Due to medical school, I was forced to take a long break from flying. Before this break, the 3 planes in my hangar consisted of an Avistar trainer, a Sig Somethin' Extra, and even though it wasn't officially mine, I took over my friend's Advance 40 when we converted from R/C planes to R/C cars. Anyway, here I am almost 5 years later and getting back into flying has been like riding a bike: you never forget how. While I am able to fly all my old planes pretty darn well, I am hesitant to go out and purchase a super advanced plane; however, I have always been interested in big scale aircraft. I think that the bigger something is, the cooler it is. I would think that something larger would be more stable and easier to fly (albeit more expensive and possibly more complicated to build). However, I have seen numerous warnings regarding flying these larger birds. For instance, a plane I was looking into was the Giant UCanDo or the Showtime 90, however all these planes recommend having experience on an easier-to-fly low-wing plane (like the Goldberg Tiger 60). Then I looked at the Goldberg Tiger 60, which recommends that I have experience flying a 60-size trainer. UGH!!! Do I really need to learn how to fly all over again on "bigger" planes in order to get to some of these cooler large-winged birds? Please help me out here! [:@]

I think that if you took every little bit of "advice" (legal crap) in a manual you would spend 10x as much as you need to and never get onto a big plane. It is probably a good idea to get a smaller low-wing plane first so you get the feel for them before you spend the big bucks on a bigger, harder to fly and more dangerous plane.

As a second plane, the Tiger 60 is just fine. It's what I had as my second after the trainer, which was a Hobbico NexSTAR. The Tiger 60, for instance, is very easy to control, although it does fly somewhat different from the high-wing trainer with a lot of dihedral. In fact, I would almost consider the Tiger 60 as a low-wing trainer!!

What I did was I flew the Tiger 60 for a few flights with an instructor who was there to help me with the harder parts of getting used to a low wing aircraft. This permitted me to make minor mistakes with the instructor there to correct them and show me what to do. After three flights with an isntructor, I had it pretty much under control.

That was several years ago and I still have the Tiger 60 and still fly it.

Larger is not always better, under certain circumstances. Some of the more advanced aircraft are not as forgiving upon approach and landing as the Tiger 60 is. Because of the wing design, short fuselage, they require a rather fast approach and landings are much more exciting as with a slower plane such as the Tiger 60.

There are others that qualify as 'good second planes'. One such plane is the Sig Four Star 60. It is very similar to the Tiger 60. You must consider that the larger planes are more visible than the smaller ones and those with large wings with good wing loading factor, will give you soft and smooth performance, yet can do all the neat things that the other, more aerobatic planes can do.

Pattern planes, in the 90 size range (Excelleron 90, Venus II, and so on... I mention those two because I have them and fly them on a regular basis now) are very smooth and rather easy to fly because they are very stable and fly straight. But, they can be somewhat difficult on landing because they require a faster approach than a trainer, or even planes like the Tiger 60. They go where you point them. Bank left 30 degrees and they will stay there... that sort of thing.

The U-CanDo is a very nice plane, on the order of the pattern planes that I have but considered more 3d'ish than a Venus II for instance. It is faster than a trainer, can be made to be very responsive and agressive, but toned down a bit to give you something to move up to by changing the throws, for instance. But, starting out with a 'low wing trainer' type aircraft is a good way to go. It will give you the training needed to handle a low wing plane. Remember, that the U-CanDo is a mid wing aerobatic aircraft, as are most of those high-performance aircraft.

Best of luck with your next choice of aircraft. Let us know what you come up with.

DS.

Bigger is NOT ALWAYS better - it's just bigger.


If you have a love of large AC - then buy / build one! They are more stable and will fly when many others will be grounded, you will need bigger servos, motors etc - talk to a local expert or frequent the Giant Scale forums.

Other than that - they are airplanes - buy a big truck, or trailer to move them with. Have a big workshop to maintain and store them - then go flying!

Not many planes out there, even though larger, are more difficult than your Somethin' Extra or the Advance 40. If you're comfortable with them again, go for it. It's only that you'll have more dollars in the air.

I would hardly consider a .60 size plane a "giant scale" plane. It's more middle of the road giving you most of the advantages of both large and small planes. As far as not being "grounded" in windy weather, well, I have flown 1/2A RC planes in winds that grounded most of the people at the field.

