Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > Beginners
Reload this Page >

LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Notices
Beginners Beginners in RC start here for help.

LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Old 07-30-2012, 03:04 PM
  #1  
Brian S.
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: North Judson, IN
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Can someone please explain what the differences are between these two planes? Building, flight, durability? I much prefer the look of the mk II over the LT-40 but the LT-40 seems to be the most recommended.
Old 07-30-2012, 03:15 PM
  #2  
GaryHarris
Senior Member
 
GaryHarris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Kit or ARF?
Old 07-30-2012, 03:23 PM
  #3  
noveldoc
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

If you are kitting, the MK II will be a bit more difficult to build but I agree it is better looking.  The Mk II and Mk I were the original Sig trainers before the Kadet Senior, Seniorita and later LT 40.  (There are ARFs for the last 3 but I don't know of one for the MK II.  Check the Sig web site.)

Both are slow steady flyers and, with a good instructor, will ease your task of learning to fly.

Tom
Old 07-30-2012, 04:04 PM
  #4  
Brian S.
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: North Judson, IN
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

It would be a kit. I built a PT-40 and about 3/4 of a Super Sportster (right up to that stupid turtle deck) about 25 years ago and really liked building. I built a couple of SPADS a few years back and that just didn't satisfy.
All this and I never did solo.
Old 07-30-2012, 04:21 PM
  #5  
GaryHarris
Senior Member
 
GaryHarris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

LT 40 is an easy build. I never had or built a MK2 and the reason is it just seems like too much work for a trainer without scale looking windows. I know that sounds weird, but looks at least for me, doesn't make much difference for a trainer that's going to be beat up anyway.
Old 07-30-2012, 05:11 PM
  #6  
Charlie P.
 
Charlie P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Port Crane, NY
Posts: 5,088
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

I built a Kadet Mk II and supervised several LT-40 builds (advising an Explorer Post). The Mk II is a fancier build and is a fair amount more intricate . . . but doesn't fly appreciably better. It also has a slightly heavier wing loading.

As far as a trainer both are good.
Old 07-30-2012, 06:03 PM
  #7  
jester_s1
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 7,247
Received 30 Likes on 27 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Go the easy route on your trainer. As GaryHarris said, they are meant to be beat up while you learn. Heck, for me they don't even look right until the covering is all dingy and the tips of ever surface is skinned up. I really love the ones with two or three different colored patches on them!
Old 07-30-2012, 07:35 PM
  #8  
ratshooter
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Burleson, TX
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

I built a couple of SPADS a few years back and that just didn't satisfy.
Too bad you didn't like your SPADS. I have only built two and love 'em. They fly as good as any wood plane I have ever had. Here is a picture of my newest one. It has an LA 46 on it. It has 600 inches of wing area for a 19oz wing loading. It takes off in 20 foot and will fly down to a total stall and never drops a wing. With the LA 46 it is NOT fast butI didn't want fast. It won't fly or land as slow as the Sig trainers you asked about but I built it in one day. And the plane airframe only cost me about $15. I made all the parts for it I could including the tail wheel mount and the main gear. If I built another Sig trainer it would be a Seniorita. I have owned three of them and there rank at the top of my list for favorite planes. And they look so good with transparent covering on them.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Us52810.jpg
Views:	56
Size:	66.2 KB
ID:	1787789   Click image for larger version

Name:	Lg16170.jpg
Views:	57
Size:	76.7 KB
ID:	1787790  
Old 07-30-2012, 07:57 PM
  #9  
mike109
Senior Member
 
mike109's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dubbo, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II


G'day

I have had all the Sig Trainers. I still have a Mk II and several Kadet Seniors as well as a recently built LT-25 - the LT-40's little brother.

Of the two you have suggested, I would build the LT-40. The Mk II is smaller, heavier and while it flies OK it is nowhere as nice to fly as any of the other Kadets. It is more solidly built and this may help in a minor bingle but the flying advantages and ease of building of the LT series way outweigh this.

