Hi everyone, I am looking to buy a high wing trainer for the summer of 2007. I'd like to get a good value combo, probably within the following but I am listening to any other suggestions. I have read RC Ken's recommended list but since it doesn't include comments about the various models I can't be sure if my list contain good models. Let me know :

1) Hobbico Avistar RTF

2) Hangar 9 Alpha 40 RTF

3) Hangar 9 Arrow 40 RTF

4) Sig Kadet LT 40 ARF. Only problem is it will cost about $100 more than the prevous three.


I think I will get an RTF combo because of the better deal but tell me if I'm wrong. The Avistar comes with a Futaba 4VR and an OS .40 LA. The Alpha and Arrow comes with the Evolution Trainer Power System and the JR Quattro. Can I use both the Futaba and the JR Quattro with a flight simulator ? Finally, in case it affect your recommendation, as a second plane ( a year later ), I'd like to get the Hangar 9 P51 Mustang PTS.


Thank you for your suggestions,
Séb

[sm=lol.gif] Welcome to the RCU!

Sig Kadet LT 40 ARF

The extra $100 it will cost you will be very well worth it. It is a very nice looking plane and I can not wait to fly mine this spring. As mine was not an ARF it was also a very nice build.

I would definitely go with the LT-40, you won't be sorry.


I have heard from others that airplanes such as the Hangar 9 P51 Mustang PTS and others of its kind are very poor choice for second plane. A low-wing trainer would be a better choice for a 2nd plane.

Just my 2-cents worth

You can always count on Cyclic Hardover for valuable insight.

The Sig LT ARF is a great little trainer and would give you the opportunity to pick your own engine and radio.
I've trained students on each of the other 3 as well and each has it's own qualities.
The 2 Hangar 9 products come with JR Quatro radios and the Avistar with the Futaba V4F radio. These are all VERY basic entry level radios that you MAY outgrow quickly. For just a few dollars more you could have better radio systems in either plane. Just something to think about. The Avistar is a bit "zippier" and better as a second plane but with a good instructor and good training can be a first plane too.

BTW - about the P51, let's see how the first trainer goes before deciding. Second plane may be another trainer if you have an unexpected Uhhhh "accident".[:@] It may well be the second plane though.

Sometimes, it is good to know what not to by. My recomendation in that list is the Laniar Elplorer 40 ARF. It was more work getting the plane ready to fly than it would have taken to scratch built it. I ended up replacing ALL the hardware with the exception of the main landing gear and it was next on the list just before "The Crash".

I've heard nothing but good about the Sig Lt 40. If you can, I would go with the kit vs an ARF. It sounds as if you are not pushed for time, and it is always good to know what your plane is made of. By carefully folowing the build instructions, you will end up with a better plane than you'll get with an ARF.

I'll second the nix on the Hanger 9 P5t fts. A guy at the field has one and he and his instructor can't get it to fly right. It is really not a trainer.

Most of the guys at the field are recomending a 4 star or a similar plane for a second plane. The 4 star seems to be a good second and everyday plane. A couple of the guys have then and highly recomend them. I've got a 4 star 60 on the board now. The kit is incredable. It took me all of about 30 minute to build up a wing half. You just stick everything together and then use CA with a fine applicator and glue it together. The design almost eliminates the need for the plans as everything on the wing is self spacing and aligning.

One thing about living where it snows, is that you can really spend some building time in the winter. Out here on the left coast, Rain and wind are the only two things to stop us from flying, so building gets sandwitched inbetween. Most of my building time in the last six months has been rebuild time from crashes. I'm in a position now though that I need to finsih the 4 star as I lost my trainer Wed. Lost, like can't find it. I have two other planes ready to fly, but I'm not sure I'm up to either of them yet.

Don

I learned on an Avistar and still fly it regularly 3 years later. It`s an excellent trainer, pretty docile with a 40LA. I replaced the 40 with a 46 and it REALLY woke up! Need an instructor with ANY trainer, but especially an Avistar IMHO. Looking back, however, I probably would have soloed sooner with an LT-40.

