Begginer plane
 

i am looking around for a good gas trainer i have some flight expirience, i have been looking at the Nexstar from hobbico, is this a good starter or trainer plane or are there some better ones?

RE: Begginer plane
 

I've put together a list of planes that make good trainers and second planes. All of them on the list are proven planes that are well suited for successfully letting students learn to fly, or advance to a second plane. Check out the list here
[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_4537845/tm.htm] Looking for a trainer- what's available. (Updated 1-19-07) [/link]

Hope this helps

Ken

RE: Begginer plane
 

I got the Hangar 9 Alpha 60. Its about the same cost as the Nexstar, but from what i have seen, I think the Alpha is better. The Nexstar comes with alot of "stuff", that is really unneccessary, and therefore you paying for stuff that you dont really need, and would do better without.

RE: Begginer plane
 

Take the gizmos off the Nexstar and it is a O.K trainer. If you are on a budget get a Tower or Hanger 9 trainer. Power it with a good ,46 2 stroke so you can use it in your second plane.
For me the Ultimate trainer is the Sig Lt 40. Mine has a Magnum .52 4 stroke with a APC 12x6 , it is very capable of doing aerobatics and it has a 70 inch wing, which makes it easy to see. And Newbie tough .

RE: Begginer plane
 

A guy at my club has the Alpha 60....that thing is HUGE. I love it. It also looks very well built and covered.

RE: Begginer plane
 

The Hangar 9 Alpha 60 is, in my opinion, the best overall Ready-to-Fly glow trainer package on the market. A classic high-wing trainer airframe in an extra large size, a good ball-bearing .61 glow engine, and a simple but solid 4-channel sport radio combine for an excellent package with no weaknesses. At $389.99 for a typical selling price, it's not the least expensive option, but it's a solid value.

The Thunder Tiger Tiger Trainer .60 Super Combo is my second pick at $359.99. This is another classic high-wing trainer airframe that has been super-sized for extra visibility and stability. The engine that comes with it, the Thunder Tiger GP-61, is a plain bearing engine; it is high-quality, reliable, easy to tune, and powerful however, as well as a terrific value.

http://www.thundertiger4u.com/thunde...ck-p-7303.html

The radio system that comes with the Tiger Trainer .60 Super Combo is nicer than the one included with the Alpha .60. The JR Sport SX400 (Alpha .60 RTF) comes with a single conversion 6-channel FM/PPM receiver. The Trainer .60 Super Combo comes with the Hitec Laser 4 radio system with a dual conversion 8-channel FM/PPM receiver. The Laser 4 transmitter also offers features like end-point adjustment and v-tail/elevon mixing that the JR Sport SX400 does not.

In addition to being $30 cheaper than the Alpha .60 RTF, the Tiger Trainer .60 Super Combo is available with all of the basic flight line equipment you'll need to operate it at no additional charge. Thunder Tiger's Side Kick flight accessory package, included for free at thundertiger4u.com, includes a glow ignitor and charger, chicken stick, fuel pump, 4-way glow/prop wrench, a fuel cap kit, and even fuel line. Those items will cost you extra with the Alpha .60. The folks at www.thundertiger4u.com also ship all orders $150 or higher for free.

The third best RTF glow trainer package on the market is the new Sig Kadet LT-40 RTF available for $319.99. The Kadet LT-40, while slightly smaller than the Alpha .60 or Tiger Trainer .60, is still quite large and stable. The RTF bundle includes a .46-sized ball-bearing Aviastar engine and the same Hitec Laser 4 radio system that is bundled with the Thunder Tiger super combos. You have to do some digging to find it, but the Kadet LT-40 bundle can be found at the http://www.sigmfg.com website and can be ordered directly or you can take the part number to any local hobby store that carries Sig and they can order it in for you.

Sig is the North American distributor for Aviatech engines. They have a good reputation, but your local hobby store has about 0% chance of stocking any parts for these engines. If you need replacement parts to fix your engine, you will have to mail order them directly from Sig. Parts for Thunder Tiger or Evolution engines are more readily available.

The Nexstar is a good trainer package, but it is a bit pricey for what it includes.

Good luck and good shopping.

RE: Begginer plane
 

I'm about to get my first plane and have been looking into what to get as a first plane a lot. I am down to being torn between two of them. Both are Hangar 9 planes.

The Alpha 60 RTF plane sounds like a really great trainer plane, and maybe the best "pure" trainer. But it only comes with a 4-Channel radio. The P-51 PTS comes with a 6-Channel radio that I assume will last me longer before I am wanting to buy a better one, and apparently becomes at least a decent "2nd plane" just by taking all of the training stuff off of it. There are some things that would make it easier to decide if I knew...

