So,I have the hawk sky brushless trainer and have been doing well with it (other than landings, still working on smooth one's). Ican fly it with really no problems and it's quite fun. I have done loops, dives and such but as Icontinue to practice with the plane Iwas wondering what is a good SECOND plane. I eventually want to end up with an A-10 warthog, F4U corsair and finally an SR-71 Blackbird.

Thoughts, suggestions? Oh BTW electric only please.

If you have someone to help you out, the Parkzone Corsiar could be a good 2nd plane. You'd probably want someone buddy boxing with you, but it would get your corsair fix. It is a great flyer with no bad habits.

Ooooo, that's a good looking plane [8D] but couldn't you use two dx6i, for example, with a buddy and the corsair like say the one from nitroplanes?<div>I only mention that because I am looking into the dx7s or dx6i soon and will only be after plug and play or kit models after that.
<div>
</div><div>Glad to hear they are a good flyer. </div></div>

Anything but a Sig 4*.

Why?

Any of the planes you see flying can be electric powered. I fly with a number of people that have made the switch. Space Walkers, Sticks, 4*s, trainers and a number of pattern planes. Electric is just another power source, the plane choice is up to you.

Why? x2

Heck, the Sig Four Star is a great second plane. My second was a Tiger 60 and shortly after that, I bought and flew the Four Star with an OS 50 SX. It was a great plane. With dual rate and some expo, it was either as easy going as a low wing trainer, but with high rates, well, it would do some pretty radical maneuvers for what it was. I sold tht plane, and am sorry I did. It was a fun flyer.

CGr.

If you like the park flyers, the Mini Ultra Stick from e-flite is a great performer. The aerodynamics are very forgiving of pilot error (no tip stalls) but it is much more maneuverable than the plane you are used to. I'd at least suggest getting a more experienced pilot to do the maiden for you and set up the throws to be docile. You'll find with it though that general flying and especially landing is much easier with it than on your trainer.

That makes sense and it looks good but how does the balsa hold up with reguards to potential crashes or rough landings? Ilike the more advanced maneuverability.

You know, there is one big advantage to owning a good Flight Simulator in that it gives you a lot of choices to fly, especially when trying to determine if something is within your capabilities or not. RF 5.5 I believe is the most recent version of Real Flight, has many electrics in the model selection, and all the older ones in their previous versions are available for free download and use within RF 5.5.

When we offer suggestions about various aircraft, often times that is offered based on our experiences. Not knowing your capabilities, well, that can fall flat if you are not up to it for the model that you may get based on these recommendations.

Not all aircraft are included in RF 5.5, but a good number are, and you get to see what they look like, and get to fly them the way they are set up for use within RF 5.5.

Just a suggestion to help you out in making a decision.

CGr.

Thank you for that thought and I agree that a simulator helps alot and it has for me. I have the clearview simulator and I have gotten completly comfortable with it. It made my first flights a snap with my SkyHawk I was used to what sticks to use when including when it's heading toward me. I can fly most planes on that except the jets. I still need to get used to them but I fly them for fun anyway. I've flown both of the planes I want to do in real life eventually with no problem and wish they had an SR-71 somewhere to add to it but I haven't found anything.

And, to answer your question directly, well, that all depends on if you want glow or electric. In my experience, balsa electrics are very fragile and do not hold up well to rough handling. Their glow counterparts are a bit more sturdy and do hold up better, but nothing will hold up to really severe handling and very rough landings.

The best thing to do is master the one you have, to the point where all of your landings are good, meaning, "the plane walks away from the landing"... Some of the recommendations, the Four Star 40, for instance, are balsa and are pretty tough. They are bigger and, thus easier to see. They are faster, too, but can be tamed down quite a bit, and, as we always seem to say when offering help, throttle management is always a good thing... they are linear (somewhat) and not on-off switches. Learning to land safely is all important, and encompasses throttle management and use as well as the use of the other controls.

Now, back to the question in hand. Some of the foam aircraft seem to hold up better to hard landings, way better than balsa electrics will. So, if you are looking for a tough landing aircraft, then I would definitely stay away from electric powered balsa and stick with foam. Once comfortable, move on up and give them a try. They are a true joy to fly.


SR71... [:@] Not a beginners aircraft at all. Maybe after a time, well, I've already said that.


CGr.

