What does everyone think about the Aircore trainer planes? How do they fly and how much abuse can they take. Is it a good plane for new rc pilots? I was thinking of ordering one, but i never hear much about them so i thought i should ask first. I would appreciate any info on these planes.

There is a thread in here i think it was about teaching yourself to fly. Anyway I believe the guy had an Aircore trainer and said it was practically indestructable. Check for the thread and send him a PM.

Good luck and Happy Landings,

Sean

I owned an Aircore that I used to train many new pilots. The airplane is very sturdy and impossible to destroy. It is a little heavier than a regular trainer but it flies just fine. A ball bearing .46 on 15% nitro is required to adequately power this model.

I would recommend building your own aircore type airplane for much less. Check out www.spadtothebone.com and look for plans to the Debonair trainer. It can be built for about 25 bucks and is a quicker build than the many required folds in the aircore kit.

The Aircore is tough buddy, and it seems to fly just fine. Not that I have very much experience or anything to compare it to. I bought one to save my balsa trainer from being crunched and I'm glad I did. I have crashed mine a couple times real hard and had some, well uh... how do I say this, um... HARD landings and it has only had very minor damage, the crashes would have totaled my balsa plane. The biggest repair I had to do took less than 1/2 hour and she was good as new. You basically straighten out the nose gear and refuel for the next crash, I mean flight. The build up is pretty different than a balsa plane but if you read some of the information on line about the S.P.A.D.'s and how they are built you will be prepared for the construction methods and it will be easy. Mine came from the factory with some of the folds in the wrong place but I didn't want to wait for a replacement so I just built it anyway and it came out fine. It will never win any beauty contest because the wings aren't as symmetric or precise as a balsa plane but it doesn't seem to affect the flight very much. The plane is definitely capable of aerobatic's, don't ask how I know, it still makes my knees shaky. I am running an MDS .48 on it with a 10-6 prop and it has way more power than it needs, I hardly ever run it at full throttle, too fast, 1/2 throttle for cruising and 3/4 is more than enough for short takeoffs. I love my Aircore and would recommend it to anyone learning to fly, especially if you want to try it on your own. Just like the old Timex commercials, "It takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'" I would have destroyed two or maybe three balsa trainers by now and I only have 12 flight under my belt, all solo and alone out in the middle of no where. I'm getting better each time out too. Another 20 or so flight and I'll think about flying my other plane but for now it's Aircore all the way. Man if I keep pumping this thing maybe they will give one of the Colt's when I'm ready, I can dream anyway can't I?

I agree with Homebrewer. I was learning with an Aircore 40 when I found the spadtothebone guys and built the Debonair. Never flew the Aircore again. Go with the Deb.

rrh

I have flown the Aircore and Debonair......both are very viable trainers like the others have said. I guess it would come down to a matter of preference. The aircore is a little heavier than the deb but still flies just as well. My .02

Thanks for your opinions. I just ordered the aircore after reading your replies. I already own a Hangar 9 extra easy and wish i never bought it. Its nice and everything, but just way too fragile. I mean if i hold the dam thing the wrong way it wll break. Last time i attempted to fly it the landing gear ripped off as i was taxxing for take-off. I just dont see how it is considered a good trainer. I am looking foward to getting the aircore together and flying it. If it really holds up as good as people say it does, everyone should get one for thier first plane. I will let you know how the aircore works out for me.
-Jamie

Read the www.spadtothebone.com nfo on glueing coroplast. Use that info when gluing up the Aircore trainer.

My prefered method is to sand the surface to be glued rather than some people's preference to "Flash" the surface with a propane torch. (I tend to melt the coro if I use the torch.) The purpose is to remove something from the surface that interferes with the CA bonding to the coro.

CA is MUCH lighter than the contact cement the kit instructions say to use... and it actually bonds BETTER if used properly. You can save a bunch of weght, and thus have a better flying trainer.

Jamie,
You'll love the Aircore. I kind of wonder why it doesn't get recommended more often. It has to be the toughest trainer on the market. It may be because it is so durable that you can try flying it without an instructor so most of the old timers who live to instruct put it down when asked about it. An instructor is much MUCH more necassary if you have one of the balsa planes. Or it could just be a bias against it because it is unconventional in materials and construction. It is a little heavier than it's balsa twins but if it's not that much of a difference. When I started looking at RC planes I snubbed the Aircore at first. I thought, plastic airplanes are for kids, I want a balsa plane. After a couple months of building with balsa from scratch the plastic plane started looking pretty good as a trainer. I have a bunch of 4mm coroplast laying around too (old real estate sign's) and I wanted to learn more about SPAD's and figured the Aircore would teach me that too, and it did. Just wish I could find some 2mm signs now.

The coroplast is treated with a method called corona treatment, it assists in inks sticking to the polyolefins. The Coroplast is made for cheap disposable signage.

The reason the Aircore trainer tends to get put down is... they tend to be heavy. Since there are ways to keepthe weight down (such as using CA instead of the contact cement...) you can bypass the weight issue. If you delete the purely decorational parts (have to know which is decoration and which is structure or DON'T delete ANY) you can save even more weight. Then there are other techniques to keep the weight down... and you can have one very light aircraft, that is still just as strong.

That's my only beef with the Aircore trainers... the weight if done by the instructions.

I've seen this model in use in both the per-plans mode and lightened by someone who knew what he was doing. The light one was a much better flying aircraft. Slower landing speeds and better rate of climb are big bonuses for a beginner.

Even with the durable Aircore trainer... its possible to ram the thing into a tree or something and destroy the model. I've seen the result of a SPAD Debonair rammed into a dumpster. The engine was split apart. (cylinder section ripped off the crankcase.) There was not much left of engine, radio or aircraft... and the Debonair is STRONGER than the Aircore trainer.

aircore sucks, i had the trainer, and the cub, and built to the period at the end of the sentences, and they both flew like crap. the cub only was airborne for about 30 seconds, when it augered in, and destroyed my motor and broke all the ca joints.[:@][:@] i stripped them down and burned them both.