Swift427

Third, what is your recommendation as to pusher versus puller for a teenager with several years experience building and flying more sophisicated paper airplanes, balsa rubberband powered craft, toy gliders, AirHogs, a micro helicopter, a GWS Slow Flyer or PZ Slo-V and a HZ Challenger/Aerobird 3 who now wants to learn aileron control with a plane that is relatively inexpensive, durable, simple and practical, and easy to repair during the learning curve.

As a parkflyer he/she is not concerned that they may not earn their 'intermediate' wings with a 3-channel aileron plane as soon as might be recognized or achieved with a more expensive 4-channel plane. Let's assume that he/she has the skills, interest and time for a custom build 3-channel project.

With this in mind the purpose of this thread is to discuss pusher verus puller as to which aircraft design may be more suitable as an aileron trainer for this above described parkflyer that is advancing from a beginner toward intermediate pilot.

Leo L

Hi (again) Swift,

Generally speaking, a pusher plane reduces the chances of severe damage during the learning curve, compared to a tractor (puller) design. However, generalities don't properly address every plane and every situation. For example, the absolutely best beginner plane is the HobbyZone SuperCub, which is a puller.

Regarding the specific situation that you describe, the question is how big a step does the flyer want to take?
- Small step: Aerobird Swift
- Medium step: Multiplex Minimag or PZ T-28 Trojan
- Big step: PZ Typhoon or PZ Stryker
- Giant step: E-flite MiniUltraStick (MUS)

Has the teenager mastered the Aerobird3 using the extra cell battery and the ProTail modification? If not, I would go along this path until the flyer is very comfortable with flying the upgraded Aerobird3. I would then strongly recommend either the Minimag or the Trojan as a great next step. Continuing with the pusher planes, such as the Aerobird Swift or the BeginAir/Wing Dragon may quickly lead to boredom and a desire to move up. The pod-and-boom are very nice, relaxing planes that make great platforms for aerial photography, but are limited in their performance potential compared to the conventional planes like the Minimag and the Trojan, particularly if they are upgraded to brushless and LiPo power.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

Sounds like he has a lot of time in the air.

You haven't given us a feel for the pilot's competence on these planes, but assuming he can fly and land reliably, I don't think pusher vs. puller is important for someone of this experience.

I have to assume that he has achieved some level of competence with the planes you listed and did not destroy them immediately. If so, then he has plenty of time with pushers and pullers.

BTW if that GWS Slow Flyer is a Slow Stick, you can add ailerons to that. If you pop on a brushless motor you have quite a lively plane.

Swift427

I found the following by 'LLoo' with a nice 3 minute video. [link]http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=710385[/link]
Discuss pros cons as a first-build aileron trainer for above described beginner with basic building skills(knows how to solder), tools(X-acto, etc.), parental quidance and interest in aviation--puller or pusher?

This teenager's interest is to use this plane(puller or pusher) as basic intro to learning 3D aerobatics. They dream of learning to fly like Quique Somenzini--4 time TOC winner. Without getting in over their head or taking shortcuts what are his/her options with respect to least expense, build time, durability, etc. This person isn't obsessed with perfection, tinkering or modifying. He/she does want the satisfaction of building either a: conventional puller kit; flat wing or dihedral w/camber, etc.; a delta flat wing foamy pusher(maybe mid-motor); etc.

This person has a trashed 3-channel plane with working: Tx, esc/rx, servos, speed 400 motor, etc.

Glacier Girl

My Feedback: (4)

Swift, for 3D, ease of building, cost, and ease of flying, look up the "NASTY".
You cut them out of fan fold foam. Couple of CF braces, install the motor/electronics, and have at it.

Will fly well slow, can be as wild acrobaticly as you want it to be. 3D manuvers are no problem with a cheap brushless outrunner.

You thump it, no big deal you can cut one out and swap over everything in less then a couple of hours, and be back at it. Little CA and some hot glue is all the adhesives you need.

Swift427

The teenager thinks he/she has mastered the Aerobird3? Perhaps it would be helpful if you explain to this parkflyer what a ProTail is and if this ProTail is a wothwhile investment --
http://cgi.ebay.com/Hobbyzone-Firebi...QQcmdZViewItem

This quick learn teen is leaning toward the looks and reviews on the T-28 over the Minimag.
Is the T-28 really any more difficult to master than the Minimag?

