Im intrested in building my first trainer,and would be intrested in peoples thoughts on the two kits im intrested in. Sigs Kadet LT40 and Laser Models Ibis. What iis the quality of the kits like,ease of building and are the flying qualitys good for a trainer? If anyone can suggest any other kits (not ARTF) would be intrested in hearing from them.Thanks

Wingman:

I just soloed a Kadet LT-40 about a month and a half ago. From my experience, it is a great trainer. I am a kit builder, and really wanted to go with the Kadet kit, but just didnt have the time right then to build, so I went with the LT-40 ARF. The ARF kit was easy to build, was of great quality, and went together without any problems. I did reinforce a few glue joints in the firewall area, but that was only because I wanted to, not that it needed it. the instructions are straight forward, and have good assembly pictures. I will tell you this: Be sure and coat the inside and outside of the firewall, and the fuel tank area with epoxy for fuel proofing. The instructions neglect to tell you to do this, and it is very important if you want your plane to last. I also replaced the stock wire main gear with the heavier plastic Du-Bro gear. It doesnt cost much, and the Du-Bro gear is much more durable. I am running an older Webra .46 engine on mine, and have used 10x6 Master props, and have experimented with a Top Flite 11x7.5 Power Point prop, with good results. All my radio gear is JR (XP662, 537 servos, R700 reciever). The Kadet LT-40 is a very stable trainer, being as large as it is. I saw one of these a couple of weeks ago that a guy had converted to a taildragger, and installed a Saito .56 four stroke on the nose, and had converted the wing to a bolt on configuration, instead of rubber band mounting. It would actually do some great aerobatics. Anyway, I dont think you could go wrong with the Kadet.

I personally feel that the Midwest Aerostar is the best trainer ever designed and kitted. Our club had four of them at one time as instruction planes. I also heard that the ARF is quite good too. I also have been using an H9 Solo Sport as an instruction plane for the last 2 years and it is working fine.

Goinstraightup,

In keeping with the two planes you have specifically asked about I would suggest the LT-40. It's a well known fact the LT-40 is a great trainer. I know nothing about the Laser Models Ibis, and that it why I recommend the LT-40. There are so many people with LT-40's if you ever need any help or have questions you should have absolutely no problem finding help. For your first plane I would buy something that you can get tons of support with when needed. That being said, I'm sure the Ibis is a great flying plane, and you really won't go wrong with either. Good luck.

I can't speak for the Ibis, but the LT-40 is excellent. Others to consider are the Great Planes PT-40, and the Goldberg Eagle

Last year i built and flew the great planes pt 40 with great results.
I knew nothing about rc planes and after building the plane i
can't say enought about the the GP instruction book that comes
with the kit.
It was a great help for me.

The LT-40 and the PT-40 seem to be the planes of choice at our field and I dont think I have ever heard a complaint about either one.

I soloed on an LT-40 with a TT46 Pro.

IMO- its the only trainer to use. It's big and easy to see. It flies very stable. It slows down for landings.

One suggestion though- get an ARF.

Don't waste your time building a kit for your first plane. Your going to crash it anyway.

Get the ARf and slap it together in a weekend. Then go out and start training right away. And when you do crash it--trust me, you will---you won't be near as upset, because its just an ARF.

It will take a month or more to build a kit. You'll have to buy all kinds of tools, which increases the initial cost of the hobby. You'll most likely make a mistake-- I did on my first kit. You'll have so much time and energy into the kit; that when you crash it; it's gonna suck.

The ARF, on the other hand, will only take you about 15-20 hours to assemble. You won't have all the "blood, sweat, and tears" into the ARF.

Get the ARf and go flying. Buy a kit and start building it as your training. That way, when you smack the ARF, you got something to fly.

I got an ARF LT-40 and started training. Then, I bought a Sig Kadet Senior Kit. I started building the kit right away. I smacked my ARF LT-40 on my 8th flight. I went right out and bought another ARF LT-40 and put it together over a weekend. I never missed a lesson.

After I soloed, I flew my LT-40 for about 6 months. Then I started flying my Kadet Senior. I've never regretted my decisions.

Good luck

One of the guys at our field actually bought 3 LT-40 ARF's. He flew one and used the other 2 to replace the parts he broke. He never missed a lesson and really wasnt that bad of a pilot. He just wanted to be sure he would always be in the air.

Other kits not arf

Great Planes trainers are a good choice, Sig Kadet also good.
Wanna go big?
A&A Bud Nosen trainer, Lots of sticks and wood but 'fairly' easy kit, lots of cutting. And some say the Telemaster.

