I just recently got back into rc planes and this time around I decided to have the thrill of building them myself. My first kit should be done soon, it is the GP PT-40mkii. My question. What to build for a second kit? Actually it will be a third kit Im going to build a second PT-40 for a back up and more experience. I have read the thread on what plane would be good for a second plane, but I would like to know what would be a good kit for getting more building experience. My goal is to build the TF F4U Corsair Giant Kit so I think I will need some kits with a little more building challenge to work up to that. I do plan on building the GP Super Skybolt before attempting the Corsair, and after reading a build thread on that kit I realize I will need probably a couple more builds before attempting that one as well. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.



John

If you can find one, then the BTE Venture 60 is good, or one of the 4 Star models. You might try looking through the Sig Catalog and see if something there piques your interest. There are still a good number of builder's kits out there, so find one that you like, and start cutting wood. I don't know why someone would tell you that you shouldn't build the Top Flight Corsair. It is a straightforward build, and goes together quite nicely. If you hit a spot where you get lost, then the internet, and this site is a great place to gain information. It's like having a group of master builders sitting at your elbow while you are building.

Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brother #1

Not only will you need building experience for that F4U kit, but you will need a lot of flying experience.

My suggestion would be something in the order of a low-wing mildly aerobatic plane, sometimes considered a low-wing trainer. My second was a Goldberg Tiger 60. It was bigger than a 40 size plane, had the low wing setup, flew and landed somewhat like a trainer, but was also aerobatic enough to give you those thrills of learning the capabilities of the aircraft.

The Tiger is a trike gear (nose wheel) setup. Another alternative is the Four Star 60. Same type of aircraft, but it is a tail dragger, and is a tad bit more aerobatic.

Whatever you decide to get, check out the flying characteristics of that particular kit (Tower Hobbies gives a brief description of the aircraft they sell, ie.: beginner, intermediate, advanced) so stick with something no more than intermediate. Fly it with an instructor with a buddy box for the first flight.

Good luck.

CGr

The reason I want more experience is me and wood working dont mesh real well [X(]. That and the Corsair is my favorite plane and I want to make sure I can do a real good job on the build. Thank you for the info though I will definately check some of those out.


John

Thanks for the info CGRetired. I do have quite a bit of flying experience, although it was about 18 years ago. The corsair would definatly be a plane that I would have to wait awhile to fly, to make sure I get more than plenty of stick time to get back into the feel of it.



John

Best of luck, John. You can be assured of getting more advice than you bargained for here on RCU.. most of it is good, though. When in doubt, ask away. I'm sure Minnflyer and RCKen will also chime in here and offer some real good advice. They have built and flown just about everything in the inventory, and have written reports on what they found. They have great advise based on their build experiences as well as their experiences flying.

CGr

Thanks CGR Im actually hoping for more info than i bargained for.


John

You may wish to consider a Great Planes Rapture 40, which does require some carving. It also still qualifies as a low-wing trainer, but tends to be a little faster and more responsive than the Four-Star or Tiger 2. Good luck.

NorfolkSouthern

"DING"

MinnFlyer, Chiming in

I was also going to suggest the Rapture. It's a good build - challenging without being too difficult.

The Skybolt is a very challenging build, but GP's manual does an excellent job of guiding you through it. It would be an excellent step toward building a Corsair but you may want one more build between the Rapture and the Skybolt... I would suggest an Ultra Sport!

DING DING

RCKen chiming in too!!!!

I can't add much more than what Minnflyer has already said. I'd put a little bit of extra emphasis on the Ultra Sport. While still a fairly easy build it does have a few challanges that will start getting you ready for the warbird build. And the end result will be one of the best flying planes out there!!!!! Another choice for an easy build to gain confidence is the Sig Something Extra. This is another build that will result in an awesome plane!!

Ken

The Ultra Sport or the GP Extra, the Bolt is maybe a harder build then the Corsair. It has quite a bit of carving and fitting, good one to get a good understanding of incidence though.

