777

My Feedback: (1)

What do you guys think about the U.S. Aircore for a person's 1st plane?

Thanks for your input.

Fastsky

The Aircore is a heavy plane and needs a good 46 to fly properly. Yes it will stand up to a lot of abuse but the plane sacrifices good flying qualities for toughness. If you are joining a club that has qualified instructors then I would consider other trainers that fly better such as an LT40 or a Midwest Aerostar.

EXCAP232

My Feedback: (12)

Agree with the above post on the plane. With 15 new pilots meeting Tuesdays' at the field we have had about every possible plane there. I did help one pilot with one of these. It did fly very well. A surprise to me has been the SuperKraft 0.40 with the TigerShark 0.46. Will fly inverted no problem (flat bottom wing) and is the lightest trainer of the size encountered. Bolt on wing.
Bill

Homebrewer

My Feedback: (8)

This is a great trainer! Yes, it is a little heavy and needs a .46 engine (a tt .46 with a 11x5 APC is best). I always keep a trainer in my hangar to train newbies with and this was the solo bird. Yes, it had been crashed a lot and it held up with at least 14 solo flights in the past 3 years. I flew it regularly too when I didn't want to concentrate too hard. Sadly, mine finally started showing its age and I had to retire the fuselage but kept the wing.

I'd buy another one again, by the way, mine flew inverted quite well and was awesome at fun fly competitions.

Andy

Sewerdude

My Feedback: (20)

I'm by far no expert, But I'd take a hard look at the Avistar. ,JT

777

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks for the replies, guys. Being a newbie, I may ask some very rudimentary questions, so please bear with me!

What is it about it's flying characteristics that are considered by some to be inferior to other planes?

What is a "tt .46 with a 11x5 APC"? I gather that the ".46" part of that is an engine of some kind. I see that over at http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...70P?I=USAA2030 you can select different engines. What's the difference in them?

Also I understood that you could easily remove the engine and slide it into the other US Aircore plane, the Colt. This sounds like a desireable feature. What do you guys think?

Thanks again.

twostroke

My Feedback: (6)

I have one of these and would not advise it to someone. Yes they are tuff, but not fun to assemble everything likes to twist and the leading edge of the wing needs alot of redesigning, took me three tries to get a good wing. Also once you get the power cartridge in the fuse pray you don't have to take it back out!!! This is just my thought's on the AirCore I would never get another.

Flying Scotsman

The Aircore is the toughest plane in the pits...no other plane wants to be around when the Aircore is in the skies!

See what an Aircore did to this nice gas powered aerobatic flyer as a result of a mid-air (happened only yesterday). The only damage to the Aircore was the engine fell off and was lost in the woods but the rest of plane was fine, even after a high speed spiral into the trees....that can't be said for the plane shown in the photograph (by the way, does anyone know what type of plane this is (was)?)

EXCAP232

My Feedback: (12)

777
TT refers to Thunder Tiger engines. They are distrubuted by Ace.
Decent engines designed by a former engineer from OS.

Try this link:
http://www.acehobby.com/acehobby/index.html

As the thread goes the recommendation is for a different trainer. Don't be concerned about asking questions. All of us asked a few to learn what we know. This is in the correct forum for same.

Bill

Crash Master

While I don't own an Aircore, I have flown one and it is quite heavy and may not be the best choice for a First trainer.

If you like the idea of the Aircore being nearly indestructable, and want to build, take a look at this link: http://www.spadtothebone.com/SPAD/Debonair

The "Deb" is build along the same lines as Aircore wherein it is built with PVC (gutter) pipe and corrogated plastic (coro). The Deb should be lighter than the Aircore which will give you gentler flight characteristics and at a fraction of the cost. To build the Deb should cost you less than $20 and is reported to fly even with a LA40 on the nose.

Check out the Deb before you decide. If you have any questions about the Deb, jump on the SPAD forum at http://www.rccombat.com/forum/forum....rplane+Designs

A great bunch of guys (and a few gals) that are more than happy to answer any questions you might have about the Deb or SPAD (Simple Plastic Airplane Design) in general.

Good Luck

uonlylivetwice

My Feedback: (2)

Isn't it true that one of the companies planes, I think it is a Tower Trainer, will be replaced free of charge due to crash damage if you are being taught by a club instructor? If that is still true, it seems like a fantastic compromise between getting a plane with good trainer flight characteristics, and not having to worry about crashing.