Dan Z

In response to your question about trainer I went with a Sig LT-40 Kadet ARF. It was a good choice for me as I did have my share of crash landings and since I had built it I knew basically what needed to be done to fix it. The plane is a hardy aircraft with an co 46fx on it. You should get some one who has built one to look yours over during construction and before your first fight and make suggestions to make it more air worthy. You should also get your instructor identified while you are building it and let them help you with pre flight items. I did things like changed the wheels to larger ones because of the grass field that I fly off of, I cut fuel line pieces to make little rubber bands for holding the various plastic clips together, I ran a plastic tube down inside to run the antenna wire through, I installed a fuel dot in the side to make fueling easer and so that I did not wear the fuel line tubing at the motor by taking it off and on, I reinforced the front around the motor mounts to make the sides stronger since they stick out unprotected, I think an aluminum motor mount would be better than the fiber one that comes with the kit, I put some red and black stripes on the bottom of the wing so that I could tell the orientation of the plane.............Like one of the other post I also built a Sig Senior Kadet for the mew level of flying......My trainer also used a Hanger 9 ultra Stick 120 to teach me to do the basics of flying but when it came time to land we switched back to the LT-40. The Ultra Stick 120 is large and easy to see and it really helped , I have been looking for one for myself but they have stop ed building them, But I called them today and they said there is a good chance that they are going to offer them in the spring....Good Luck in your selection,,,,,

LT-40 is one that I think everyone agrees on, I have not flown one but have seen quite a few fly at the field. They seem to be great planes.
I learned on, and still fly my Hobbico Superstar trainer. The Avistar is also a great plane.

I dont think they make the superstar or avistar in kit form though.

Not sure about the other plane you mentioned.


Dbow

I'd also agree with getting the ARF. It'll actually be cheaper than buying a kit with no tools. Also an ARF will fly way better than your first kit. First time builders make lots of mistakes (major ones like 2 left wings) and you'll find that your first kit built plane will be f'ugly and not a very efficient flyer. If you learn on an ARF that's built straight, then you'll have a better chance of not crashing the ugly, twisted, patched thing that you slaved over for 2 months.

The Sig LT-40 is the easiest kit that I've ever built. The quality of the kit is excellent, and it is very complete (not a lot of additional stuff to buy). It is a large, light trainer that flies well with small low-cost engines. I believe the larger trainers are easier to fly, and I don't think you can go wrong with the LT-40.

By it's numbers, the IBIS should be a pretty nice trainer. I have not flown one.

I generally agree with all of the favorable comments about the LT-40, and it, or the LT-25 is the model I generally recommend.

However, if you have a good instructor and you build it well, I am sure that you would have no trouble with the IBIS. There is some attractiveness in the idea of not building a trainer that looks like everyone elses, and the IBIS is a nice looking bird.

Put another way, If you showed up at my field with an IBIS, I would not shy away from teaching you with it, and I think most other instructors would agree.

If you want to build a kit, then by all means do so. The Sig is an excellent flying plane. From what I have seen of the Ibis it should be too. (The engineering of a trainer is not rocket science) If you are really sure you want to build, another choice might be a Telemaster 40 (same size as Sig LT40) or a Senior Telemaster. The Telemasters are tail draggers but find taking a properly built tail dragger off is easier than a trike. They are much more work than the Sig kit though, especially the Senior, but it's much larger.

I have spoken to around a dozen shops in and around London. The general theme is that a kit plane is tougher than than ATRF. The Ibis 40 has been thought of as a very good plane, with good reviews. The quality of the kit is excellent, from what I have seen.

However, it is recommended that the Ibis is your second plane, as you will destroy the first one. The shops almost all say to start with an ic 40 trainer, not a 25, or electric.

Most shops recommend the Irvine Tutor 40, however, for a little extra, the ARC Ready 2 is regarded as much better, and very hard to destroy.

I agree with shero-113 about the ibis.I built a pt 40 and built a ibis while learning on the pt 40.It was a very nice kit that went together with precision,but i demolished on the first flight.It should be your second plane.I'm still flying the pt 40.

I think that the Senior Telemaster is a wonderful plane to build and a great trainer as well. It was my very first plane and I love it!

Being brand new to the hobby, I have only completed 3 training flights. I have bought a Big Stik 60 with a Magnum 65 engine. Friends at the club have told me that the Big Stik is a bit of a handful as it is so responsive & fast, but I seem to be coping. There are many others in the club that swear by the 40 Stik as the best trainer.

I was gifted an LT40 and OS46FX when I wanted to get into the sport. I built the kit slowly, assuming it had to be perfect to fly, even though the kit is complete and easy to construct. It flew great with the 46 and after the first major crash it flew just as well with a .32FX. Crash caused when rudder departed company with the fus, that is a definite weakspot by the way. I learned a lot about building with balsa but would never again build another kit as my focus is on the flying of the things. I built an Armidillo and then a spad next and have become completely hooked on the game. That would not have happened if I had continued to fly and worry about the LT kit I built.

what I can get the kit cheap? I have no tools at all. what I shold buy to build up the kit myself except radio?

thx u

www.hobby-lobby.com telemaster 40 is a good kit to build?

SWAT

Hi i recomnend you the Ibis as second airplane

Last fall I lost a Big Stik 40 to a mid-air (I was struck from below & it popped the wing bolts). I had mine set up as a tail dragger which made it a little trickier to taxi and take off. As a tri it would have probably been easier to land than the RCM 40 I had as a trainer. It has excellent low speed characteristics. BUT (big but) it will eventually bite you as a trainer unless you are extremely cautious or lucky. Take your eyes off it, lose it in the sun, catch a gust under a banking wing, lose orientation and you're boned. It has neutral stability and will fly happily straight into the ground. A trainer should have positive dihedral/stability so that in a panic you can release the sticks and it will correct itself - at least somewhat.

It is a good flying plane, but I would rate it too hot and sensitive for a trainer. Even if you were to tape the throttle to go no higher than 1/2 you would still not have the pendulum stability of a trainer. I learned to drive and took my road test with a standard shift, but an automatic would sure have made it easier.