This beginner to intermediate teen doesn't see any advantage in spending money on an aileron pusher. Is there anything else to reconsider that would suggest that an aileron pusher like WingDragon-4 would be better than the MiniMag or T-28 besides possible prop damage?

Leo L

Swift,

There are three things needed for a ProTail: packing tape (preferably with nylon reinforcement); epoxy; knife or hobby saw. The purpose of the ProTail is to make the control surface much larger, without increasing the overall size of the tail and without increasing drag. On the standard tail, the tip is part of the stationary section. The ProTail seperates the tip from the stationary part and adds it to the control surface. The steps are simple. Place a piece of tape across the gap between the control surface and the stationary surface, makinig sure that it ends at the hinge. Fill the gap with epoxy and place a piece of tape across the top, sealing the epoxy in the slot. Once the epoxy has hardened, add tape in the other direction, so that the reifocing runs both along the tail and perpendicular to it. Mark a line extending the eilled gap to the front of the tail. Cut along this line right up to the start of the hinge. Repeat on the other half of the tail. You're done. The ProTail is very responsive, so set the control line/rod on the outer most hole of the control horn.

By most reports that I've seen, the T-28 outperforms the Minimag, yet is easier to fly. It is very rapidly becoming the plane of choice for starting out with ailerons; much the way the SuperCub is the plane of choice for a first time flyer.

Swift427

The teenage parkflyer in this thread has the tools and skill level to build a “NASTY,” but is somewhat discouraged by all the foamy build threads that go on and on seeming to take forever to build an inexpensive-simple flat foamy. EXactly how long(hours) on average does it take to build a "NASTY" once you have all the necessary supplies and parts.

Let’s first followup on Leo’s Aerobird w/Protail. This teen has an Aerobird 3 and likes using the X-port attachments. He now is thinking he will first modify it with a Pro-tail for improved maneuvering for combat flying. He recently broke the beam at its weakest point (quide wire hole). Before he finishes repairing it he’s wondering if it’s OK to shorten the beam a few inches giving the plane a shorter turning radius. He has already installed the 480 motor which weighs an additional 1.15oz. and is thinking about using the 8-cell 9.6v NiMH which weighs an additional 0.6oz more than the stock NiMH.

What’s your advice to this inquisitive teen who has the tools, repair supplies, skill and patience to do as good a repair job as any one. He realizes by shortening the boom the guidewires will need another boom exit hole closer to the fuse. He has an old fiberglass fishing pole he's going to use to cut and shape a short piece just the right diameter to reinforce/epoxy to the boom around the sides and bottom of it's new exit hole.

He understands CG and his friend has a stock Aerobird 3 so they can compare CGs with his modified Aerobird 3. He's mainly wondering if removing 3" of beam may not make that much difference as many combat planes have the elevator and rudder just a few inches from the main wing. How short of a boom is too short???

Glacier Girl

My Feedback: (4)

Well I built my first NASTY in a couple of hours. This was my very first attempt at building something like this. Now, I could do one probably in an hour if I'm not doing any painting.

Just like anything, the more you do something the better and faster you become. Just like flying. Same holds true. In the beginning, I was fretting over cutting everything just so, making mistakes and having to do things over. Now, it's become second nature to me. I'm already thinking ahead of the next step, as I'm doing the first step.

The NASTY, if you have the basic skills, is not that hard to build. The design is very forgiving, it doesn't have to be perfect, and it will still fly just fine. And it's such a solid concept it can be modded and grow as you do.

After a couple of standard versions, and as my experience at building grew, I built several "variants". Like a P40, which was really no more then some cosmetic alterations, to a Corsair that has a gull wing just like the real one.

To this monstrosity, an 8 1/2 foot wing span, NASTY Pteradactyl. Same foam a NASTY is made from, just went overboard on the changes I made.

Just like in flying, start out simple, and as your confidence and skills get better, try new things.
As they in turn become easy, try something else. You are on your way to becoming an expert.

Not in anyway to say I'm an expert, but I am getting very comfortable in trying new stuff.

Heck, I started in this hobby back in 2004 with a PZ Cub, and no guidance what so ever.
I made all kinds of mistakes, but I learned from each one. Take a look at my gallery, you'll see my evolution to some of the stuff I fly today.