Sig 4*'s aren't difficult builds at all. With Sigs laser cutting and interlocking construction you'd get as much building experience putting together a 100 piece jigsaw puzzle. I'm not saying the 4*'s are bad planes, on the contrary they are excellent low wing trainers, especially being tail draggers because you'll need that experience for a warbird. The running joke with a lot of Sig planes is "open the box, pour in glue, shake box, pour out airplane". The second kit plane I built was the Great Planes .40 size Corsair and I learned a great deal more with that one. It wasn't difficult per se, but it wasn't as easy as just pouring glue on it like a 4* either. With the GP Corsair I got to try my hand at shaping balsa as well since you have to shape the wingtips and turtle deck from balsa blocks. Fully sheeted fuse (experience sheeting those curved surfaces). Single Aileron servo/bellcrank setup I'd never done before (I'm betting the Giants have a servo per surface tho). About the only thing it doesn't throw at you are the flaps a larger build will have you do. The Great Planes Corsair also happens to be a great flier as luck would have it. Granted it's in no way a scale model, but no one's left wondering what it is either. I built this plane because ultimately I wanted to build warbirds as well. This way I could try my hand at it without jumping off the deep end.

Good point.

Several of the newer kits are easy to build and fly great (Like the 4* and SSE) but they don't challenge your building skills. So they are fantastic if you just want to build a plane and fly it, but they offer very little in the way of a learning curve to increase your building skills.

I meant to add,...Instead of building a second trainer like the one you already have I'd shoot for a Sig 4*. You can probably frame it up in a weekend or two, granted it's not going to advance any building skills, but it makes an 'excellent' second plane/first low wing.

Edit: The Goldberg Tiger 2/Tiger 60 are equivalent to the Sig 4*. If the Tigers are more aesthetically pleasing to you, those also make excellent second planes/first low wing. The Tiger's may offer a bit more challange then the Sigs when it comes to building...but only a bit

Let me add to CGRetired's suggestions: The Goldberg Tigers are superb second planes. I considered the 60 kit before getting my SIG Fourstar ARF. I subsequently got a Tiger 2 ARF and highly recommend it. Like the Fourstar it is maneuverable and aerobatic while at the same time being stable and gentle. It simply sticks to the runway on landing with no bounce at all. I found it superior to the Fourstar, perhaps in part because of its dual aileron servos (The Fourstar 60 hs two but the 40 size has only one). Also, the Tiger can be built as a tri-gear and easily converted (built in design) to a taildragger as you gain experience. The only caveat is that I do not know if the Tiger 2 kit is exactly the same as the ARF in terms of dihedral, semi or full symmetric wing, fin size, etc. In comparing my Tiger to an older one at the club all these have been changed over the years (including the move to dual aileron servos) and the newer edition is much more responsive than older models. While I think the 40 ARF is matched to the 60 kit in these areas I am not sure the 40 kit is the same, so you will want to check on this if you decide for the 40 size.

Thanks everyone for all the great info.


John

I bought a 4*40 for my second plane, first build. My "assembly" skills are so poor, I'm thinking of getting a marker and scribbling "Experimental" down the side of the fuselage!

Seriously, looking back on the project I could probably build a second one in a weekend and not have any trouble. My dream is to get to either a sport scale version of a P47 or a P40.

Keep the information coming on the second kit - I'm also wanting to go a similar direction.

I can't think of any sport scale P-47 or P-40 kits except the Top Flite .60 size birds. I know they aren't 'dead' scale and are considered sport scale (they usually have enlarged tail surfaces for better flight characteristics....hence not dead scale). Dead on or not, they still look great. If you want to start off a little smaller...say .40 size, Great Planes makes a Sport Scale Corsair and Mustang. The Mustang can use retracts, where the Corsair isn't designed for them.

Well I got the second trainer already coming in the mail but now im thinking maybe i might try to make it a tail dragger. Also was thinking about going with the O.S. 46AX. Was wondering if the mounts would be different from the O.S. 46LA.



John

I believe the AX mounts are the same design/layout as the LA, so it should be just fine. In fact, I'm sure it is because I removed an LA from a basic trainer (club trainer I bought) and put a .46 on board. Not an AX, but the footprint is exactly the same. In fact, I believe I used the same mounting holes.

So, there ya have it. Oh, one more thing.. I completely forgot about the Something Extra. I have one partially framed up now and will most likely finish it before the upcoming season. And, again, in fact... ... with Julie (my significant other) headed to Florida without me tomorrow for a week, I will have some free time on my hands and just may work on getting that SE going and finished up this weekend. I ought to be able to do that!!! That has been a fun build, I might add, and, I've flown them, too. They can be as radical or as sedate as you wish to make them. Nice plane, for sure!!

Best of luck.

CGr