whic one of these is a good second plane?

I like the Sticks, they are cheap, fly great and are a nice easy first build if youv only had ARF's. My favorite Stick is the SPAD DPS closly followed by th SPADstick, have a look at www.spadtothebone.com

Nothing beats a Four Star 40. They are some of the best flying planes in the world. They will teach you a lot of aerobatics and they still slow down well. But, sticks are my second choice. They also fly well, but not as well as Four Stars in my opinion.

Most of the planes in your poll are frequently recommended as good second planes. My vote is the 4*. Both the 40 and 60 size kits are super easy to build and you can get the 60 size as an ARF if you are not into building. A 4* will do just about anything you want it to and is plenty fast if you open up the throttle, but lands super slow and easy. And although its not the best-looking design in the world, it IS a low-wing tail-dragger!

All would be fine. Pick the one you like best and bet building.

Why does this thread and its responses look surprisingly like all the other ones on this subject? You get the question with the same planes, then a response praising sticks, then the 4* response, then the consensus that all of them are pretty good. I'm not bashing the thread originator here, but maybe a sticky thread should be started on this topic.

Kinda depends on what the first plane was, doesn't it?

While not listed in your choices I like the "Bingo" (as my user name suggests) it is older than the 4*s but is also stronger (I have seen 4*60 wing fail doing a high "G" maneuver that I do all the time with the Bingo).

The "Bingo" draw back is that you may have to build from plans as Ace no kits this bird. The good thing is that it is easy to build even from plans and building from plans will save you some $ and you will have a plane that , in all probability, no one else at your field will have.

I have built several planes designed by Dr. Mathews (designer of the "Bingo") and all are great fliers.

My 2 cents: Point is from a guy on a very limited budget.

You should try to fly some of these planes before you buy (hope your club members are as nice as mine). Then you will know which plane suits your current skill level, then try to go up a notch.

To make my point, I am one person who flew the dog out of my trainer first (I did'nt feel right until I made it snap, crackle and pop, and who says that a trainer won't knife edge well...). It took me 4 months of searching to find my 2nd plane. I considered the sticks, 4*, Somethin Extra, Dazzler, Pizazz, Kaos, Advance, Contender, and Super Sportster (read that I had a chance to fly all of them first). While good for most people, I did not like the response of those planes (only a little better than my trainer) with the exception of the Somethin Extra.

I ended up going with a type of plane that most people would suggest for a 3rd plane, and I'm glad I did. With reduced rates it was as docile as my trainer and went head to head with a Somethin Extra. On normal rates it will flat outfly the other planes, and lets not even talk about 3D rates (have about a dozen flights on this new plane). I'm repairing this plane now (engine backfired during vertical takeoff, yeah, I know it was dumb...but boy is it impressive...), so I bought a used Ultra Stick to fly until my plane is ready.

All I can say is that I'm not impressed with it (even with maxxed out throws; I even went with full sized ailerons to improve roll rate), who needs flaps anyways, it already slows down to a crawl during landing.

Ok, let me back up, I'm not bashing the stick, its a good flyer, just merely saying that I did not have enought performance for me as a 2nd plane.

Back to the point, I think you should buy a plane that you can barely fly now on normal rates, reduce the rates and learn to fly it (even if you have to go the buddy box route the first few flights). You end up needing fewer planes to grow....

While they are all good possibilities, the one that's best is going to depend on YOUR skills. Unless you're VERY comfortable with your trainer, or plane on going back to a buddy box for a few flights, I would stay away from low wing models.

While things like Tigers and 4*'s are often recommended, they should not be automatically considered a "Second Plane".

Remember, when you advance to a second plane, you're still a novice. Your trainer taught you the basics of flying, your next plane will be teaching you the basics of aerobatics, but you are still LEARNING! Which means that your fingers will still be doing new things and crashes (minor or major) are still a very real possibility. So (and I guess the whole point of this is) don't be over anxious to trade your rubber bands in for nylon bolts.

Wildnloose,

I think you were an above average flyer when you went to your 2nd plane. As you said, you had wrung your trainer out thoroughly. The reason the Stick is such a good 2nd plane is because a lot of students jump to their 2nd plane too soon and the "lower performance" of the Stick is perfect to keep them out of trouble. In your case the SE was perfect, in the case where the student is rushing into a second plane, I think they should go with the Stick.

The above is also why I shudder every time I see high performance planes like the Contender and Kaos on these lists as second planes. I think these should be 4th or 5th planes. It's not that I don't like them, I've flown them. It's just waaayyy out of the league for someone just jumping up from a trainer. All this is not a slam to you or anybody, in fact, I commend you for being so ready for your "2nd plane". Fact is, most students are not.

I totally agree with what Goinstraightup said.

Some people can take on an advanced plane their second time out, but most can't, and should not.

Many of the MFGR's are to blame for this also. All too often I see airplanes such as the GP Ultra Sport+ being touted as a good second plane. I LOVE Great Planes, but they should be horse whipped for an ad like that.

MinnFlyer makes a good point. You don't want to step into something that you aren't ready to handle.

I agree with Minn. Many manufacturers try to sell high performance planes by saying they fly "easy as a trainer". I had a flying bud once that was just getting started. He visited another club where a guy was flying a Scat Cat Q500. Of course the guy made the Scat Cat look easy to fly and told him it would make a great 2nd plane. Anyhooo, my bud ended up having the Scat Cat for a 2nd plane. It didn't work out. He ended up getting something easier that worked out better. I am still flying the Scat Cat on it's second fuselage though. What a blast, but not a 2nd plane. Possibly a 5th.

I built a Sig Somethin Extra while "Wringing out my trainer". This worked out great for me.