Thank you again for the excellent reply. I should mention my landings aren't bad as in crashing landings but more in that I have them land in a different area than I want it to. Usually about 15-20 feet away from me instead of just in front of me. But no crashes.

I am definetly planning on continuing to practice with it, and then upgrade the motor and once I've gotten a good hold on that I will get the "second" plane I just haven't decided yet what to get but I am liking the park flyers I've seen so far. I even found a decent one on nitroplanes that is EPO foam.

The Sr71 is a far off goal, I only mention it because it's probably my favorite aircraft and has been since I was younger. I think my "third" plane would probably be the A-10 warthog, that's one I really want to fly!!

I understand. My all time favorite is the Vought F4U Corsair. But that is a pretty hot aircraft and really needs to be flown.. meaning not a lot of trainer level flight with that one.

CGr.

Why? x3

Why x4. It must have been pilot error cause the 4* is a great second plane.
I have the Mini Ultra Stick with a Super Tigre .10 electric on it. It's a great flyer and has held up well to some less than perfect flying. To me, it's ugly and I sometimes wish it would die so I could get something else. Truth is, though, It's really a great flyer.

I'd look at the E-Flite Alpha 450 Sport. Has some sport characteristics and some trainer characteristics. I have had a parkzone ultra mini T-28, parkzone t-28 and the Alpha 450. The Alpha is a MUCH easier plane to fly than the T-28 which is supposed to be easier than the Corsair. It also takes the same size battery as the hawk (but has a different plug). I love the plane and wish I had purchased it earlier.

I've never flown the hawk, so i can't really compare the two. If you can fly the 4 channel hawk, I'm guessing you can fly and land the Alpha 450 with out a someone to help you. As far as ruggedness, I don't know. Its so easy to fly, I've never had anything but lovely landings and flights.

http://www.e-fliterc.com/Products/De...ProdID=EFL2875

what about the GP Cherokee ARF? it's a very nice looking plane, it flies great, at low rates it behaves almost like a trainer and it is designed for glow or electric power.

http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...XTXE1&amp;P=ML

Always recommended the Goldberg Tiger 2 or Tiger 60. not sure if still available

It would depend on your "balsa" plane. For instance I have a Gnat. It is an small old style pattern ship designed for a small glow engine. Converted to electric it is a fast and fun airplane. Very few airplanes will survive a crash. But in many cases a balsa airplane will survive better than a foam one. Hard landings with a properly built balsa airplane will just break a prop or bend the landing gear. A foamie will explode.

Any stick style would be a excellent choice for a second airplane. Including Falcon 56 and other similar style.

I also have a 40 sized Sig Kougar. Actually two. One is electric and the other is glow. My electric with a five cell 3000mah battery installed is a half pound lighter than its glow counterpart with NO FUEL. My glow flies longer but my electric is just as much fun.

What I have found is when you get above 40 sized airplanes it is not really practical to go electric. The weight of the batteries will become more than what is practical. If you fly trike gear airplanes you also have to swing a smaller prop.

Good luck and make sure you use good batteries with a spektrum radio system. I hear they "brown out" easily. Thus causing a crash.

Here we go again. That was identified several years ago and addressed. If the pilot lets the battery drop to below what most would stop flying at, well, it will fail, just as all the other digital receivers will.

CGr.

if you dont mind tiny planes the ERC micro stik is great fun and really easy to fly check out some videos of that.

You asked about the durability of the Mini Ultra Stick, and my honest response is that the question is thinking in the wrong direction. A better handling plane will avoid crashes, which is the best way I've found to survive them. Your landings will be smoother and more predictable, and the plane will not be affected as much by wind gusts. As long as you have a smooth enough landing strip for the wheels to roll on withing binding or bouncing, you'll find that landing a stick (any stick) is an exercise in relaxation. That said, if you pull a bonehead maneuver and drill it in you will take it home in a bag. If you really want an indestructible plane that's fun to fly, I'd recommend a Parkzone Stryker. It can cruise as low as 15 mph and tops out around 70 in stock form. You can make the throws as hot as you want to as you get up the nerve, and since its a belly lander about all you have to do is flare it and try not to bring it in nose first. The Stryker is my park plane and general "don't worry about it" flyer. I've flown it in gusty 25-35 mph winds with no problems too.

Why X5.............we're waiting for an answer/explanation