RCU Forums - Best Trainer

RCU Forums (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/)

- Beginners (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/beginners-85/)

- - Best Trainer (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/beginners-85/458290-best-trainer.html)

I figured the begginers could use this- Lets vote on whats the best trainer...

I have flown almost everyone of those and they are all good but I really have to say the LT-40. I keep one in my hanger as I just love to fly it!!!!

YYYYYYYAAAAAEEEEEEEE!!!!!!- Thats what I want to hear!

Please Keep in mind that you can vote for more than 1 trainer...

MY KINDA TRAINER

RE: TRAINER
The Tower 60 size Trainer is my kinda trainer.
NEDYOB

G'Day Art,

a quick question as I'm not looking for a dispute :D. Our students have done well with the LT-40 and achieving their "wings" but the complaints that I see and get are that the transition to a second plane (say a 4 -Star as a typical example) are a bit tougher on the new pilot when they start with the more docile LT-40 vs a more agile trainer.

Have you seen this too? I'm really just curious.

Thanks,

Bob aka Nuker

Hi Bob: No I haven't and my LT-40 is anything but docile. Look at the plans and see that they give you 3 different positions for the CG and all I did with mine is move to to the furthest one back for advanced flying. The common problem I see is people balancing the plane way to nose heavy and this will make any plane sluggish. If you put the CG back a bit more then what they call for for the beginner you will find it to be a nice plane that shouldn't give any problems with the transition.

I like the LT25,W/engines up to 46 bb,flew all the others except the alpha.

Morning Nuker, I look at the 4*'s as a third plane on the learning curve instead of the second. My $.026 worth of saturday morning thinking.

I personally have a Kyohsho Trainer 40 and I Love it. It has more ablilities than the average trainer and it flys great!! WIth an O.S. 46fx 11X6 prop it rox.

As ive said before, I learned on a LT 40. When I got my hands on the 4 star, to me anyways, I found it a much easier plane to fly. Landing however was very simalar......floats all day long.

Thanks guys,

the complaints I got was that the 4 * was far more responsive and therefore "twitchy" to them. All had the LT-40 and, yes, we set 'em up with the CG forward so they almost landed themselves.

Certainly nothing against that plane or others (with perhaps the weight of the Aircore); the majority fo our students last year had Avistar's (about 7), a couple of LT 40's, plus assorted like Eagles and Superstars.

So long as they all fly and people like them, that's all that matters anyway.

Thanks again for the insights,

Bob aka Nuker

So far it looks like the Kadet lt-40/25 is in the lead... :)

Oh well
I the LT 40 is a fine plane but I think the Avistar lends itself to giving the new pilot a plane that has a better airfoil for better wind penetration (semi symmetrical) and will be able to stunt a little better so they don't get tired of it as quickly, wanting to move onto a new plane quite so fast. I think right now I have 5 students that are flying them and the rest are flying everything from the Lt 40 ARFs and the hobbicos not to many are still using the Towers, Hey you guys remember the RCM trainer, That was another fine trainer.

The DiBo

There are many good trainers in the list and it is hard to vote fairly unless I've experienced flying all of them. I flew the Avistar and still am today..............

can anyone list what others may be missing from list
I can add 2,
Carl Goldberg EAGLE 2 (and the older if still alive EAGLE 1's lol)
and one you can get as a ARF or KIT in canada , is the SKYWARD 40,60 and yes, 120 size, with a 108 inch wingspan, these are nicely made planes, or nicely made kits, depending on how well
your build comes out lol, (mine was perfect),

Quote:

Originally posted by TerrellFlyer
Morning Nuker, I look at the 4*'s as a third plane on the learning curve instead of the second. My $.026 worth of saturday morning thinking.

Way off their, turn the controls down and use a plain bearing .40 on the 4* and it's a better primary trainer than most of those listed.

It flys as slow or slower than those listed.

It's just as stable.

It responds much more precisely therefore when a student moves the sticks it moves exactly the same way every time and doesn't have to be lead.

It doesn't self correct so it teaches better. (I haven't seen a self correcting trainer able to self correct before it crashes)

I've taught severl people to fly with a 4* and all have learned as fast or faster than with a typical trainer and were better pilots and crashed less aftewords. (ages 9 to 72). I've take several people who were having trouble on a trainer and put them on a 4* with low throws and they universally said it was easier to fly.

The current dogma says to learn to fly RC model airplanes the best way to start is with a “Trainer” that has a high flat bottom wing with generous dihedral so it self corrects. I believe this is wrong! I believe the following are the best characteristics for a trainer.

Flies Slow (light wing loading)
Flies Very Stable
Responds to controls in a uniform fashion (Does What it’s told When it’s told the same way every time)
Inexpensive and easy to repair

Take note, nowhere in that list do I list the type of plane, high wing, low wing, mid, wing shoulder wing, doesn’t make that big a difference as long as it is slow stable responds to it’s controls uniformly. It is an easy task to limit the amount of control to get the control rate at an acceptable level for a beginner.