I also think that one should take in account the nimbleness of the trainer that they learned on. For instance, if you learn on an RCM trainer (Flat bottom wing) as opposed to a semi symetrical wing (such as the Avistar), You may want to lean towards a more docile second plane.

Just my hay penny.


Chad Smith
Elmsford, NY

Goinstraightup,

Your comment was exactly what I was referring to in a not so direct way. People move up too quickly.

I know there are good instructors out there, I had some, but I have seen too many people who either forget to remember what they were taught, or just choose to ignore it. They want to fly that new, cool plane soooo bad. You know them, they are the people who get other people to test fly their planes for them, and they are the ones who refuse to fly on a windy day (not complaining here, gives me more time to fly).

Now, keep in mind that I'm not bashing those who choose to have someone else fly their plane for the first time, In fact, most of my club members fall in that category. I'm just saying that if I'm going thru the trouble to buy it, build it, install equipment in it and cover it; you can believe I will be the first to fly it (or crash it). Now keep in mind, I have only been flying since last May, but I know the basics and know them well.

Now back to the subject. What do you guys think about my last comment on my first post???

I voted none despite what people say about sticks and the 4*.

I've had a look around and there really isn't much out there....

Currently I've got a Superstar 60 (flat bottom) which I've just repaired after putting it through a tree. When I next crash it, if its too bad I'll retire it in favour of the Hobbistar 60 I just got (very similar but semi symetrical)

I've also just bought a Brightstar. This is specifically advertised on the box as a low wing trainer and an ideal 2nd plane, it has a flat bottom wing and it looks like it has plenty of dihedral.

The only other plane similar in this respect to this that I know of is the Slow Poke (40 size).

the reason i always go the stick option is they are so versatile, an easy transition from a trainer and easy to build, one of mine (SPAD DPS) is like grandads axe.

it started life as a standard 40 size stick with a flat bottom wing, then i built a fully symetrical wing for better inverted, then i built another symetrical wing with 3" ailerons and 2 wing servos, then i built a new fuzz 3" longer with bigger control surfaces and used the 2 servo wing on it and went from a 40FP to a TS46.


and my next one is going to be a low wing stick probably using the original flat bottom wing, all from the same basic plans.

As i said this was a SPAD but theres no reason you cant do the same with a set of balsa stick plans.

not only that sticks are easy to scratch build from plans.

oh and there CHEAP so its not a big disaster if you bounce it practicing.

Ok... I havn't even flown my First real plane,(though I have been tearing it up with Fighterbirds and Aerobirds) which is a PT40. However, tonight at the airfield watching the other fellows fly, There were 2 guys with P-51s flying. After speaking with them they said that the P-51 flies very easy and since I have always wanted one, I went afterwards and bought one. Hangar9 .60size P-51arf.
I will not be flying this for a long time untill I've gotten very tired of the PT40,but on the G2 simulator,it is one of the easier planes for me.
Will I regret it or should I look for something to go between these 2 planes?
Derrick

I'm not familiar with the Hanger 9 P51 but a lot of semiscale war birds tend to have some bad habits at lower speeds, like when landing, when in the air they are like any other "sport" plane but you need to fly them on to the strip not float them downlike a trainer, personaly i'd get an in betweener plane.

also it may fly "EASY" for them 2 guys but then what are there skills compared to you or me??

Woodsy is right on the mark when he says that. Scale planes, even (flamesuit on) Cubs, lack all of the self correcting tendencies of trainers. Realistically, you are going to have a lot of $ in the P-51. Probably 600 to 800 dollars. Compare that to the price of a cheap ARF that you just stick your trainers radio and engine on. Also I read in a review that the H9 P-51 retracts were a little tender and even an experienced pilot doing the review dingled them on a landing. I would make sure you are landing very smooth before taking out the P-51.

Somewhere in this thread someone said that the choice of a second plane depends on what your first plane is. Maybe this is more key than folks realize.

I learned to fly R/C on an LT-40, moved to a 4* after three months, then a Nobler two months later. I've only been flying R/C for a total of 6 months and am now building my 4th plane- a 60 size 300S. So far, no serious crashes- my shop is filling up with planes fast and if I don't begin crashing some soon I am worried my wife won't let me buy anymore.

But my LT-40 was kit-built with 1/2 the recommended dihedral and a 46FX for power. It is no pattern plane, but I was able to practice inverted flight, rolls, cuban-8's, and how to recover from a vertical stall with it before moving on. The 4* is much quicker and will do more radical maneuvers, but is not all that different from my LT-40 during "normal" flight. Anything less than the 4* for a second plane would have been a wasted step.

So, maybe the proper response to the 2nd plane question depends on the answer to some more questions, some of which depend on what the beginner learned on: How fast is his first plane? How long has he been flying it? Can he find the runway regularly when landing? Can he do basic maneuvers? How about inverted flight and more complex maneuvers?

I sort of agree here, but think you should be able to fly it on normal rates, then turn the rates up to get more performance.

My second plane was an E.Z. extra 230 arf thing. The construction was that foam board covering type, but that plane would do it all (flat spins were really flat!). The reason it was a good second plane was that thing was basically a shoulder mounted design, and had a semi-symetrical airfoil.

And so you know, I was not an above average pilot (I am still pretty much average).

Essentially, it depends on your comfort level and your interest.

I edited this post after re-reading it.

You should only fly a plane that you are READY for. In some cases, moving from a trainer to an advanced trainer may call for a buddy box, just to get you through the first few mistakes while you're getting used to the difference. But flying a plane that you can barely fly is never a good idea.

I would have to say that for the average flyer thats very Bad advice!!! If you can't handle a plane when the throws are setup to manufacturers specs. then you are most likely asking for a crash.