My most recent LT-40 was an ARF which I sold to a friend. I flew it initially with a Saito 62 which really suited it but when I sold it I put an Enya 40SS in it (plain bearing version). This also suited it well. Sadly my friend decided to so a little solo flying when he really was not ready to solo and he lost the plot. The plane flew away on its own and crashed. He never did find the engine. I rebuilt it and it is flying as well as ever. It now has an OS LA 46 which also suits it well.

The LT-25 is a much overlooked kit. It quite a bit bigger than a Kadet Mk II but it is also quite a lot lighter and only needs a 25 two stroke. My first one (which I recently gave away after having it for about 5 years) initially had a 30 four stroke, then a Leo 46 (total overkill) and finally a very old OS FS 40 which was perfect in it. My new one has a new Enya 36 four stroke which cost about three times what the plane did but I just like four strokes and I like to put them in trainers to run them in. It is wonderful to fly. Even works pretty well on our windy site. I'd strongly suggest you look at the LT-25 kit too. It comes as a tail dragger too with a neat pull pull system for the tail wheel. I used my old one to help learners to sort out their landings. I rebuilt the wing tips several times but she just kept on going.

Photo is my new LT-25 covered in Solatex as the "stealth trainer". It is yellow underneath and quite easy to see in the air.

Cheers

Mike in Oz

Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Bz78988.jpg
Views:	60
Size:	227.8 KB
ID:	1787796  
Old 07-30-2012, 08:11 PM
  #10  
mike109
Senior Member
 
mike109's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dubbo, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

G'day ratshooter. Yes, the Seniorita is a great plane. Mine was covered in see through red on the fuse and white on the wing centre section and see through red on the tips. It started with an ASP 30 four stroke but ended up with a PAW 15 diesel. It needed very little engine to fly and it flew really well.

But, I like its bigger brother the Kadet Senior. This is my favourite plane for just doodling around. I have three at the moment. Two are built as per the plan with no ailerons. One, the oldest which is now about 7 years old, has a Saito 62, is covered in Solatex and has been the first trainer for many people. The next has a Laser 70 engine and a modified wing with ailerons similar to the setup on the ARF version. The most recent has a Saito 90R3 radial engine and is finished to look like a Japanese Zero. It is a sort of "stand miles away" scale model. I put the radial in it because I was having trouble getting it to run well and I did not want to put it in a plane that really needed the engine to work properly. Kadets make quite good gliders and a dead stick in a Kadet Senior is a real non event. I have now worked out how to make the Saito radial work and it flies the Kadet really well. (The secret was more nitro - 20% instead of my usual 10%. This resulted in a little more power and a lot more reliability).

Cheers

Mike in Oz
Old 07-31-2012, 01:41 PM
  #11  
Brian S.
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: North Judson, IN
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Oh they were ok and I may build more again someday. I just didn't really like the build process or the look of them. I was attracted to them because of the cost and the durability as I was going to try to go it alone. I must have screwed up building my first one because it seemed pretty erratic. I was able to fly my second attempt fairly easily…I even almost landed it once. It met its end with the engine about 6 inches in the ground and a popped wing.
ORIGINAL: ratshooter

I built a couple of SPADS a few years back and that just didn't satisfy.
Too bad you didn't like your SPADS. I have only built two and love 'em. They fly as good as any wood plane I have ever had. Here is a picture of my newest one. It has an LA 46 on it. It has 600 inches of wing area for a 19oz wing loading. It takes off in 20 foot and will fly down to a total stall and never drops a wing. With the LA 46 it is NOT fast butI didn't want fast. It won't fly or land as slow as the Sig trainers you asked about but I built it in one day. And the plane airframe only cost me about $15. I made all the parts for it I could including the tail wheel mount and the main gear. If I built another Sig trainer it would be a Seniorita. I have owned three of them and there rank at the top of my list for favorite planes. And they look so good with transparent covering on them.
Old 07-31-2012, 01:44 PM
  #12  
Brian S.
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: North Judson, IN
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

The only reason I was thinking .40 is because I already have a TT .46 PRO to put in it.
ORIGINAL: mike109


G'day

I have had all the Sig Trainers. I still have a Mk II and several Kadet Seniors as well as a recently built LT-25 - the LT-40's little brother.

