ghtracey

Just looking for some opinions. I know I'm not ready for one, but I'm trying to start planning. I'm wondering what a good low-wing trainer would be, second plane type of thing. I've been flying the Spacewalker on the sim, but I see GP doesn't sell that anymore. Any thoughts?


Cheers,
Graham

The aircrash bureau

The ARC Jupiter is a very good low wing trainer. It's basicly the same as the ARC Ready 2. in that it uses the same wing, tail plane & fin as the Ready 2 but has a differant shape fuz. It is a tail dragger type and is of an all plastic constrution so it will take the knocks & bumps of trainging very well. HTH

Campy

My Feedback: (1)

The SIG 4 Star and the Thunder Tiger Tiger II are a couple of "traditional" low wing trainers. Both are excellent flyers.

Another one you may want to consider is the World Models Rambler 30 or 45 (retracts ). Both of them are floaters and real gentle on low rates, on high rates they are very aerobatic. I have had 2 Rambler 30s. The first one had an OS 46FX in it and could be a real "pocket rocket" if opened up. My present one has an OS 52 4 stroke in it and while not as much of a pocket rocket, has a lot more pulling power than the 46 FX.

CP140

Graham,

The two "standard" first-time low airplanes that you'll probably hear kicked about most often are the Sig Four Star or the Golberg Tiger/Tiger 2.

You'll get opinions on both of them and everybody will have their preference. If you show up at the field with one of those as your "second" airplane 45% of the people will say you picked the right one, 45% will say you should have picked the other one and the remaining 10% will have some other airplane in mind.

FWIW, the four star was my second... I built 2 of the 40 size from kits... one, after I had flown the %^$& out of it, I gave away to a guy who needed an airframe to get back in the saddle (he still has it) and the other survived a couple of "incidents" and is still up in the attic (minus an engine etc). I now have a 40 size and a 60 size (ARFs)... both see a lot of use.

One more thing... Whitehorse isn't all that far north... I grew up in Ross and did high school in Faro!

ghtracey

Thanks for the advice My instructor wasn't too keen on the fourstar as a second plane, he thought something with a little dihedral in it. I'll check into the Tiger II and Rambler and see what they're like. I don't want to go much smaller than a .40, Whitehorse is always windy.

And... Whitehorse is far enough north!! I'm actually from Carmacks, I go there every weekend, get a little flying in at the airport Liking Van a little more than Ross?

carrellh

If you don't mind building, the Sig Astro Hog is a fantastic plane. Built per plan it has a good bit of dihedral and is a very stable flyer that is meant to fly 'on the wing' versus simply drug around by the prop.

But, it is a design from 1950 something and a long running joke about the build is, "Keep the chainsaw good and sharp."

It has instructions to build as trike gear or tail dragger. A .61 two stroke or .70 four stroke will fly it well. A .75 two stroke or .91 four stroke is even better for a lot of people. My Hog has a .70 FS and my brother has a .91 FS on his. Both fly great; his has stronger vertical climb but mine will do big round loops easily with the smaller engine.

TheParrot

A guy in my club is using a Spacewalker ARF as a second plane. Not sure who makes it. But it seems to fly pretty well. He's got a 56 Saito in it, so I imagine a 46 would work too. If youve got your heart set on a spacewalker I will ask him next time I see him.

ghtracey

I was looking at the Astro Hog, seems like a decent plane. I was wondering about the "saw cut" kit quality though.

Kevin, maybe the Seagull ARF? I saw one, not too sure about the quality of their ARF's heard some bad things. How's that one?

Thanks for the input folks.

Graham

CP140

The 4-star does have some dihedral in its wing... some will say too much!

As for the quality of the cutting etc in an Astro Hog kit.. I can't tell you too much. The only thing I can say is that Sig kits I've built have all had pretty decent wood quality.

ghtracey

TheParrot, I'd appreciate if you'd ask him. I was looking at the Seagull Space Walker II 46 ARF. It got some decent reviews and looks like a nice plane. I'm curious if this is the one he has.

Thanks,
Graham

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

I like the 4 star if you are just wanting a light flying sport plane. Its really easy to fly and if you build it light its a very forgiving airplane. Im not much into the "old standards" and could suggest some trendier planes that would probably be a little more aerobatic and still have the gentle qualities of the planes you have expressed interest in. But if you want a rock solid, proven good flyer you cannot go wrong with a 4 star.

lalaland

The Sig Astro Hog gets my vote. Takes a bit longer to build but well worth it in the end. After I finished building mine I told myself, this is too nice looking to actually fly and take a chance on crashing it. After I maidened it last week I couldn't get over how easy it is to takeoff, fly and land. With the right instructor this could be a trainer for a beginner. Stick a nice 4 stroke on it and you'll never want to go back to 2 strokes as far as sound!

