Hey Bald:

Hope you have a bank roll to support your hobby. We have had several new club members over the years who were pilots, and the last being a Jet Commercial pilot, who refused any help or instruction from any our club members. He thought he was high and mighty because of his aviation experience. Well, being that he is not sitting in ship, we have that word as I recall "perception", and feel for the controls.

We all sat back and watched or was it laughed as we knew what the outcome would be. He taxied out to the runway, applied throtle, rotated, and immediately dumped his plane. What a waste! Yep he did get airborne for about 5 seconds. Even if he did get into the air................you still have that mandatory (lol) landing.

Go for it..............."NO GUTS NO GLORY". Make sure you have a crowd there to entertain.

GET AN INSTRUCTOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kf

Get an instructor! I tried my first flight on my own, only took a couple of hours of repair, I was lucky. No instruments and not sitting in it is a whole new experience. At least I tried with a high wing, you are going to try with a high wing loading warbird? Bring a trash bag with you!
Good luck and be sure to post in the crash forum.

By the way I had over two thousand hours in full scale aircraft of many types, including multi engine, and still looked like a total idiot trying to fly RC.

Not on line an Hour and is gone[sm=drowning.gif] I'm crashing and need help

Let's look at the flip side of this scenario. I went up in a friends two seat Pitts. I had sat in a cockpit once when I was about twelve. He let me fly it for a while and I had no problem at all. He said he could tell I was using rudder to correct for the cross wind and that I was very smooth with the stick. He was very surprised when I told him it was really my first time flying a real plane and told me that I should get my license because I was one of the best first timers he had flown with. To me it was just like flying an RC plane, pressure on the controls not really moving them and I had a feel for the aerodynamics of flight from RC as well. The main difference is you are always in the cockpit, unlike RC.

On the off chance that this isn't a troll, and you still REALLY insist on learning without a helper present... I suggest you do it the way the early RC'ers did.

First you start with a plane that is basically a free-flight plane, install RC control, and learn to get it to fly & circle, and repair it when it crashes.

Then, get used to that odd situation where the plane's coming at you (as in landing) and you want to turn it the wrong way. Master that, and then the rate of descent procedure, so you actually land. Then you can start on planes without the free-flight characteristics.

That Spitfire, by the way, has no free-flight capability. If you insist on using it first, as the others have said, get plenty of pictures and maybe a video with which to remember it.

The thing that is difficult for RC flyers to convey to the new pilot is the required total concentration on the task. We all take it for granted. We all learned to never look away from the plane, and we learned to constantly make corrections. We are always in preparation for the next turn - which is never more than a few seconds away. Your full scale experience allows you to look around, maybe even read a map while the plane is flying itself, for minutes at a time. If you learn RC flight without a helper present, you will soon be accustomed to never looking away from the plane, and always finding your controls by feel, even the trim tabs. You will also learn that shoving the throttle to full speed and leaving it there is a mistake. (Some newer trainers have low pitch, inefficient props, and air brakes, which give the self instructed person a better chance to get away with full throttle operation.) How much of that relates directly to your full scale experience? There's more, but we take it all for granted.

Most of us are pretty friendly, and some even have a plane we use for instruction, with which we can give you a test drive. It really is worth asking for one.

Good luck,
Dave Olson

I'm not responding to the the originator of this thread, for I feel he's quite obviously a troll.

But in the highly unlikely event he's for real, I'm must take issue with those that feel flying a SIM first is a bad thing, and I "think" they' re suggesting that, even in his situation, that he find an instructor first ?!

Like others here, I'm a full scale pilot. As of yet, I have not flown R/C as it's winter here . I would never consider trying to fly R/C w/o instruction, I'm not that stupid. HOWEVER, it I ever had any doubts about my ability to fly R/C without instruction, it was proven to me in spades by flying a Sim FIRST. I found out within seconds that I can fly the Sim with ease whilst seated in the cockpit. But I found out just as quickly that I couldn't fly the Sim while "standing on the ground". I never had an ego being a full-scale pilot. But if I did, I know one quick way to burst THAT bubble !!! Five minutes on a Sim and he'd instantly forget about trying to fly without instruction. Ergo, my advice to Mr. Troll is get thyself to a Sim ASAP and find out fast how little you know .

Joe

Just a Noob

Let us know how the flight goes.

