I would go with the alpha. Thats what i learned on and i love it. Then after i learned i did what you want to do, i got the P-51 mustang pts. I also like that a lot. I got the RTF and had no problems at all. The most important thing i can say is get and instuctor!!! They help a lot. I would stay on the alpha for a while even after you solo to get that extra practice. The mustang is a lot different.

Good luck and have fun

Chris

The LT40 is the same size as 60 size trainers but only needs a 40/46 engine becasue it is a lighter but still sturdy design. Thats why it is right up there for being one of the top trainers. [8D]

I just read that Sig is now coming with an RTF version of their Kadet LT40. It comes with the Sig's Aviastar Av-46 2 Stroke Glow Engine and the Hitech 4-Channel Radio. It should sell for a bit less than $400 cdn. I can get the Alpha and Arrow .40 RTF for about $330cdn. What do you think of this new RTF combo ? I have learn about the difference between the various planes I have on my list but what about the value of this combo when compared to the two others ?

I'm still waiting and reading a lot before I buy, that is a bit difficult to make a choice. For example I just found a Thunder Tiger 40 MKII RTF for only $250cdn ! Wow it look like a deal but how can I know it when you're a total newbee I'd like to avoid making a mistake. I want a radio that can be use with a flight simulator and with a buddy box capability. I don't really care if the radio is not great as I will buy a better one later on when really needed ( maybe in 3-4 years ). I will still keep that first 4 channels radio to practice on the simulator. I will use the simulator a lot so that's ok with me if I only use this radio for this purpose in the future. That will help keep my starting cost a bit lower.

Thanks again,
SĂ©b

Advice on your first trainer:

There are many good ARF and RTF packages out there today, which are very good values. It is my opinion that you should consider building your first trainer, and let me tell you why. If you can build, then you will understand how to do repairs in the future. Trust me when I say that repairs will be needed. This is an unavoidable fact.

The Goldberg Eagle 2 is a wondederful trainer, and is easy to build. I built mine when I was 14 years old, and kept it until last year (another story). The Eagle is a very stable and forgiving platform for someone learning.

I would certainly recommend that you join your local club, and seek guidance. Usually, folks are very helpful, and happy to help one another out.

As far as power, I would recommend either an OS FX or an Enya 40. Enya is sort of an unsung hero in my opinion. They are still avalible through richmondrc.com

There are several good four channel radios out there today. Your local hobby shop should be able to help you with that. Most shops should also be able to get the Eagle. If not, then it's at Tower Hobby.

Again, build your first plane. It's a great learning experience, and will help you in the future.

As for your second plane:

Sig Four Star 60

Hope this helps

J. Perry

Since lots of people recommend the Sig LT40 as a good trainer, what do y'all think of the LT40 Electric RTF version?

It has a FlyWare outrunner motor and the Sig web page claims it gets 10 minute flights on an 8-cell 3300 mAh Ni-MH battery pack.

The flying weight at 6.25 lbs is a little more than the glow version (6 lbs).

This sounds like a good option for people (like me) who don't like the noise or messiness of glow engines.

Sorry, I like the noise.

And the goo to wipe up.

Mmmm, goo. Yummy.

So is a couch. ;-)

What good's a cat that can't purr AND growl.

I second the recommendation of the Goldberg Eagle II. I got the Eagle II ARF and soloed on my second flight. The third time out at the field with it I was flying in 15 mph winds, wasn't fun, but kept it in one piece. The only negative I can think of is that it just wants to float on landing if the engine isn't at a dead idle.

Bruce, you obviously have eaten my wife's cooking!!!!

Ken

Yeah, you and the guy down the street who revs his Harley for 20 minutes every morning at 5:00am before he leaves for work. [:@]

Now that's excessive. 10 minutes is plenty for a Harley. 20 minutes for Japanese junk.

Thank you pkevinb. You are right about the floating. This can also be an advantage to a beginner however. I wish that I still had my Eagle II. My son is a 1 1/2 years old, and I can't wait to get one from him.

pkevinb, what did you use for power?

Also, has anyone else built the Eagle II as a kit?

I have an OS .40 LA. on it. It flies around well at just under 1/2 throttle. I have an 11 year old step-son that gets a turn at it next. I imagine he will do better than myself.

What makes the Best Trainer.

A while back (about 6 years) I was helping another new student, Grant. He has a PT60 with a OS FP60 and a 4 four channel radio. He got everything as a package. Teaching him to fly with this plane is almost impossible. The engine is great, the plane takes off and lands ok, but it is a pig in the air and difficult to fly. He built it according to the instructions with an obscene amount of dihedral. We were flying in a moderately stiff breeze, 12-15mph. The plane had slightly more throws than recommended. Turning down wind tool a little aileron and let go of the sticks and it completed the turn and headed down wind on it’s own. Turning up wind was almost impossible without coordinated use of aileron, rudder, and elevator. Flying it seems more like fighting the plane to get it where we want it than having it fly where we tell it. It does not respond to control inputs in a uniform manner. It is difficult to teach a skill when identical actions get different responses. I will again start a thread on what makes a good trainer.

The current dogma says to learn to fly RC model airplanes the best way to start is with a “Trainer” that has a high flat bottom wing with generous dihedral so it self corrects. I believe this is wrong! I believe the following are the best characteristics for a trainer.

1. Flies Slow (light wing loading)
2. Flies Very Stable
3. Responds to controls in a uniform fashion (Does What it’s told When it’s told the same way every time)
4. Inexpensive and easy to repair

Take note, nowhere in that list do I list the type of plane, high wing, low wing, mid, wing shoulder wing, doesn’t make that big a difference as long as it is slow stable responds to it’s controls uniformly. It is an easy task to limit the amount of control to get the control rate at an acceptable level for a beginner.

Nowhere in the list is the term “Self Correcting”. Planes designed to self-correct are harder to fly. If you try to allow them to self correct they will crash long before finish correcting themselves or you fly them so high you can’t tell what the plane is doing. “Self Correcting” also means that you will have to fight the plane to turn up wind, fight the plane to turn it in general. We are teaching people to fly R/C models not guide free flight models. The early days of RC we used modified free flight models. Current Trainers reflect our free flight heritage.

My experience has shown that people who learn with typical Trainers all learn in about the same amount of time as somebody who learns with a “Sport” plane. I know a lot of people have successfully learned to fly with Eagle II’s and the like but from what I’ve seen the people who learn with a “Trainer” crash more after they solo, especially when they go to something sportier. After learning with a “Trainer” they pretty much have to re-learn to fly anything else. People who learn with a “Sport” plane learn to fly just as fast, crash less after they solo, and can fly a larger variety of aircraft sooner.

Planes I think make good trainers and that I have successfully taught people to fly with:
1. Four Star 40 (probably the best trainer ever!!!)
2. Ugly Stick (any of several variations)
3. Easy Sport 40
4. Airmidillo Trainer
5. Sig LT25 (very slow, very responsive, way better flier than LT40)
6. Sig Midstar 40

All these planes are very stable, don’t tip stall, can fly very slowly, respond uniformly to controls, and have fairly light wing loading. These characteristics make better trainers than typical Trainers. Now all we have to do is get instructors to take a critical look at Trainers. I don’t buy arguments like: “The XYZ trainer has worked great to train zillions of students for years”, or “I learned on a SR. Kadet, so that’s the best trainer”. Doctors used to bleed people that didn’t make it right. With the absolutely dependable radios of today, and buddy cords, we don’t need to learn with glorified free flight models.