1) Am I worried too much about not having to buy a cheaper low-wing plane to learn those because it is almost a certainty that I will wreck my first plane before getting to that point anyway? If so, then the Alpha 60 seems like the way to go.

2) Is the P51 pretty much a dud of a second plane anyway?

3) Should I not care about anything more than 4 channels in a first controller?

Thanks in advance:-)

RE: Begginer plane
 

Hobbico hobbistar or a kadet senior ARF for my money(maybe the LT-40 as well).


Recover the hobbistar......the sig is a typical sig :D.



BTW ken, why no 4* 120 on the second planes list?(curious not trying to be a smart alleck)

RE: Begginer plane
 

You might be surprised at just how many years you will have and fly your trainer. A lot of pilots continue to fly trainers well after they've solo'd, and they're nice to have so you can teach friends how to fly later on. Most trainers also make good float planes, and the Alpha 60 would be a great choice for flying off of water because it comes with a nice, powerful .61 ball-bearing 2-stroke.

The P51 isn't so much of a dud as a second plane, as it is a dud as a primary trainer. A good, skilled flight instructor can teach you to fly the P-51 PTS with all the training wheels on, but it just can't be flown as slowly as an Alpha or a Tiger Trainer can. It's a handful as a trainer, and it can be a handful as a sport plane if you take all of the training wheels off of it. I know a bunch of students who bought P-51 PTS packages last spring and summer, they all either crashed them while training or crashed them shortly after they solo'd.

I believe a new pilot could actually train on a Goldberg Tiger or a Great Planes Big Stik with their flight instructor and be way ahead of the game when they solo and start learning more aerobatics. A high wing trainer with a flat bottom wing can still be surprisingly agile once the control throws are increased, assuming it doesn't have too much dihedral in the wing.

As for 4-channels on your first radio, the idea is to keep things simple while you're learning the basics. Learn to fly on your sport radio now, and you can use it as a backup transmitter, a flight sim controller, or a buddy box after you've gotten some stick time and learned all the basics. I've seen a few crashes from new pilots who accidentally selected the wrong model on their computer radio or left it in programming mode by mistake and then took off. Dual rates and rudder > aileron mixing and model naming are all wonderful things, but when you're learning how to fill up your plane and start your engine, you don't need any extra complexity to worry about.

Simple is good when you're learning to fly. Keep it simple and don't get too far ahead of yourself with regard to "next planes" just yet. Besides, with Hitec and Airtronics yet to join the 2.4Ghz bandwagon, I'd be wanting to wait a little while before buying a more advanced radio. There are going to be some really cool new products announced in the next twelve or eighteen months that might make you glad you waited.

RE: Begginer plane
 

Thanks for the excellent adivce. I've actually found a flying field within blocks of where I live, and it is even in a state park so anyone can use it any time they want. This airfield sits on the edge of a lake. Finding this airfield last night, and reading your advice (espcially about converting a trainer to a float plane later) has just totally changed my whole outlook on this. Now I'm thinking I'll buy cool aerobatic plane after I am so good with the trainer that it bores me, and when I get my second plane I will convert the trainer into a float plane to fly off of the lake that is right next to the airfield, which is right next to my house (I sure am lucky to just happen to have this awesome facility that I didn't even know about right down the street).

So now the question becomes, which trainers make for particuarly good float planes. It sounds like the Alpha 60 that I already like makes the conversion well, is there a trainer that makes for an even better float plane? The idea here is kind of to, assuming I don't wreck it, keep the trainer as a useful plane after I am done learning. So which trainers would make good float planes?

RE: Begginer plane
 

I thought about the 4-star 120 for the second plane list, but I decided that it really shouldn't be on there. With the 4-star 120 it gets into larger engines as well as a larger plane that may be a little bit too much for a new pilot to deal with right off of the bat. I'm not saying that it isn't a bad flying plane because it's outstanding in the air. It's just within the context of beginning pilots just moving to their second plane it might be a little too much to handle at that time. That's why it's not on the list.

Ken

RE: Begginer plane
 

well i ended up getting the Nextstar, i was at the Local Hobbie shop and the guy there really recomended it it was on sale and looks like an over all good plane, thnx for the advise though guys much appreciated :) . Flying Feild here i come!!!!

RE: Begginer plane
 

Dundahead, make sure you disconnect the ALS system from the receiver before you attempt to fly. The ALS system works by turning the top of the plane toward the brightest sunlight in order to keep it level. This works well at noon, but if you fly in the mornings or evenings (like everybody else) then it means your plane will constantly want to bank toward the east or the west.