When model airplanes approach the size of full scale airplanes, they start to fly like full scale airplanes, when they approach the size of birds, they fly a lot like birds, scale them down to the size of insects and they start to fly a lot like insects. Flys can't fly the way a Boeing 747 flys, on the other hand, a 747 can't do an inverted landing on the ceiling. What size flys "better" depends a lot on what your definition of "better" is.

Bruce Tharpe Engineering BTE look at the giant flying king..it is a giant trainer..a guy at my field has one with a 106cc DA engine, its huge and he can crab it down the runway 20 feet up like it was a kite on a string...then pour the power on and hover the thing....too cool..Rog

The only objection I would have to something that large would be the expense of all the accessories needed.. larger more powerful servo's, multiple batteries, larger fuel tank, larger gas engine (expensive in itself), and so on. All this can really add up when talking a plane that large. But, if money is no object, then, sure, that might be a good choice.

DS.

I'm building a killer bee. How do bees fly? Scientists still haven't figured it out, so my plane may be permenantly grounded

You forgot to mention that you also need a big vehicle to transport these planes to the field. It's pretty hard to put a 40% Extra 300 in a Honda Civic. Also, you need to consider the preflight foreplay, assembly etc. The nice thing about something like a Mini Ultra Stick is that you can throw it in your subcompact car assembled, stick a charged battery into it, and do a couple of flights during your lunch hour.

Yeah.... what you said!!

U-CAN-DO airplanes, whether it is the .40 size or the 120 size are basically what you make them. They can be very docile or aggressive it all depends on how you set it up. They are not a fast airplane, as a matter of fact there is a warning furnished with the aircraft that cautions you about full throttle flight. I personally think the 60 size is an excellent 2nd airplane. The 120 size shouldn't be any different as far as one's ability to fly it. Start with gentle throws and work your way up to the more aggressive maneuvers. I say, buy it, build it, and fly it, you'll love it. Surely there are members of your club who have owned a UCD and can offer their advice on setting it up.

Regards,
doubledee

skul,

I don't understand why Goldberg would say "if you have experience flying a 60 size trainer." It should just say "if you have experience flying a four channel trainer." Whether it is 1/2A, or huge, it's a trainer and you learned how to fly with it.

If you're already comfortable with the SSE & Advance, I don't think there's a compelling reason to get a Tiger before the UCD or Showtime.

Thanks everybody for your help! Since I have an older Futaba 6-channel computer radio, I am limited to 3 model memory and was thinking of filling out the last memory slot with a more "basic" plane. I'm therefore probably going to go with the Tiger 60. Even if it isn't advanced enough for me, I've read great reviews and am sure it will be an enjoyable plane to come back to. After all, there's nothing wrong with having too many planes in the hangar! I later plan on purchasing a Futaba 9CAPS and experimenting with PCM and digital servos in the UCanDo or Showtime. Thanks again guys.

If yer gonna go big, go big:

[link=http://www.carlgoldbergproducts.com/12077.htm]Tiger 120[/link]

1.2a, 10, 15, 20, 25 size planes are buy default more sensitive to winds and, depending on several factors are generaly more sensitive to control input. Ground effect also tends to have more effect on smaller aircraft. All this equals faster pilot correction response time. Trainers (pilots) need thought processing time to react so this is really not a good match.

The larger you go the more "stable" an aircraft becomes due to more surface areas available to air flow. Larger planes tend to have thicker airfoils which translates to slower more stable flight etc.

Some would argue the points above but I am comparing apples to apples. small trainer vs largerer trainer of the same design etc.

generaly most trainers start in the .40 size due to the above with .60 gaining speed (so to speak) price and transportability probably has some effect on .40 vs .60 airframes too.

I have really over simplified things but I think you get the idea.

Bill

I have a cap 580 1/3 scale with a da100 in it . It lands at the same pace as a trainer. it is very stable in the air and can see it beautifully

I like bigger better, but it does carry a higher pucker factor. Once you get over this, you won't want to go small again. I have a 40 size ultimate and a 120 size ultimate. Both fly great, but personally the 120 flies much better, much easier, and is very very visible. Now compare to this to my new 50cc Extra 260, and the airplane is even more easy to fly, easier to land, and handles the wind better. the downsize is the insides are way more complex, and there are more failure points. One switch? Nah, make that two switches to be safe, ignition battery, ignition module throwing interference, servos binding on multiple servo surfaces, elevator halves matching, you get the picture. So while a larger plane is easier to fly, it is definitely harder to maintain. Just my .02.