Bringing a plastic bag along on this flight was a nice tip, but I would recommend a couple of other people with you also. After a good crash, there is usually too much for one person to carry back, and it takes a few trips.

Bring a camera for a picture.

If you could take a digital camera with you and post some images here after your first solo? Thanks.

I've noticed a strange phenomenon. When I walk down the aisles of a hobby shop, the kits kind of cringe back from me. In regards to the thread topic, I'll share this: I went to visit my brother and we went out to the local airport so I could fly my plane. He showed me a big dent in the side of a hanger where a full scale pilot had ended his modeling career in just a few seconds. He never tried it again.

To all those who have been following this thread with interest, perhaps hoping to see the gory after photos, I discovered that people's advice was heeded. The Spitfire stayed home, and therefore survived. The OP is now looking for a simulator so he can build sufficient skills to fly the Spit.

It's obvious he has been reading the responses to his original post.

It's hard to understand why some people are so #&$* bent on ignoring proven methods, trainer planes and instruction, and instead insist on trying methods that have been shown to fail. Oh well...

thanks for the update piper_chuck...

I for one can do without the gory pic's...too many new flyer's get discouraged and leave the hobby when they plow in the first one... especially if it's the first flight.

If the original poster is still reading this... a sim will help BUT you'll still likely stuff your spit on the first flight. Get a TRAINER... this is one step you really can't get around if you want to do it right... get an instructor... would you have hopped in your first full scale without one?? once you have the right tool's you'll get a good base that will allow you to fly your spit later on.


Bottom line is few and that's DAMN FEW can go from sim to flight with a TRAINER and not crash... throw a spit in the mix and your back to almost no chance.

John

I admit I found it difficult to believe that the original poster truly wasn't trolling and could have actually been at all serious...but made a reply just in case as I didn't want to miss out on the entertainment either way.[8D]

Ok call me an idiot but, what in the great googly moogly is a troll?

Some definitions:

1) This is the Scandanavian term for elf. Sometimes they are described as being hairy and ugly, although they are able to change their shape into anything they please. They are said to have lots of treasure, and live in beautiful palaces.

2) A popular Upper Peninsula term for people who live in the Lower Peninsula, below the Mackinac Bridge.

3) a race of giants. They appear in various Northern mythologies. In Norse mythology Trolls are represented as a type of goblin.

4) a newsgroup post that is deliberately incorrect, intended to provoke readers; or a person who makes such a post

5) From the fishing term. As a noun, synonymous with flamebait. As a verb, to post controversial or provocative messages in a deliberate attempt to provoke flames.

Aaah 4 & 5 seem close ! Someone who's posting something that goes against the opinion of the majority, just for the fun of getting lot's of reactions.

Hope this helps! [:-]

J.

Wouldnt say hes a troll, some people really are ignorant enough about how these things work to think they can do it.

And another point, trainers ARE better, but you can learn on anything, trainers were the only real choice before the buddy box, their slow speed and self-righting abilities made it easier to hand-off the controller back to the instructor, but now with buddy boxes, its an instant change, the instructors fingers are (should be) on the sticks already. If it can fly, you can learn on it...it will just take longer. It depends on the instructor too, an old buddy of mine learned to fly last year on a corsair, and after about a gallon of fuel, he was soloed on it...it hasnt crashed yet (other than a prop strike or 2 on landings)

Still though, a high-wing trainer is better, especially with the mindset of the original poster.

What you fail to account for is the speed at which things can happen. No instructor can instantly take control when a student's plane is out of control. There is a constant evaluation going on in the instructor's mind of whether the student is in trouble, and if they can get themself out of it. There will always be a delay between when the student gets in trouble and when the instructor takes control. Due to the faster speeds of a warbird, significantly more distance will be covered during this delay. The odds are so stacked against learning with a warbird, buddy boxed or not, that it's not worth doing.

In addition, being an instructor and having a responsibility to protect the student's plane from the student's mistakes is challening enough with a trainer. Most are not willing to accept the additional risk, and stress, created by trying to teach with a warbird.

If this guy isn't a troll, then he certainly has a natural gift and all the skills and inclinations of one. He ought to do it for a living.

It's always amazed me that someone will see some value in yelling, before doing something he knows almost everyone considers to be stupid. If this guy hasn't illustrated the perfect "experienced yet arrogant pilot" syndrome, he hasn't missed it by much.