This ALS system is nice in theory, it just doesn't work in the real world. It's one of the features you pay extra for on the Nexstar that you don't really want.

It is a good trainer, however, and it will make a nice float plane when you decide to fly it off the lake.

RE: Begginer plane
 

You did not make a mistake with the Nexstar. I trained with one, without the AFS but with the wing-tip spoilers and the flap brakes. They work just fine, no matter what the nay-sayers say, and do help. Once I learned, I removed them, first the wing tip spoilers, flew a few flights, then the flap brakes. I needed to change the elevator trim after removing the flap brakes, but it was fine and I flew it for several months then moved up to a Tiger 60, which I still have, by the way, as my second plane.

Good luck with the Nexstar. You will like it.

DS.

RE: Begginer plane
 

Well, I won't be buying the plane for another month or so and I keep learning more that changes my mind, but as of now I am not really thinking of the Alpha 60 anymore because it has a flat bottom wing and is probably too big to fit in my car. Once I learned about semi-semetrical wings and looked at all the trainers again it seems to be a choice between the Arrow 40 and Avistar. I want a trainer that I can also do aerobatics with because I will probably become a decent pilot pretty fast. The semi-symetrical wing seems to be the key to having a trainer that you can use for a long time.

So, looking for expert/experienced-wth-the-planes advice...

The Avistar and Arrow both seem to have really great reputations/reviews as trainers that can also serve as at least a good lead-in to a "second plane". The Avistar seems to make itself easier to fly by having a weak engine, while the Arrow has a powerful engine with a "training propeller" designed to make it behave like a weaker engine. For these reason, I am currently planning on getting an Arrow 40 as my trainer. Once I become comfortable with it, from what I have read, all I have to do is put a nice propeller on it and it will serve as decent plane for trying some basic aerobatics.

Another reason that I am looking at "higher-performing" trainers now is that I live over a mile high in Denver, CO and I imagine that will have a noticable negative effect on such small planes. This Arrow probably won't be quite as "hot" where I live as where you live...

So, am I right in my thinking here or do I have things terribly wrong?

RE: Begginer plane
 

You're not too far off base. I've been surprised at how aerobatic a flat-bottomed wing trainer can be since I built a Tower Trainer .40 MkII ARF this spring. I put an O.S. .46 FX on it and left the control throws at full without dialing back the end point adjustments.

The plane flies very well inverted and is capable of all of the basic aerobatics. I've also switched the engine to an 11x4 prop to tame some of the extreme speed that the .46 FX had been providing.

I think lessening the wing dihedral may be more important than whether the airfoil is flat-bottomed or almost flat-bottomed. You can call the wing on the Avistar or Arrow semi-symmetrical, but it's really not all that different from standard trainers.

The Nexstar is very challenging when performing basic aerobatics, and it's no coincidence that it has gobs of dihedral built into the wing design. I remember having trouble keeping my Nexstar in a basic inside loop when I was learning to fly with it, the dihedral made the plane want to roll out to one side or the other all the time.

My Tower Trainer .40 MkII was built with 4" of dihedral instead of the recommended 5.5" as stated in the manual. It's resulted in a surprisingly nimble airplane that is still capable of gentle, self correcting flight.

The Alpha .40 and .60 are often reported as being good at basic aerobatics, and by most appearances they don't have a ton of dihedral built in. I think you could train with an Alpha .40 RTF and it would fly aerobatics almost equally as well as the Arrow RTF.

For flying in the Denver area, just make sure you have a ball-bearing .46 engine on the nose of your trainer instead of a plain-bearing .40 (like the .40 LA) and you'll have plenty of reserve power.

RE: Begginer plane
 

Hmm... So do you think the Alpha 40 would be a better choice than the Arrow 40? Why?

Also, I know it's getting ahead of myself, but I already kind of have a plan for progressing through planes. I think I'm pretty settled on my second plane already (that I will build this winter after using the trainer in the second half of summer and fall). For the second plane I am pretty sure I will get a Cloud Dancer 60 and initially put the smallest engine in takes into it. Then later when I am comfortable with it, put the biggest engine it can take in it.

This is all leading toward some type of totally awesome acrobatic bi-plane that can leave a smoke trail! :-)

Or, maybe an Aero-Works Edge 540T (www.aero-works.net).

