Tiger .60, pattern planes are very stable and track straight and true while being capable of a wide array of aerobatic manuevers. Most pattern planes won't typically tip stall, or drop a wing if they're slowed down too much, like your Tiger .60. The big difference is they have to be landed faster than a trainer or sport plane. You can't just chop the throttle and float down, pattern planes are like scale aerobats and warbirds in that they need to be "greased in" a bit to be landed smoothly.
An airframe like the Great Planes Venus .40 or Venus II or one of the Groovy/Aeropet airframes from World Models would be a great, reasonably priced airframe for you to learn 1/4 throttle landings and to practice your aerobatics for when you finally have your Edge 540 or Giles 202 scale aerobatic ARF.
#3
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Portland, OR
I'd get a Funtanna 90, put at least a 100 four stroke in it and have some fun. It's a great flyer, lands slow and easy and can make you look like an expert. Built stock it needs a lot of weight in the nose, Balance it well forward of the suggested CG point. My first one I had to add 11 ozs. of lead to the nose. Second one I mounted the rudder on a pull pull and both evervator servos, with carbon fibre pushrods, 2/3's of the way back in the radio compartment. Balance was perfect and plane flew great and still is after 2 years of pretty hard use. You won't beleive how gentle it is landing and how well it performs.
#5
Senior Member
It depends what you want to do ... 3D? Scale flying? or just messing about. For me you can try the Black Horse Extra 300 60 if you want a bigger plane that flies nice but does not cost much, don't expect her to really do any 3D. The Fliton Extra 330 is superb if you match it with a SA82 and awesome with a SA100. The Pacific Aeromodels Edge 540 (90) is a nice plane to fly and their Laser 200 (72") is one of my favourites. Let's not forget the WM Super Chipmunk 90 for a little nostalgia, that is a very nice aerobatic plane to fly. It feels really solid.
Question is what do you really want out of the new plane?
Question is what do you really want out of the new plane?
#6
ORIGINAL: bgold
I'd get a Funtanna 90, put at least a 100 four stroke in it and have some fun. It's a great flyer, lands slow and easy and can make you look like an expert. Built stock it needs a lot of weight in the nose, Balance it well forward of the suggested CG point. My first one I had to add 11 ozs. of lead to the nose. Second one I mounted the rudder on a pull pull and both evervator servos, with carbon fibre pushrods, 2/3's of the way back in the radio compartment. Balance was perfect and plane flew great and still is after 2 years of pretty hard use. You won't beleive how gentle it is landing and how well it performs.
I'd get a Funtanna 90, put at least a 100 four stroke in it and have some fun. It's a great flyer, lands slow and easy and can make you look like an expert. Built stock it needs a lot of weight in the nose, Balance it well forward of the suggested CG point. My first one I had to add 11 ozs. of lead to the nose. Second one I mounted the rudder on a pull pull and both evervator servos, with carbon fibre pushrods, 2/3's of the way back in the radio compartment. Balance was perfect and plane flew great and still is after 2 years of pretty hard use. You won't beleive how gentle it is landing and how well it performs.
One problem though... It's discontinued and has been unavailable for months.
An alternative would be the Funtana 100X.
#7
Thread Starter

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: St. Louis,
MO
Thank you for all of the suggestions so far.
As to what I want the plane to do; I suppose it would be a bit more aerobatic than the the Tiger, to be on the way to scale, but not too crazy.
Would the Sig 40* 60 or Somethn' Extra be the kind of airframe bigedmustafa is referring to, or would they be about the same as the Tiger? It seems the Sigs have a thicker and slightly different wing configuration as opposed to the Tiger, although both websites say they symetrical.
Thanks for any other recommendations!
As to what I want the plane to do; I suppose it would be a bit more aerobatic than the the Tiger, to be on the way to scale, but not too crazy.
Would the Sig 40* 60 or Somethn' Extra be the kind of airframe bigedmustafa is referring to, or would they be about the same as the Tiger? It seems the Sigs have a thicker and slightly different wing configuration as opposed to the Tiger, although both websites say they symetrical.
Thanks for any other recommendations!