BTW, the only "real" pilots I ever knew who were decent at RC from the gitgo were Navy pilots who were carrier qualified. Those guys had to spend time at the Landing Officer position, judging landing attempts from the "ground" perspective. And most of them had the honest humility to get past the arrogant, "I'm a stud pilot that can do anything anytime without even any training" mentality. I guess landing on a carrier gives one a better perspective. I've been honored to known two, and neither of them would have posted what started this thread. And they both turned out to be good at RC, early on.

As an instructor I've had students show up with all different kinds of planes to learn on, ranging from warbirds to one who showed up with a seaplane (he thought that would make it easier to take off from the grass). I have never taught any of those how to fly. I send them back to get a trainer plane to learn to fly on. Why?? It's just like Piper_chuck said, it's hard on an instructor to teach different planes like that. When using a trainer it can be all an instructor can do to keep them from crashing, I'm not going to complicate that for myself by adding in a plane like a warbird that is more difficult to fly in the first place.

On a similar note, we have a guy at our field right now that "refuses" to buy a trainer. He doesn't want to "look" like a beginner flying with a trainer. Right now he's trying to learn flying a 4-star 60 with an instructor (not me, I refused to teach him unless he got a trainer). While he is learning to fly, he could learn a lot faster with a trainer instead of the 4-star. But I just don't understand that kind of attitude. Heck, we've all been there when we started, we all owned trainers. But anyway, the point I am trying to make is that sometimes it's up to the instructor to play the bad guy and tell the student that they just can't learn to fly on what they have brought out. If the instructor doesn't say that to the student then he is doing a disservice to that student by not setting them straight.

Ken

Bald
To bad you are not in a area that does not have a training program. Here I keep a full trainer system in my truck or at home for such a chance to help I really don't care what a person brings to to field ( he or she ) will get stick time.
PS You can down load free sims of the internet . Swallow your pride and join back in lot of free help on RCU
The Old RC Outlaw

Ken,
Tell that guy that I own everything from Quickie 500's to 28% aerobats and I just built a trainer from a kit. Everyone should own a trainer for a number of reasons, really windy days, getting back to basics occasionally, having something that you can just relax and fly and in my case having a platform to mount a camera/night fly/ bomb drop and any other stupid fun I can think of to do with it.

Don't listen to them. Your real-world experience will stand you in good stead ----go for it. By the way, Spits are a push-over.

For your next plane I suggest a CAP 232.

Talk about trolls! You forgot the smileys.

Oooops -- geee, ya noticed

I did learn to fly on my own so I say it is possible. In my case I learned with electrics and needed my first flights to be in the early morning when wind was at its lowest.

The first flight ended in a crash though it was due to a bad RX and not pilot error. The 2nd time I flew was an aerobird and again had RX problem was this time was able to get it down saftly.

Once I bought new TX and RX, everything went smooth though were plenty of tense knee knocking moments. So far have flown a 3ch plane, high wing aileron plane, flying wing and 3d plane. Since then I lost my slinger in fog once and got my Cessna in a tree though no damage during those crashes. All my planes are in flying condition though if I ever did wreck one beyond repair I could afford to pay $60 or so bucks for new kit.

I don't fly scared like some people and just do laps around the field with maybe one or 2 loops thrown in. I fly all out knocking the sticks pretty hard. I'll take a trainer plane and fly inverted, do rolls and outside loops. Only thing I don't do is low passes or touch and gos.

I do feel a sense of accomplishment having learned on my own. At the time I was training I only had 2 battery packs and it would have taken forever learning with instructor only 1 or 2 days a week. If you have an instructor willing to teach, it's well worth it to get help at least the first couple of flights. Though I see that some fields are harsh on anyone getting a warbird to start with though I think it's possible to learn on such a plane if you have Sim training behind you.

I can understand most people that start into this hobby don't realize just how much it's going to cost. They see a RTF kit and jump into it thinking that is all there is to it. Or they want to skip some levels and get a aerobatic plane or 3d plane to save $'s. It's very easy to spend $1000+ dollars your first year in the hobby.

An instructor might teach you that banging the sticks isn't necessarily a good thing and touch and goes are probably the best thing to practice because landing is really is the only maneuver that counts. Flying is one thing, flying well usually requires some instruction. Most people don't know the differance untill after they learn to fly well.