Of the two you have suggested, I would build the LT-40. The Mk II is smaller, heavier and while it flies OK it is nowhere as nice to fly as any of the other Kadets. It is more solidly built and this may help in a minor bingle but the flying advantages and ease of building of the LT series way outweigh this.

My most recent LT-40 was an ARF which I sold to a friend. I flew it initially with a Saito 62 which really suited it but when I sold it I put an Enya 40SS in it (plain bearing version). This also suited it well. Sadly my friend decided to so a little solo flying when he really was not ready to solo and he lost the plot. The plane flew away on its own and crashed. He never did find the engine. I rebuilt it and it is flying as well as ever. It now has an OS LA 46 which also suits it well.

The LT-25 is a much overlooked kit. It quite a bit bigger than a Kadet Mk II but it is also quite a lot lighter and only needs a 25 two stroke. My first one (which I recently gave away after having it for about 5 years) initially had a 30 four stroke, then a Leo 46 (total overkill) and finally a very old OS FS 40 which was perfect in it. My new one has a new Enya 36 four stroke which cost about three times what the plane did but I just like four strokes and I like to put them in trainers to run them in. It is wonderful to fly. Even works pretty well on our windy site. I'd strongly suggest you look at the LT-25 kit too. It comes as a tail dragger too with a neat pull pull system for the tail wheel. I used my old one to help learners to sort out their landings. I rebuilt the wing tips several times but she just kept on going.

Photo is my new LT-25 covered in Solatex as the "stealth trainer". It is yellow underneath and quite easy to see in the air.

Cheers

Mike in Oz

Old 07-31-2012, 03:03 PM
  #13  
mike109
Senior Member
 
mike109's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dubbo, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

G'day

Given you have the TT 46, the LA-40 would suit it better. And be total overkill in the LT 25. We only put the Leo 46 (a close cousin of the TT46) in the 25 because we wanted to see how the engine would run and it fitted in easily. We ran it on FAI fuel as it did not seem to like nitro and rarely got past half throttle.

If you already can fly and if you want to do some more complex building, then the Mark O2 is OK. It flies faster than the LT 40 because it has a higher wing loading and it is quit tough with its complicated construction. I built mine as a tail dragger with a free castoring tail wheel. Like this it was quite a challenge to get off the ground as it would snake all over the place. It would be a good model to use as an advanced trainer before flying models like the Decathlon or Auster or any other high wing planes with short fuselages and long wings. I put it back to a trike and even with my quite tame OS 52 Surpass, it can be quite difficult to handle on the ground when taking off.

The LT, by comparison is very easy to fly. It takes off at quite a low speed and with its low wing loading is very forgiving. The Mk 2 is not nearly so forgiving.

It all depends on what you want.

Have fun

Mike in Oz
Old 07-31-2012, 04:06 PM
  #14  
Brian S.
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: North Judson, IN
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Thanks for your input everyone.
Old 08-05-2012, 06:34 PM
  #15  
acdii
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Capron, IL
Posts: 9,738
Received 64 Likes on 57 Posts
Default RE: LT-40 vs. Kadet mk II

Modify the wing on the LT down to 1 " Dihedral, and make it a tail dragger.  Really livens the plane up without compromising the excellent handling.  Mine is a bolt down so the wing goes on square every time and stays put. With an OS 52 4S on it, it flies great.  Inside loops, outside loops, upside down,  does them all pretty good.  With the low dihedral when I bank, it maintains the bank until I level it off, much like my SIG 4*120 does.  If I want to relax or need to take my eyes off the plane for a moment I can set the wing on a bank, and kick in some rudder, and it will circle round and round until I release it.

It is my fun plane for now. The 4* may take its place once the engine is broke in and I get stick time on it, but the LT40 is just a blast to fly.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.