Hello all. I am fairly new to RC planes. I am in the process of learning to fly my trainer and I want to start building my second plane from a kit. I have little interest in ARF/ARC etc, as my trainer was an ARF and I actually like to build things. I read that a "stick" type airplane is a good second plane. However, I was hoping for something with a bit more scale looks. Can anyone make a suggestion as to a few plane kits to try?

You can't miss with a Sig 4 Star, Carl Goldberg Tiger 2, or a Great Planes Sportser. All build well and fly well. Good Luck, Dave

NY Planes,

Just to add my experience. After flying my trainer, I built a CG Tiger 60. Easy construction for first time builder, great second airplane. Semi-symetrical airfoil is stable, but more responsive than trainer wings. The first time a flew a my Tiger 60 felt like I had such a HOT airplane. After some time I begin doing loops, rolls, lemchevaks, and snap rolls. Lands very easy and is a sturdy airplane. Flew mine with a Thunder Tiger Pro .60 and it performed really well. I like the Sportster also, but CG makes better kits than GP.

Have fun building! Its much more exciting to fly what YOU build from a box of wood parts.

I suggest the Sig Mid Star 40, couldn't be a better 2nd plane IMO.

NY Planes,

Two other's to consider are the Sig Astrohog and Sig Kavalier. The Hog lands just like a trainer, and can probably be used for a trainer. The Kavalier can be tamed down to trainer like handling, but is also quite aerobatic and very rugged. But it's also and older desing that is more to a builders plane (25+ year old deisng) - not laser cut, requires some block shaping and has a bit heavier wingloading than the Mid Star. Just a tried and proven plane.

My first plane was a Super Sportster -- 8 flights and smash! She's rebuilt -- a little heavy now but what a great plane! She is definately faster than either a 4* or a Tiger. All of which would be great second planes. There is also numerous compliments (lots of threads) for the BTE Venture and everyone says his kits for quality and engineering are second to none. The other plane that looks like a good second is SkyShark's Fantasy but I don't know of anyone who fly's one. The kit looks like it come with about everything but the silicon fuel line, engine and flight pack.

The Fantasy and the Tiger build as trikes. The Venture and 4* are tail draggers, and the Sportster has plans for both including hardware (less the front wheelpant which I would ship you free -- got an extra one).

My thought is to pick a plane that is going to feel like you can't handle it on the first flight, you know where your legs are wobbly. After a couple of flights where your doing laps at 3/4 you'll do for a roll or Russian 8 with your thumbs trebbling -- you'll be glad you did. But that's just my two cents, don't count on it much because I'm still just a rookie and a good builder (I rebuild and rebuild and -- you get the point).

4 STAR .40 all the way. You can't miss on this one. The tiget is a harder build and the same goes for the ss. On your first kit, go with the easyest and see if you like it. When yuo build the second kit, use all the experience from the first kit. After all, Henry Ford didn't build a race car as his first car.

I learned to fly with an Avistar ARF last year and wanted to build my 2nd plane from a kit also. I choose the 4* .40. I choose it because if you notice on these forums, you would be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't like it. I also choose it because I liked the looks of the 4* over the Tiger. I spent the winter building the 4* (10 months out of the year it seems) and took my time with it. As a first time builder, I can tell you, the kit was a breeze to build. I just followed the instructions to the letter, and when I got stuck, I got on-line and asked for solutions. After spending the spring flying my Tower Trainer (don't ask about the Avistar, it wasn't pretty) I finnally got the courage to fly my 4* last weekend. I loved it! It's like going from driving a school bus to a motorcycle, but it actually lands sloweer than my trainer. I like the plane so much, I plan on building another after I finish building my slow poke. However, this is only my opinion, so take it for what it's worth. Just do plenty of research before buying your kit to decide which one would suit you best. Good luck

Goldberg Models are unbeatable. Period.

but they aren't as cheap and don't have the quality Sig premium wood in them. Are they even laser cut?

I would recommend a SIG kit over any for quality however, if you can put up with a glitch or two I second the Tiger 60. Great second plane!

I went with the 4*60. Figured it's a little more $$ then the 40 size. Wished I went with someting... cooler.
While the 4* was a decent plane, it wasn't as aerobatic as I'd prefer. Perhaps this is all hindsight, but it is 20/20... The dihedral was annoying. It would roll and loop and all that. I didn't start with a trainer, mostly worked on RF and went right to the 4*.
Don't get me wrong I liked the plane, but shoulda went with the smaller one or a super sportster. Guy at the field has one and it seems like a decent flyer.

It's called skill. I fly limited 3D with a Telemaster. It's a whole lot harder than with a 40% Extra. A 4* is more aerobatic than a Telemaster and will fly just fine. I have a SS and it's not the most aerobatic plane either. From what I've seen, the 4* is better.

Well guys.......my personal likes in this are sure to offend all of you because I liked one of Sig's and one of Goldberg's: The Tiger 2 and the Kobra. I liked each but I did dislike the lack of laser cut wood in the Goldberg kit. That is becoming the industry norm now and they need to get with it or get left behind. And woops......skills are an odd thing....just when you think you have enough to brag about.....someone comes along to humble you and make you eat crow...ya' know? *G*

NYplanes,

I can see that you have received plenty of good advice and 2nd plane selections. So, here's another that hasn't been mentioned yet. Take a look at the TOP FLITE "CONTENDER" . It is relatively easy to build, looks something scale like and does it fly great. You can buy this Kit for approx $80 and it is well worth the money. The thick air foil and optional flap make this airplane a real pleasure and a step up from the trainer's. I can't say which is better a 4* or a Contender. I can say that I have seen them both fly and they are both good. I chose the Contender after learning on an Avistar. There is no comparison the Contender is far superior. I wish I could see the smile on your face after you land the Contender for the first time. I'm sure that is true of the 4* also.

Good luck & good hunting. Let us know what you choose.

Sledge_78

Thanks everyone!

woops,

Regarding CG, I can testify my Eagle2 was bought in the early 90's and the wood quality was great. I can guess they improved the quality along the years.
And of course they are laser cutted.
I just can't wait for their next model I'm going to purchase! It's going to be the Ultimate 10 300! grrrrrr....

Many top pilots couldn't do that easily, but I can't do some of the stuff they do. I hope to continue to get better, but by no means am I a top pilot if I can hover a telemaster.

Sledge_78, The contender isn't the easyest plane to be a first time build.

Moneymaker, I'm hoping to get the Ultimate soon also.