aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

I recently got into an lively discussion with several people about what constitutes a good first plane, or a trainer. It was clear we all had different ideas and different criteria, so I thought I would get some feedback from the community. First I will pose some open questions that I think are relevant to the discussion. Feel free to add your own points.

WHAT ARE THE GOALS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF A FIRST PLANE?

WHAT ARE THE GOALS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF A TRAINER?

ARE A FIRST PLANE AND A TRAINER THE SAME THING?

DOES THE TYPE OF POWER MATTER?

MUST THE RADIO HAVE A BUDDY CORD CAPABILITY?

WHAT IS THE MINIMUM BUDGET A NEW FLYER WOULD HAVE TO COMMIT IN ORDER TO BE EQUIPPED TO MEET YOUR DEFINITION?

I ask these questions because beginners often ask questions like this and we, the RC community, give them all kinds of answers, but I rarely see clear explainations of what the posters are basing their recommendations upon or what goals they assume the new pilot should have. So, here is our opportunity to discuss these points. This way we can more clearly advise new and prospective pilots and be clear on why we make these recommendations.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

Here are my thoughts:


WHAT ARE THE GOALS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF A FIRST PLANE?

To me, the goal of the first plane is to give the new pilot the greatest opportunity to succeed. A first plane should be easy to fly. To that end, it should be very stable, highly self correcting and have a minimum of extra features. It should be rugged and easily repaired so minor crashes can be fixed at the field and flying can continue.

Depending on the size of the field, it should be slow to moderate in speed to give the pilot time to react and recover from errors. I would say high wing planes would be preferred. I feel the simplicity of electrics make them easier to learn to fly, so I will suggest electrics as first planes. (I started with an electric then moved to gliders, so I am biased this way.)

Unless the new pilot is strongly motivated to build, I would suggest that the first plane be an ARF or RTF to minimize the chance that a building error will compromise the pilots opportunity to succeed in flying. I feel that requiring new pilots to build their first plane from a kit is a strong deterrent to entry into the hobby. I know I would not be flying today if I had to build even an ARF. I started on an RTF electric because that was the ONLY way I was going to give this a try.

Kits, and even ARFs, would have required too much investment of time and required too much learning about components before I could get to what I wanted to do, which was to fly. I would also be too worried that my lack of building skills would cause a poor flying session or a crash. I would be torn with doubt all the time. I didn't build my first car and I did not want to build my first RC plane.

Building can come later. I am now starting down this path, now that I know I can fly.


WHAT ARE THE GOALS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF A TRAINER?

I see this as the same as the first plane except that the word trainer implies the strong involvement of an instructor, so a buddy corded radio implied, though perhaps not required. Otherwise I see no difference between the two.


ARE A FIRST PLANE AND A TRAINER THE SAME THING?

No! A first plane does not assume an instructor. It may be intended for someone to learn on their own or with only minimal instruction.


DOES THE TYPE OF POWER MATTER?

I feel the power source is irrelevent to the goals of the plane and the pilot. Personally I have not expectation that I will ever fly a glo or gasoline based plane. Some new pilots may have not interest in electrics or gliders. Of course interests change, but I do not see power source as part of the definition. I will say that, since fuel planes tend to be more powerful and heavier, and can be more prone to engine problems than electrics or pure gliders (dah), that the buddy cord becomes more important during the training of the pilot when their first plane is a fuel plane.


MUST THE RADIO HAVE A BUDDY CORD CAPABILITY?

If the new pilot is going to train at a highly managed field where landing protocols include a strict runway landing environment, then I would say a buddy cord is highly recommended if not required. If you learn in a large open grass field, as I did, than I would say it is nice to have but not required. If the plane is very delicate, then a buddy cord should be requierd as the risk of damage is high.


WHAT IS THE MINIMUM BUDGET A NEW FLYER WOULD HAVE TO COMMIT IN ORDER TO BE EQUIPPED TO MEET YOUR DEFINITION?

A two channel electric RTF can be purchased for a little as $50 which will allow the new pilot to fly. However I would strongly recommend a new pilot start on a three channel plane. RTF three channel electrics start at $125 and there are many choices in the under $200 range, so I would say $175 to $250 for an RTF 3 channel electric including a second battery and a 12 volt peak charger. A second wing or tail might also be advisable depending on the particular model's tendancy to break given parts on hard landings.

So, those are my thoughts. What are yours?

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

I feel that a new person must be ready to spend $300 to $400 to get into it right. The first trainer would be one that the new person can learn the basics on, and depending on the situation, maybe a bit more than that. The radio must have a buddy box and the power must be enough for the plane, but not too much. If the person has flown a bit, an advanced trainer might be in order, but not over kill like a mustang or some thing like that. Too many newbies want to run before they can walk in this hobby.