I know I'm hooked on this already and don't even have a plane yet. Always loved planes, surprised I never though of doing this sooner:-)

RE: Begginer plane
 

I to have a tower hobbies mark .40 II trainer. I bought the rtf and have been very happy with it. It handles loops and rolls just fine. Stall turns are very nice, and the tower hobbies .46 engine seems to be more than enough power. I changed the prop to an 11x6 and on take off if I had to gues at most 60-75 feet and it is in the air. My honest opinion so far is this thing is really an incredible package that just can't be beat for the price. Yes the electronics are not top notch but as a beginner the most important thing is time in the air.:D

RE: Begginer plane
 

This article may shed some light on which trainer is best for you. http://www.masportaviator.com/ah.asp?CatID=8&ID=51

However.........I would choose my instructor first, see what brand of radio he uses, and go from there. Find out if your local club already has trainer airplanes you can try out with a club instructor for free. I often bring my trainer to the field and let anybody who wants to fly it give it a whirl. I am sure there are others like that at your local field too.

RE: Begginer plane
 

Thanks. I read that whole thing and am still sure I want an Arrow 40. I'm pretty sure a few months later I'll pick a Cloud Dancer 60 as my second plane, too. It does what a second plane needs to do, and I think it looks just really great. Since the first low wing plane is kind of a trainer in a way too, and I'm not going for optimal perfomance anyway, I'm going for pure looks on that one:-)

RE: Begginer plane
 

The pick of an Arrow .40 RTF is a good one, it's a fine trainer.

As for the Cloud Dancer .60, well:

http://www.thundertiger-europe.com/u.../pics/4559.jpg

What can you say? They fly as good as they look, and they look damned good!

As far as "smaller" or "slower" engines versus "faster" or "bigger", remember that you can change the flying characteristics of an airframe and engine simply by how you prop it. For example, if you ordered your Cloud Dancer .60 with the Thunder Tiger Pro .61 engine combo for $269.99, you could start out with a 12x4 prop to keep it flying nice and gently while you're getting familiar with it, then upgrade to a 12x6 or 11x8 prop later when you really want to ring it out a bit. Changing props is significantly less expensive and time consuming than changing engines.

There is a thread in the Sport Flying forum where I nominated the Cloud Dancer as the greatest sport plane of all time.

RE: Begginer plane
 

Yeah, that thing just looks great, doesn't it?

Thanks for the advice about the prop, that's a better idea than having to buy two whole engines. I think I have my "training equipment" worked out. I'll have 4 stages: Arrow 40 with training prop, Arrow 40 with good prop, Cloud Dancer 60 with handicap prop, Cloud Dancer 60 with high performance prop. That seems like a good progression to get me to the point of being able to fly anything I want to try and fly. Doing it this way I think I've eliminated the need for a whole plane. I can see how you could go through 3 "training planes" which is what I have been trying to avoid. I like what I have finally settled on here.

Maybe a couple years from now I'll be confident enough to get a really awesome plane like the Aeroworks .90-1.20 Yak 54. I really like the planes that company makes a lot, they just don't make many small ones like I will be using.

RE: Begginer plane
 

BigEd, you know I found the pdf file for the Cloud Dancer 60 online and I think I understand why you don't see them much compared to some other similar planes. I am actually looking forward to finding a second plane to build over the winter, after flying a trainer this fall, so was initially encouraged to see that it looked to be more complicated to put together than the trainer. But when I read the instructions... they have been translated into English from an Asian language. This probably isn't so much of a problem if you have assembled more than a trainer before, but as the first plane I would put together those instructions are pretty much useless.

It would be my pick for a second plane if the instructions were re-written by someone who spoke English as their first language. That company really should seriously consider contracting an American to re-write their manual from scratch for them. I think that is why you don't see Cloud Dancers as much as some other similar "2nd planes". It is of most interest as a second plane, and you can be pretty sure someone building their "second plane" is undergoing a first-time "non-trainer" build experience. And for someone in that situation the instructions are just plain confusing. I think if I had built a single plane first, I could build a Cloud Dancer by the current manual. But as my first attempt at putting together more than a trainer, after reading that there are many places where I would never be able to figure out what they are talking about. I really think if they had an American (or Brit) re-write that manual a lot more people would choose it as a second plane.

I want to build my second plane in the winter, so I don't want to just buy a used Cloud Dancer. Are there any modern looking bi-planes made by US/British/Australian companies that make for a good second plane, are there? I'd rather have something more unique than just going with the obvious Goldberg Tiger:-)

RE: Begginer plane
 

If you can find a Great Planes Tiger Moth .60 ARF, it would make an excellent 2nd plane. The ARF was discontinued last year, but there are still units floating around out there.

RE: Begginer plane
 

When you say build , do you mean assemble an ARF ?