By the way, 777, I don't know how literally you meant your question about an earlier post, but as someone earlier said, TT is Thunder Tiger, an engine manufacturer. .46 is the displacement of the engine. 11x5 is how the prop is measured, the first number being the diameter in inches, and the second number effectively measuring the distance the prop will move forward in a single rotation (there's more to it) but what you need to know is a x6 will pull forward more in single rotation that a x5 would. There is a lot to matching a prop to an engine, and that is why many guys will offer good advice on where to start with prop size. Welcome to a great hobby!!

Markman

I have to agree with Crash Master. I just got, last week, my SPAD Debonaire and it flies fantastic! I have an OS 46FX on it so power is not a problem. This is my first "glow" powered plane. Before this I taught myself to fly with a Zagi. I couldn't be happier with the Debonair, it takes off in a short space, handles wind and can do most of the basic aerobatics. It does fly inverted and will loop from level flight rightside up or down! Landing is easy and the plane is very durable. All in all a great trainer. Get one of these, you won't be disappointed.

Mark

777

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks guys, so much for your info! uonlylivetwice, thanks for that lesson in engines & props......I'm starting from the ground up (appropriate analogy, don't you think?) so everything is new to me.

Crash Master & Markman, being so new, I didn't want to tackle a build in my first sitting. I see on the spad website that there are people that will build them for you. Any experience with any of them? Markman, did you build or buy?

Thanks again.

Markman

Im short on time and not the best builder so I had mine built for me by a guy here in Chicago who does a great job. Here is the link:

http://www.plasticconceptplanes.com/index.html

The guy's name is Scott and he flies at the same field I do, that's how I found out about them. Send him an email through his page and ask him about his trainers. Maybe he will ship to you. If not he might know of someone in your area that builds them. Good Luck!

Mark

javven

It looks like it -was- an Extra or maybe a Giles.

I wouldn't be afraid of an Aircore plane. You might like the idea of folding your plane into existence then gluing the joints. Just take your time with this and do it PRECISELY the way Aircore tells you. If you're not sure, go ask your LHS (Local Hobby Shop). I'd recommend purchasing the plane there if you can. They're fairly cheap all around, so an extra $5-15 to LHS will probably go a long way towards you completing the plane properly.

I have an OS .46LA on my trainer. Honestly I think the FX might be worth it in leiu of the LA. (OS - an engine company makes 2 varieties of engines in this displacement in what is called two-stroke design). The OS .46LA is certainly cheap and will have enough power, I think for your plane. The OS .46FX will have more power and will also run on 10% Cool Power (which is cheaper than the fuel I ended up having to buy for my LA). I also feel that they start easier, run better and last longer. For an additional $50 it's not an insubstantial investment but I feel it's worth it.

You've also got a radio to look at. Radio forum's that way ==>

Keep in mind corplast (that's the plastic material the Aircore's made of) is NOT indestructable nor does it tolerate heat worth a darn. Also, if you nose-over the plane into concrete you run about a 50% chance of kissing the engine bye-bye and some of your radio gear might get damaged as well - despite the rest of the plane being in good shape. Of course, a balsa trainer will likely disintegrate, or be at least severly damaged, in addition to the afforementioned engine destruction / radio mangling.

Crash Master

777 . . .

If you're looking for an ARF, take a look at this link (http://www.spadtothebone.com/misc/Hi...ad_ARFs_Almost). It lists those who can get you set up with an ARF, but it will be well worth your time to learn to build - especially when it comes to repair time.

And as Javven reminds us, there is no such thing as an indestructible plane. The coro will handle much more of the abuse that a newbie will and can put his model thru where the balsa models will not. Another advantage to the coro is the cost. Once you decide to try and build, and if you try a coro model, you'll be suprised to find that you can get one together from $20 or less. Personally, I would much rather crash and burn $20 at a time than $150 or more.