IMO the 4 star is more aerobatic due to its smaller size than the hog but doesn't even compare to the hog as far as looks. The hog is also aerobatic, just on the slower side. One guy claimed in rcuniverse he built a hog in 7 days. WOW!

EDIT - (A scroll saw comes in handy for the astro hog and lots of sanding)

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Go with the Tiger II by Goldberg.

It's a little more gentle than the 4*

In fact, the way I was introduced to the Tiger was many years ago when a student of mine bought one. I told him he wasn't ready for that type of plane and that we should go back to the buddy box.

But after trimming it out, and doing two or three laps of the field, I landed it, unplugged the cord, and told him he wouldn't have any problem. It really is a pussseycat - But it will also do any trick in the book short of 3-D maneuvers

schokshi

I see that you are leaning towards Spacewalker II. I am in similar situation. I like the way Spacewalker flys on sim. You can purchase from Horizon Hobby. It is made by Seagull & sells for $119.

I was considering this plane for its looks but I have realized that my second plane has to be sturdy enough to take abuse. I am not sure if Spacewalker is sturdy ennough for anticipated hard landings !!!!!!!!!!

I am now considering Sig 4* 60 but will build cowl to make it look pretty.......

TheParrot

Yes! It's the Seagull ARF, I was thinking Pheonix Models for some reason but that is it. It's a very nice looking plane, and though I haven't flown it, my Dad did fly it with him and he said it flew very well. I would go for it if that is what you want.

ghtracey

Lots of advice here. I'll have to think about this. I agree the Astro Hog looks great. I live in a small apartment at the moment though while my other half and daughter live in another town. Work thing. Anyhow... it doesn't leave me any room to build a kit. My "instructor" (well he trims my planes and gives me pointers ) didn't seem to keen on the Four Star as a second plane, I'm not sure why, I'll have to ask. He also definately frowned on the Matt Chapman Cap 580 I'm looking at the Tiger II and Space Walker II. Yes, leaning towards the Space Walker for the reasons you said, its a pretty plane and it flies nice on the sim. RCU review shows it to be pretty capable in aero as well, if you watch the video. And... well to be fair looks are part of it. I just like the way it looks.

Another one I was looking at was the Hangar 9 Pulse XT 40. I'll do a little research on that one as well.

Thanks for all the ideas everyone.
Graham

wing_man

hey,

if your looking for the spacewalker..like you really really want it go to: [link]http://www.sigmfg.com/cgi-bin/dpsmart.exe/MainMenuFV4.html?E+Sig[/link]

there are also some others you might find catch your eye...o btw these are all kits

hope this helps

Fastsky

I think the 4 star is a waste of time for a second plane. Yes it will fly faster than a trainer but when you throttle it down to land, it will float forever and probably land slower than your trainer. Doesn't help you much if you want to learn to handle sport planes or sport scale war birds after. The Tiger 2 and the Space Walker would be much better choices. I like both planes for flying but for looks I think the Space Walker has the cool factor!! If you want to consider a Sport Scale war bird trainer World Models has a T38 ARF that also works well as a second plane and its reasonable price.

ghtracey

I think I've pretty much decided on the Space Walker after reading a lot of good reviews on here. Minn wrote up a very good review of it. It has some left yaw tendancies on takeoff, but then, so do all the warplanes I want to fly eventually. And yes, on looks alone, it beats any other plane mentioned in this thread. Of course, I have a .46FX and a .46FXi, but I'll HAVE to get a 4stroke for it, won't I? A 2-stroke would just sound.... wrong. (Now to convince the other half that) Actually, will most likely use the 2 and maybe get a 4 later.

First though.... more trainer time. 7 hours total yesterday between the field and the sim doing touch and goes.... that's like a job! Much more fun than my real one.

TideFlyer

I 2nd Fastsky`s recommendation of a WM T-34 as prep for sport scale warbirds. I`ve flown both a 4* and the T-34 and the `34 has a much more deliberate rate of decent than the 4*. A 46 and a 10X6 or 7 prop on the ` 34 and you can get a feel for what a hot landing`s all about!!

ghtracey

I took the Space Walker to committee for approval. My 4 year old co-pilot approves of the design as she figures that one of her dolls can be the pilot, and the wife approved the budget.