I have trained lots of new flyers with whatever they brought out to the field. The Lt 40 is the easiest trainer to learn on. I have had students that had too much trouble with trainers that were a bit faster or more responsive but were able to learn on my LT40 just fine even though it had a strong engine on it. Something else I found out, the LT 40 also has the best ground handlying of any trainer, not that the plane is supposed to spend all of its time on the runway! [8D]

Yeh, what he said except that part about me![8D] Don't forget, the paper airplane is becoming a lost art. How many of you would be where you are today if it were not for the paper airplane! Some of the best disciplinary measures came from throwing paper airplanes and change the course of many lives. Schools, Church Balcony, Meetings

I'm going to go with the Hangar 9 40 RTF, but I'm biased since that's what I learned on. For reference, I started flying this past April, and picked everything up fairly quickly. I'm now on my second plane, a H9 Pulse XT. Here's the pros and cons to the Alpha RTF in my experience:

Pros
1. Goes together very quickly - I bought my plane on Saturday and took it to the flying field to start my training on Sunday.
2. The included Evolution engine starts very quickly, easily, and provides plenty of power. This was my instructors first experience with the Evolution, and he was fairly impressed with it. To date, it really hasn't let me down.
3. The included flywheel and three bladed prop give good engine reliability at idle speed, and keeps the plane slow for training purposes. But, when you get more advanced, you can knock the flywheel of the prop driver and switch to a two-bladed prop for greater power and speed.
4. Increase the throws, and swap out the flywheel and three bladed prop and you have yourself quite a performer. I can get my plane to do square turns and basic manuevers. Despite have a more maneuverable plane, I still love taking my trainer out and throwing it around.
5. Parts and upgradeability - I admit, I got in a little over my head and really had good crash when I was flying this plane inverted. I was able to repair the wing and salvage the tail feathers, but had to buy a new fuselage (although someone with more skill probably could have repaired it). However horizon hobby has all the parts for this plane, so I just got a new fuse and got back to flying. Also, the Alpha is a very standard design, so there's nothing tricky about any modifications you want to do. I now have mine on floats.
6. Great flying airplane. My instructor is a big fan of the Sig LT-40, like many here, but he was just as happy flying this airplane. Like any decent trainer, it doesn't have any bad habits, lands easy and can take the abuse of a few rough landing. Trust me, I know.[>:]

Cons
1. A little more expensive than some other trainers. But considering the $ you'll be spending as you get further into this hobby, the cost difference between the Alpha and other trainers isn't all that great.
2. The radio system is basic. While it's doing me fine for my first two planes, I'm kind of wondering what I'm going to do in the future because I want a plane that's more scale (retracts, flaps, etc.) And before I can do that, I'm going to have to shell out more $$ for a new transmitter.
3. They directions for the RTF say to use the included tape to tape the wing halves together. I did this at first, and it worked fine, but eventually the fuel will get to it. I suggest just epoxying the wing halves together to begin with.
4. While it is an RTF, double check and make sure all the screws and fastners are tight. Even though, you'll notice things starting to shake loose after a few flights. It's no big deal, as you have to do this with any plane, but be aware.

So there's my two cents. I'm attaching a couple of images of my plane, just cause I like showing it off

I have trained people on the Alpha and the LT-40. The LT-40 is more docile, more stable, and larger, making it easier to see. The Alpha will do more aerobatic maneuvers once you're soloed.

In either case, I'd go with the ARF, not the RTF version. Spend a few $ more to get a 6 channel computer radio with a synthesized module, and you'll be set with a transmitter for your next 8 planes.

And don't bother with the 40 LA. For the same money, you can get a Thunder Tiger Pro 46 which is a fabulous engine on any of those trainers (all the reliability of the OS for about 2/3 the cost.

Don't think of it as money spent. Think of it as an up front investment. In this hobby, VALUE is what counts, not COST. Why spend $60 on an engine that you'll get bored with (the 40 LA) when you can spend $80-$100 on an engine that will be ready to move onto your second, third, or fourth plane. Same with the radio gear.

Brad

Very true

I have had a bad time with the Hangar 9 Arrow RTF.
Of the 10 planes purchased, 4 engines were bad and one receiver was bad.
I also think screw on wings are the way to go.

