I have my G.P. PT40 built just needs to be covered the ultracote should be here Saturday can’t fly for at least two more month because of the N.Y. winters, was thinking of building a second plane to pass the winter. Took a look at RcKen’s second planes list did not like any of them my wife wants me to build a biplane like the Pitts but I was looking at the Goldberg anniversary Piper cub nice and big. NO ARF or RTF takes all the fun out of it any suggestions remember I have NOT flown a plane yet but I need something to do for the rest of the winter.

The Goldberg Anniversary Cub is one of my all-time FAVORITES! Not too tough to build either.

But I also HIGHLY recommend building the clipped-wing version. It is not as short as some clipped wing Cubs, so it is still a slow, gentle floater, but it won't have that "Too Big" wing that Cubs are famous for.

In a way a full wing Cub is difficult to fly for a inexperienced person

It is best to fly it first in a no-wind condition

any of the ugly stick kits or a goldberg mid wing would be a great second plane. for your first 2 or 3 planes, looks are not the most important thing. getting thru the steps from a trainer to low wing tail drager is the most important thing

I've had several of the stick type airplanes and among those I like the Ultra Sticks best

The Super Sticks are not far behind

I say go for the Cub. I built one a few years ago and it was a lot of fun. You may want to look around here on the RCU classifieds or an online auction site to see if you can find an older kit (pre-Lanier) still in the box. I've heard that some of the newer kits have pretty bad parts cutting and fit. Maybe that has changed now that Hobbico owns Goldberg, who knows.

Cubs are considered among the most controversial of planes when stepping up. Some instructors will swear by them, while others would recommend a low-wing first. But, my experince indicates that they are easy to fly and quite forgiving, and thus should be a good candidate for a second plane. You just need to learn the rudder, but that shouldn't be difficult.

NorfolkSouthern

I find Cubs extremely easy to fly also but I've been flying for more than 50 yrs.

For some reason I've seen many people that have flow some or at least soloed that could not get A Cub off the ground or land it without ground looping.

Mine was a mite touchy and hard to fly until I got used to it. At the time I was flying fun fly planes and the Cub was harder for me to control?? After a bit of air time I got used to it but never did like it. It was a GP 40 size if that makes any difference?? I have only flown one other one sense then and it was a big giant scale. Talk about a floater!!! It could have just been me over controling too??

I never had a cub, but this is one of my favorite planes and was always curious on the way it handles,but any way my second plane was a four star 40 I like it so much I'm thinking about a four star 60 kit with a 4 stroke .91 and building it the way I want (with wing tips )is the astro hog on that list?thats a nice looking plane that can fly slower and is arobatical,good second plane if you ask me but you gotta build,but think of it this way a second airplane is just another trainer and it's gonna take more abuse,so is it worth messing up a nice plane?I don't think so.Tigers are are a good next plane that can take some abuse.

One of the things that makes a Cub tricky to fly is that the original Cub was designed back when engines were not much more than a squirrel in a cage. So to get it off the ground, they put a HUGE wing on it.

Well, that's fine for flying from point A to point B, but when you try to turn, that big surfboard generates so much adverse yaw that turning is difficult.

In the 30's, a few pilots discovered that if you put a real engine in it and clipped a few feet off of each wing, you had a really nice airplane!

Problem is, most manufacturers make it so you can build it either way, and too many people think that by clipping the wing, the Cub will no longer be a nice, easy flier - when in fact, the oposite is true - Cubs fly much better with a clipped wing and with the full wing, they are difficult to turn.

I never flew a real full size Cub but have about 40 hrs in a '39 Reed Clipped Wing Cub with a Continental A90 engine covered with Razor Back. It was one of the original J-3 Cubs from Moton Field in Tuskegee Alabama of Tuskegee airmen fame. It had been ground looped back in the '40's and hung in the ceiling of the hanger until '62. It had wood spars and one wing spar was broken at the root. By converting it to a Reed, we didn't have to buy a new spar. The engine was the original Continental A65 that we converted to a A90. I really enjoyed flying it. The amount a float was about like a 7AC Champ. I looked the "N #" up on the Internet but it is no longer registered. When I see a picture of Hazel Sig's Reed Clip Wing it reminds me of the one I flew except we had it white with red trim.

The first time I flew my H9 40 size Cub with a Saito 50 I was reminded of the adverse yaw factor. I now have a Robin Hood 80 with a OS 91 Surpass II that flies just like my H9 Cub. I also have a Sig LT40 tail dragger ARF with a OS 52 and it doesn't seem to have such an adverse yaw factor but the landing is a lot like a Cub. I've had the LT40 ever since they came out with the ARF. Been 10 yrs anyway?

Yeah, get that Pitts and make sure your wife is watching you fly it for the first time. It should be about 30 seconds of entertainment before it is totally destroyed if you have never flown a plane before!

The Cub flys great if you "clip" the wing like MinnFlyer mentioned, but it's not a beginners plane.

The cub will fly lots better than the PT40, especially in the wind once you get some experience in flying.

Good Luck