Nowhere in the list is the term “Self Correcting”. Planes designed to self-correct are harder to fly. If you try to allow them to self correct they will crash long before finish correcting themselves or you fly them so high you can’t tell what the plane is doing. “Self Correcting” also means that you will have to fight the plane to turn up wind, fight the plane to turn it in general. We are teaching people to fly R/C models not guide free flight models. The early days of RC we used modified free flight models. Current Trainers reflect our free flight heritage.

My experience has shown that people who learn with typical Trainers all learn in about the same amount of time as somebody who learns with a “Sport” plane. I know a lot of people have successfully learned to fly with Eagle II’s and the like but from what I’ve seen the people who learn with a “Trainer” crash more after they solo, especially when they go to something sportier. After learning with a “Trainer” they pretty much have to re-learn to fly anything else. People who learn with a “Sport” plane learn to fly just as fast, crash less after they solo, and can fly a larger variety of aircraft sooner.

Planes I think make good trainers and that I have successfully taught people to fly with:

Four Star 40 (probably the best trainer ever!!!)
American Flyer (ARF)
Ugly Stick (any of several variations)
Easy Sport 40
Airmidillo Trainer
Sig LT25 (very slow, very responsive, way better flier than LT40)
Thundar Tiger Wold Trainer 40H (semi-symmetrical high-wing low-dihedral ARF – This one looks like a typical “Trainer” but flies like a typical “Sport” model)

All these planes are very stable, don’t tip stall, can fly very slowly, respond uniformly to controls, and have fairly light wing loading. These characteristics make better trainers than typical Trainers. Now all we have to do is get instructors to take a critical look at Trainers. I don’t buy arguments like: “The XYZ trainer has worked great to train zillions of students for years”, or “I learned on a SR. Kadet, so that’s the best trainer”. Doctors used to bleed people that didn’t make it right. With the absolutely dependable radios of today, and buddy cords, we don’t need to learn with glorified free flight models.

Tom Rhodes

Tom

Here Here, I think you are 100% correct. I have soloed and trained many new pilots and can't agree with you more. The only reason I have not suggested the 4* in the past is because most of the new pilots have already purchased a ARF trainer.

I think the one and only thing that really lowers the learning curve is a simulator and my reason for this is the following:
New students tend to over correct, they do not realize how sensitive a plane is no matter how low you make the rates for them. You are taking the plane away from them constantly, so they actually have less stick time per flight. The beginners that have been on a simulator,Usually the real flight, have learned that sensitivity. I also believe that many of the experienced pilots out there try to make flying RC more difficult that it is. SO they recommend a trainer. "Whoa, no way can you start with a low wing tail dragger" Bull like you say the 4* are easier to fly or at least as easy. Any plane you can cut the throttle and land on idle and float it in, is and easy plane to fly. And for a beginner I feel that is really the only hard part. Except for learning their orientation as in when left is right and right is left as in head on.
The DiBo

My vote would go to the Great Planes PT-40. Great trainer! I also like to take out some of the diehedral, throw a O.S. 46 fx up front, and modify the wings to accept servos for each aileron. Nothing like a vertical capable trainer with a fast roll rate! LOL!

I know I might get flamed for saying that but I believe by doing this it will allow the trainer the ability to grow with the airplane, of course I only do this for people who have asked me to build there trainers for them, probably too complex for a first time builder. Just thought I would share my ideas!

Justin

Your list is pretty incomplete if you want the best trainers. They are all pretty good. I personally wouldn't have someone buy most of them on the list for a first, because I like some of the others, but if someone came to me with one of the birds on the list, I would not bad mouth any of them. They are all good planes and fly very well. I think you will have trouble finding a "best" because there are so many good ones that all do so much. Goldberg makes some of the best, as well, the LT-40 is a good one. There are a lot of good ones out there.

And to be honest, as a guy at our club always reminds us; opinions on the best trainer are just like belly buttons; everyone has one. ;)

As can be read in this thread, if it works well for you then it's the right plane. Sometimes being different is a fun thing.

Bob

When I was learning to fly in the late 70's the big trainer in my area (up in Michigan) was the Balsa USA Swizzle stick. It was actually lighter and flew better than the Original SIG Kadet of the time. You could order it from Balsa USA for $13.95 as opposed to the going $50 price tags on the kits then. I've noticed that Balsa USA still sells a more modern version of it...but I've never seen or heard of anyone flying them...if you ever want to get your feet wet on building a simple balsa kit, that would be it...at least it used to be.

Favorite trainer

Midwest Aerostar 60. Built or helped build 3 of 'em. Excellent for learning to build and to fly under varied conditions.

mt

I have a LT-40, and it is a very very docile aircraft. Maybe a little too docile, but it is a great trainer! Want to make it a bit less docile? Remove the tricycle gear and convert it to a taildragger (there is a thread on here somwhere that deals with this mod), hang a Saito .56 on the nose swinging an 11x7 prop, change up the CG, and this docile trainer can spice things up a little. I saw one modified like this last weekend, and it was pretty cool. Granted, it wont burn up the skys, or win any aerobatics contests, but it WILL get rid of the image of the LT-40 being TOO docile! :D

I wonder how many times this thread or similar will appear on this forum.????

Tom