I have seen several JR Quatro radio systems that have never been crashed and almost new (8-15 flights) just stop working. The owners had to take the planes back. Personally, I'm leary of the Quatro system. I have not seen this on other JR radios though.

I started with the nexstar and never had a problem with it in about four years of flying. I would say it is a great plane to learn on and also fly after you have moved on to other planes. However I have also bought a tower trainer and it is a very good plane also, I just did not like the tower engine that came with it so I out a O.S. in it instead. I think most trainers are close to the same and they all have pros and cons of some kind. The list you have are all good planes and I am sure they all fly very well so I guess I would say pick the one you like the looks of best. Good Luck

Thanks a lot for all the advices. I now think I will get a Sig Kadet LT-40. It will be either an ARF or a Kit but I'm not sure about the later. The reason is that I don't have a table I could use to build it so I will have to buy a table and all the required items to build it ( maybe including the magnet system ) and that may get expensive if I only build that one. Since I'd like in the futur to buy a Mustang PTS and a Seawind and that both are not available as a kit I'm not sure it will be a good idea ( read investment ) to get all the equipments for building. I know that you don't build to save money but rather for the fun of doing it but will I ever build any more plane ? I can't answer right now and that's why I'm not too interested in getting the kit version.

Séb

I trained and soloed on the LT-40. It's one great trainer - very predictable and forgiving. I have a Thunder Tiger .46 Pro on it and it does great.

The ARF was excellent quality and came with good instructions to boot.

Good luck.

Oh, I forget to ask an important question. Does the wings on the LT-40 easely disasembled for convenient transport ? 70" is too long for my truck.

thanks,
Séb

Whether or not to build a kit is YOUR decision in the long run. Just a couple of points on that though. IF you have any knid of a flat table you can just flop a piece of cieling tile down on it to build/pin on, works great. No table at all? Go to local home improvement store and see if they have any hollow core doors that are damaged. Cheap and flat. Lay accross a pair of chairs or something else. The biggest thing about the FIRST kit is all of the little things you need to buy, some of which you will eventually buy anyway just to maintain your planes. Saws, pins, covering irons and small tools (which you may already have) to start the list.
Make your choice. BTW - there are a lot of Mustangs out there that are kit built and MUCH nicer than the PTS.

Re: "Does the wings on the LT-40 easely disasembled for convenient transport ? " < No! The 2 wing halves are epoxyed together and then the joint is fiberglassed about 6" wide (3" on either side of joint). If you are really sure that a 70" wing won't fit then look at something smaller like a Tower Hobbies trainer. Midwest has an Aerostar that is a bit larger and its a nice trainer. All the trainers will fly similiar enough to learn on. If you can get some flight sim time before going to the field then a Hobbico Avistar would also probably work for you and its on the smaller side. [8D]

In fact I mean, can you detach the wing easely from the fuselage ? If I can remove the wing from the fuselage, then I will be able to carry them alongside of the fuselage but if they need to stay attached then it's a problem for me.

You are probably right but the Mustang PTS could be a second plane after a year with a trainer which should not be the case I guess with a regular Mustang. Of course, if I decide to go with the building process then I might change my selection to only get planes in kit. I will look about the table and other tools in the following weeks to see if I can get a good deal.

Séb

Sorry, misunderestood. Yes the wings detach very easily. They are just held on by strong rubber bands same as other trainers. The idea is that if the plane has a sudden jar (like when the plane hits a fence) the bands will pop off and prevent a lot of damage. I have watched it happen, it works. Only the very small planes have the wings that stay attached to the fuselage. Sport planes (not trainers) will probably be help on with nylon bolts which are also easy to remove. Nylon bolts don't deteriorate and have to be replaced like rubber bands. [8D]

The kit version of the LT-40 has the wing attached with rubber bands, but the ARF version uses nylon bolts to attach the wing with. The wing on both the ARF and the kit is one piece, but that will actually fit into even a smaller car. If you have a truck you won't have any problems hauling the wing.

Ken

If you can swing the extra cost, I'd recommend a 60-size trainer over a 40. The larger 60-sized trainers are more stable in flight and easier to see.