This is not a testimonial for a particular plane, but over the past couple of years several new fliers at our club have been trained from day 1 on a venerable World Models T-34 with great results. It began with a demo 'feel' in flight for one prospective flier and she did so well that the idea of using the T-34 as a trainer caught on. By now 5 or 6 new fliers have lived through the plane - and it has lived through multiple crashes. to fly on. The plane has sturdy landing gear and an easily repaired structure and covering that keeps looking good with the inevitable hangar rash. It has flown with .46 2-stroke and a .56 4-stroke as a basic trainer and advanced trainer and is still going strong. All training was done with a buddy cord until solo time and not 'self taught'

At lower rates and moderate speeds it handles the over controlling of a low time flier learning turns without teaching the bad habits that self-righting trainers can encourage. Take offs are straight and true and landings are so sure that it almost lands itself cutting down the time it took to teach those parts. The average trainer's tendency to float and sensitivity to wind changes are reduced on the T-34. On top of that, it looks much nicer than the look-alike trainers and the students like showing it off to their friends. (That alone got us one new member).

I'm sure this is not the only non traditional trainer suitable for this and I know one newbie who was taught on a SIG Somethin' Extra at very low rates. We still have the traditional trainer types around, but I just wanted to share this experience. Perhaps you might have had a similar experience with flight training in non-traditional models?


quint

Verrrrry interesting !!! Yaaa!
I've been told by a couple of full size pilots that the real thing is a very good airplane as well. So it very interesting to hear that you and your fellow club members are having good results with it. Could be a different way to keep would be members around.

I just read a thread here where somebody was looking for a 'near trainer', it seems that the idea of using planes other than the conventional trainers to learn may have merit.

quint

Some non-trainer models are very docile flyers. The tower kaos is a great example of plane I consider to be easy to train others on. I think the whole idea of "self righting" planes is a bit overrated. Unless you are using pilot assist devices.

Allot depends on the overall flying characteristics of the model and the trainee's skill. Some kids (nintendo kids) take to flying with ease. Others will need the slowest tamest plane on the market to learn.

In the case of the flyer I trained using the kaos we simply turned up the model as he progressed. Being labeled a warbird or sportplane is secondary and unimportant. It just has to be predictable and docile at low rates--and sturdy. I think it is more important to know that labels like Trainer, Warbird, Sportplane CAN be somewhat arbitrary. The labels that really mater and newbies should always steer clear of are (Scale Warbirds), 3D, Giant, and Pattern.

This is interesting! I have a World Models T-34 and I love it. It can be mild to wild, or anywhere in between. I'll have to take a newbie that's only flown once or twice up on mine, and see if he shows an improvment with that plane over a conventional trainer. (Using students for gineau pigs is legal, right??)

Only if you leave out the gravy. As long as the controls are set up very mild and the plane is not one of the radical types as Broken pointed out it should give them a chance.

Well, I wouldn't put the T-34 in the same class as most "warbirds".

In fact, the T-34 looks a lot more like a 4* with trike gear than anything. It's probibly more stable than a even a 4*.

The wing is quite big, lots of wing area, and no taper. The weight puts it pretty close to most trainers, or maybe even a little lighter.

So, sure, I don't see any reason why you couldn't use it as a basic trainer. I've used worse.

The big thing is that because of the wing shape (no taper) and light wingloading, it's going to land nice and slow and not have the nasty tip-stalling problems "warbirds" are normally known for.

The only down side that I could see, and I'm guessing here, is that many trainers are over-built to take the most common minor crashes in stride. Things like lots of extra ply in the fuse, extra sheeting on the outter bays of the wing, stronger wing spars than really necessary, etc. I don't know if the T-34 is built that tough or not. But with a good instructor, some caution and some luck, it would be a non-issue.

Some students really do need a trainer that can really slow way down and be stuper-stable. For them, the T-34 might not be a good idea. But from what I see based on the specs of the plane and so on, I see no reason an average student coudln't use it to learn on.

pt-19 is another good basic flyer. as easy as it can be. There is a HUGE one training some kids at my club, it uses 5 hitec standard servos + skysport futaba radio + a .91 2T engine. Can´t be better, slow and flying on rails, the kids learn the whole stuff realy fast.

Márcio Senger

Ditto on a PT-19. If there`s one model classified as a warbird that could be a basic trainer, it`d be the Cornell in my opinion.

I agree that it's not fair to call this one a Warbird. You can put a dress on a pig and teach it to sing but it's still a pig and just because you put some decals on this low wing trainer don't make it a warbird. I have one and it's a very stable flyer and one of the more versatile planes around so using it as a first plane isn't a bad idea cause many trainers fly like crap. It is also very durable and easy to repair so I wouldn't hesitate to teach someone to fly with it just don't tell them they can fly a warbird because of the experiance.

I plan on putting some floats on it to go up to the lake.

As a long time scale modeler I add that a 'warbird' is any aircraft that served the military of any country and not defined by it's performance or dificulty in flying. Some non-warbirds are tougher to fly than the so called traditional warbirds. AT-6s. T-34s and t-28s are just as much a warbird as a P-51 (and let's not forget that a Beech model 17 Staggerwing and a version of the venerable Cub are warbirds too.)

As to how scale a plane has to be to be called a warbird - that's a good question since many ARF warbird versions would be laughed out of a scale meet, yet are still fun and in the spirit of a given plane.But the whole point here is that many excellent non-conventional 'trainers' are out there and can be diferent from the high wing box fuse look-alikes.

quint (ex N5RQ)

quint-rcu.... THANX!