LT-40 !!!!

I learned on the Debonair. I love this plane, it's a S.P.A.D.

I love my Xtra Easy. I've used it as a trainer, a "bomber" with a dropbox, a floatplane this summer with US Aircore floats, and i use it as an instructor plane when new guys come down to the field and find out that they have to do things to thier airplanes before they can fly.

i was thinking about getting a thunder tiger trainer 60 ARF, I am a newbie to planes and I just wondered if anyone has had anything good/bad to say about it. I have r/c nitro trucks and such for several yrs now, so i am not totally new to nitro. Any help would be greatly appreciated

Of the various trainers that my students have shown up with, I happen to prefer the Alpha. Though as others have said, there isn't all that much of a difference among most of them.

lt40

Ive think ive decided on a trainer but would like more input. The Hobbico mkIII arf 60. I know lots of ppl go with the smaller plane, but I wanted something I could use a bigger motor in, (for future use) so I could use it in a war-bird. Am I making a good choice?? (I plan on getting a .61 2 stroke, and a 6 channel radio) I know all of you have different opinions on this so plz shout them my way. If u think its too big, am I taking on too much, etc, etc, etc. Thanks

My favorite is the balsa USA stick .40 I learned to fly with one, and have taught others as well. I think there are a lot of good trainers out there and there is no one plane that is the best . the old-timers I grew up with Had a different choice of trainers than is out there now. years back
arfs were unheard of. Sig, Goldberg,sterling, balsa USA, and many others made good kits for trainers. A lot of which I have flown. I have also recently purchased a falcon already built and it was a very crappy job of building can't even say I had one good flight. The end came when the firewall tore loose when I was ready to take off. the moral is, even with this type trainer model. this plane would not have been good for anyone. but the falcon IS a very stable plane when built and setup correctly

This is a little different from the others: Sig R/C Rascal with a Norvel .061.

Advantages: low-cost, fast building and simple to fly. My 8 and 10 year-old daughters have flown mine.

I think a lot of beginners get discouraged by powerful, fast aircraft.

Just my two bits.

offroadnut:

I think your choice of a 60 size trainer is a good one. For one thing, being a larger airplane, it will be easier to see when your instructor (you are planning on finding one, right?) takes it 2 or 3 "mistakes high". They also tend to fly a bit steadier than the smaller ones.

You already pointed out the other plus of being able to move the .61 and radio gear to a warbird. Although most of us wind up buying another engine anyway.

Hope I was of some help.

Phil in MN

I believe that the Hobbistar 60 MK III would be a good trainer to start with, the larger size will be easier to see and should even handle the wind a little bit better. Is there a particular reason why you are going with a 6 channel radio? After I bought my H9 Alpha and I new that I was going to be in this hobby for quite a while I went and purchased JR 8103 Promo. This Promo was an 8 channel radio, R700FM receiver, (4ea) DS811 servos, 4.8v 600Mah battery all of this for only 379.00 (I believe, if memory is correct) I know that is a little bit more than a 6 channel but I will not need another radio for several years to come. so it might be worth your $$ to go ahead and get the larger radio.

thunder tiger mk2 - took a lot of us onto rc big time!!!

I agree - it comes to personal choice. My was - Hobbistar MK III, with OS Max .61 FX. It's a blast!

Ha, I use that term too.

Now its back to using Puttycat and talking like a three year old.

Had the Tower Trainer, built like a brick phithouse but flew like a puttycat.

I voted Others. I like the Sig Kadet LT-40. It flies well and is stable in the air.

Made a Carl Goldberg Eagle II and when I crashed that I bought a Kyosho Trainer 40 ARF in order to get airborn with no delay while repairing the Eagle II. Both fly pretty much the same and I like them both.


Best regards
RCfun

I don’t think you are making a mistake by thinking bigger plane (or, let’s put it this way – I made the same “mistake” and do not regret it ) here is why. Bigger plane (and bigger engine – by the way spend little more and make sure you go with a ball bearing one) equals more control (especially here in the “windy city”). Larger wings (in case of my HobbiStar 71”) means better control at lower speed (remember – you need to learn approaches and landings!!! ). And last but lot least – better visibility.

Finally on the radio – without a doubt go with 6 channel one. Again little more money, but much bigger “bang for a buck”.

Good Flying!

thanks all for the input, my hobbico hobbistar mkIII will be here sat. , looking into motors and radios now, and yes looking for a good instructor pilot. That will be a hard choice since my buddy just got into planes and crashed 2 in 3 weeks, hooked up to a buddy box. I dont think i will use him, hehe

If your budget allows I would suggest - gou out and buy a simulation software (I have RC RealFlight 2 - Light from Great Planes). It will NOT be a replacement for a good instructor - good instructor IS a great help, but will allow you to "get in the air" cheaply (when I started using it I "crashed" number of planes on my very first day ), but I was back "flying" in seconds!!! Plus, it [RealFlight simulator] has a "virtual instructor" too. Thus, in my opinion - about $100 for a good simulator is money VERY WELL spend.

Good flying!

whaaaaaaaaat? u mean in america RF G2 Lite costs $100???
DAMN IT COSTS $250 here!!!

Well, that settles it then. Time to pack them bags and move to America...

I learned to fly on a Hobbico Superstar .40. It has lasted many years and through all of the planes I've built I still like to fly it.

i had an eaglet 50 was a little small and a little fast for a trainer but it was a good 3rd plane too i think the bottom line is that we all still love our first. so far as a .60 plane goes the only down side i see with it is that the 40s are the most popular size for planes the engines tend to be cheaper but not always i know. but there does seem to be a wider variety of planes out there for a 40. however if you already have plans and know what your looking to move up to then there is nothing in the world wrong with a 60

nah... i won't move to america.. yet
I'm too young
ill just use my moms credit card
YEAH

I like the mkIII which is the same thing as the mkII only slightly different. I built that plane in about two and a half days put on a .91 magnum four stroke!! that thing should do a lot of aerobatics maybe even a harrier? what do you think?