I used to fly a Futaba 9CAP, but just last month I switched into the new age of R/C radio equipment.
Rather than buy an old fashioned radio...like the 9CAP, step up into the state of the art radio....Spektrum DX-7 from Horizon Hobbies. $350, and it comes with 4 digital servos. It's not simply another radio...its a radical new era opening up. The real value here is that it is NOT operating on the old outdated and extremely vulnerable 72 mhz...but rather on the new and quite wonderful 2.4 Ghz. A totally different world. No more radio hits, no more intereference...no more frequency pins...do away with the impound...turn it on anywhere...anytime...no danger of hurting anyone else....and much much more. It is the answer to our prayers and dreams.
I'm not selling this gear, but you owe it to yourself to check into Horizons web site and read the literature, and watch the explanatory videos. The change over from the old 72 mhz to the new 2.4 ghz is taking the hobby/sport by storm. Read up on it before investing the same money in old technology. You'll be very glad you did.
Welcome back to r/c, and best of luck with it.
PS: You already know how to fly...get the bigger plane that you like and enjoy it. There appears to be altogether too much emphasis on staying with a "trainer". A heavy warbird may not be your next move up, but certainly a U-can-do is a piece of cake.

I too am a fan of 2.4ghz, but playing with the DX7 is rough. Its the JR user interface I just can't get used to. I'll go 2.4ghz as soon as there is a module for my 9cap or for when I upgrade to a 12z that is able to run 2.4ghz. I do admit I'll probably get a dx6 to fly my park flyers.

hi ifly a cap 580 1/3 scale . there is nothing hard about it it is just bigger with a different propulsion {hoarse power). Just go by the book and you won't go wrong. bigger is better they handle the wind better and my gosh you can see it real good. I don't know if you guys have to be certified to fly large models 7kg and above but here in aussie we do.but it is not hard. the set up on them is not hard either i run a power box in mine . 2... 5 cell sub "c" 3700 nmih for the rx and p/box and 4 cell sub"c" 3700nimh for my ignition on my DA100

Those larger planes are only "cooler" in your own mind. Unless they're doing a nice slow roll at full speed about 5 feet off the ground I think they are boring to watch.

Yes, they do cut the wind better and look nice on the ground, but I prefer flying the smaller ones with my buddies racing and chasing each other around up in the air.

As far as that Tiger 60, it's no harder to fly than the smaller ones.

Those large "cooler" planes are a big waste of money if you ask me! When someone flys their little $400 Tiger 2 into your so called "cooler" $4000 plane, I guarantee you'll be out more money than he is!

And that's a fact!

edit....."slow roll".....

I'm sure that's going to happen every day at the field. Since I've been flying, I've seen no.. read none.. zero.. mid-air crashes involving anything. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but so far it has not.

The larger planes are easier to see so it makes them easier to fly because you can see what's going on with them. Most of the larger planes, 60 - 120 sized planes that are considered "second or third" planes, are comfortable and easy in the air and handle well. Upon landing, you can see what the plane is doing which, for a second plane, usually opens up the eyes of the pilot to see more than they could with their 40 size plane. And, in the sky, they are easier to see as you do maneuvers.

I have both smaller and larger planes, but for a good relaxing flying day, I will fly my Tiger 60, Tiger 120 or Venus II any day.

DS.

One advantage of a "big" airplane I haven't seen mentioned here is that they wind up being more economical to operate. After you get over the shock of buying a gas engine, servos, etc etc. I think the main reason that Goldberg reccomends a larger Tiger to someone with large plane experience is mainly to ensure that it isn't set up wrong, I.E. too small servos, flimsy linkages, etc etc. Zope Pope is spot on about more complexity, and he's just talking about an aerobatic airplane with basic flight controls and maybee smoke. A big warbird? 15+ servos, retracts, bomb drops, etc etc...... lots of work.
But the real danger of big airplanes is that you can't go back. Once you've flown a larger plane, the smaller planes seem, well, small!

Andy

The smallest I have is a 50cc. Everything else is 40 to 46%. The only down side is you need a trailer to haul them. Once you fly big you never go back. I use the 50cc when i can't stay at the field all day. If you want to see a lot of big planes all in one place come to Bowling Green, KY the last week-end of July. We will have planes up to 50%. Mac Hodges will be here with his B-29. You can PM me for more information or check the club web-site. Skymacrc.com. Dennis