That's just my opinion,

TerrellFlyer

Hi 777, can not recommend an aircore for anything, LT40,LT25, PT40,Avistar or something similar,with a decent plane,motor,electronics,and instructor you should be having fun flying,I notice lots of advice on tough planes to crash,guess our club missed something, we fly. On the combat events then we crash a few planes.

mskyhawk

Avistar was my first plane and I still have it. Aircore people say when they hit the ground they won't break. I am here to say they are right! "IF" you can get them off the ground.
The only aircore flight I have ever seen lasted about 6 seconds and the plane got about 4 foot off the ground before doing the most beautiful cartwheel I have ever seen and hey,,,,,,, It didn't break!!
They make great r/c cars.........not planes.
I recommend the avistar to any new pilot. They make great trainers and can do mild aerobatics when the new pilot improves his skills.
It is a great first plane.

uonlylivetwice

My Feedback: (2)

Maybe I completely missed it, but 777, are you definitely NOT going to learn with an instructor? I think most guys would recommend either an instructor or Realflight G2. It sounds like the reviews on Aircore are mixed, and there are certainly many better planes out there. Personally, I'm with skyhawk, I learned first on G2, then my first plane was an Avistar. No complaints. I suppose if I didn't have access to an instructor, or to a pc to run realflight, and was really out in the middle of nowhere, though, an Aircore might be your best bet.

javven

The Aircore's a fun plane to fly... certainly no more challenging than most non-trainers out there... I don't know that it has any -bad- habbits, but they can be lead-sleds.

The Aircore's also a very low-dihedral plane. Ehh.. this can be good or bad. In high crosswind areas it's a good thing. Else it's generally considered an undesireable feature on a trainer.

I'd suggest learning ANYTHING the right way - with an instructor. My uncle builds beautiful planes, and comes home with bags of sticks.

I built a trainer and an ultra stick and come home with both. Not that accidents cant happen....

latch66

My 2 cents,

Join your local club and get their help and suggestions for airplanes, radios, engines and etc. Do this before you spend any money.

Now having said that, I do recommend the Aircore Trainer. I am currently building one for my son.

Yes, the plane is not the easiest build, but not impossible. The wing is definitely the hardest part. But, the plane can take a TREMENDOUS amount of abuse and still fly. One guy at our club litteraly wore one out (with a O.S. 46LA). The plane had several crashes (not due to the design of the airplane). The airplane was flying sustained inverted flight (for the entire flight). Any basic aerobatic manuver which a trainer can do it will do. The airplane was still flying long after two other trainers had ended their lifespan.

Fastsky

If you have trouble with slow landings how do you think you will make out with a plane that needs a faster landing speed to keep from dropping like a brick? Balsa planes are lighter and therefore are able to land at a much slower airspeed than a heavy Aircore trainer. This gives you time to react without getting into too much trouble. With a 1/2 decent instructor standing beside you, crashes during training are rare. You usually end up crashing on your 2nd or3d plane when you have gained confidence and do one more spin than you should have or doing an inverted pass too close to the ground. A well designed balsa trainer if it does crash can usually be be repaired within a couple of hours. Your next plane is probably going to be a balsa model so why not start learning with one? I sold my LT40 last summer after it taught myself, my son and 3 of his friends to fly. It never did crash.

RossAL

I learned on an aircore! I thought it was great! I can't say it was all good! But my equipment wasn't the best you could get. I was powering mine with a .40 and it was a little (little! teensie weensie!) bit sluggish. But for a trainer I think that thats a good thing! I recommend this plane over any balsa plane!

I've crashed mine several times, with absolutly little or no damage! the worst was a nosedive that pushed the powerpack right back into the fuse! I thought my day was over ! but lo and behold, two broken nylon screws, 15 minutes of calm down time, and I was up again!! (I soloed that day!)

Best of luck!!

777

My Feedback: (1)

There sure seems to be mixed opinions about the Aircore. To be honest, I need something that is as crash worthy as possible. Why? Because I live in rural Kansas about 60 miles from civilization (Wichita, if that's civilization!) and any RC field with experienced people. Consequently my experience will have to be solo from the start. That being the case, I plan on making alot of mistakes, which is a euphamism for saying "crashes".

I would sure welcome any other input. Thanks guys!

mskyhawk

With the weight/wing loading of these plastic cardboard planes, they have to be flown with authority. People learning how to fly need to learn slow and graceful flight, easy turns, and slow landings not only to build their flying skills but confidence, not to mention reaction time for when they get into trouble.
Like I said in a earlier post, I have never seen one get any higher than head high and as soon as they left the ground, the fight was on between the pilot and his plastic plane.
Any high , flat bottom winged plane "balsa not heavy plastic " either 40 or 60 size would make a better trainer than the aircore trainer in my opinion.
It will frustrate a new pilot enough to give up the hobby before he/she has began to experience it. I have seen it happen.