DBCherry

My Feedback: (4)

I think you're arguing two distinctly separate methods of getting involved in this hobby.

Your's:
Start with a $150 Aerostar or equivalent, electric park flyer. Learn on your own, or get someone to stand beside you and take the Tx if you have a problem.

Others:
Get a 4 channel, 40 or 60 size, glow powered trainer. Join a club, have an instructor teach you with a buddy box to prevent (usually) destruction of the first plane.

Mine:
Do whichever makes the most sense to YOU. Neither of these techniques is necessarily better than the other. But one WILL be better for each newbie.

Personally, I think the success rate of starting with an instructor on a buddy box is going to be higher. The only "self taught" guys we hear from are the successful ones. The guys who trash a plane or two learning on their own, and never come back, aren't going to be on these sites.

I know, you're about to say the same thing applies to glow students. But in the eight years I've been at this, I've NEVER seen someone fail to learn on glow with a buddy box. Sure, some have faded away without staying in it, but they likely would have if they'd crashed a park flyer once too.

I also disagree with your statement about glow engines being "....more prone to engine problems than electrics..." as well.
I fly both (you don't), and I've had many more reliability problems with my electrics than with any of my glow. I still own and use every glow engine I've ever purchased, new or used, and they all still operate reliably. I've never even performed any maintenance other than some oil if they're going to be stored for more than two months. Have you burned out an electric moter or ESC yet? Still have all your original battery packs?

Motors and ESC's fail much more often than glow engines. Don't forget, the majority of electric motors are rated at, say 6 volts, yet to maximize performance, we fly them on 8.4 or 9.6 volts (at least). Exceeding manufacturer's recommended limits not only causes premature failures, it also voids you warranty.

I say learn with what interests you most, or with what you can afford, but don't knock another guys ways. I will argue glow vs. electric (or electric vs glow )) 'til the cows come home, but I will not tell you one is better than the other. And if you're going to try, you need to fly glow for a while before you do.
Dennis-

CAPtain232

My Feedback: (40)

If you go with GLOW, $300 to $400 is correct........but just for the plane, engine and radio. Reallistically, I wouldn't suggest less than a 40 size (even though I learned on 1/2A)

Everyone seems to forget that you need a flight box and glow ignitor and some tools and while you are at it, you may as well have a starter....you can easily spend another $100 to $150 on all of this.....

If you are lucky, maybe you can buy all of this miscellaneous stuff from someone getting out of the hobby

DBCherry

My Feedback: (4)

CAptain,
Well, I think $300 to $400 is right. You can buy a number of RTF 40 size trainers, complete with radio gear and engine, for $300. Another $100 will buy what you need for field equipment.

And if you join a club, and/or shop around, you can often do a bit better.
Dennis-

CAPtain232

My Feedback: (40)

DB,

Looks like you said the EXACT same thing that I did....unless I misunderstood your comment?

DBCherry

My Feedback: (4)

Maybe we were saying the same thing. I had the impression you were saying the $300 to $400 still required $100 to $150 in misc. gear, which would put your total at $400 to $550.

I was saying you can get started with a plane, radio equip., engine and misc gear for $300 to $400.
Dennis-

Mike Ledbetter

I started with an Aerobird. I bought a Sky Scooter II and sold the Aerobird. SS2 is much better for learning and as an investment.

I had been using FMS as a simulator, then I invested in AeroFly Pro. Now I can fly in the virtual gusty wind and record my mistakes.

Next I got a GWS TigerMoth. I use the SS2 transmitter for it.

So far, I fly both these planes with no problems and with increasing confidence.

I joined AMA and a local club, and have a Hangar 9 glow trainer and a .48 engine waiting to be put together. This is the next step and I expect that my experience with the moth and the SS2 will make success much more likely.

Remember though that some people have no interest in glow. I ordered a Potensky cobra electric foam acrobat recently. With all the electric options available now, many people would rather not have to make the 20 mile drive to the flying field.

Regards.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

Everyone has made really good points. Many different points of view, but all with the same objective. Let's help the new pilot be successful.

I hope others will post additional interpertations of these questions and that new pilots will read these posts as part of the guidance they seek.

Lightfoot

My Feedback: (1)

Quite often a person has an interest in model airplanes and visits a local flying field just to observe. He sees all types of airplanes from trainers to pattern planes to scale World War II fighter planes. His interest is piqued by all the fabulous looking models. He thinks, "I have to have one of those Mustangs." He immediately sets out trying to find a P-51 model to begin his modeling hobby. This is a serious mistake. Many hours of training and practice are involved before a beginner has the ability to handle the more advanced models. A beginner must realize the dedication that is required to gain the ability to fly the type of model that initially spawned his interest. He must begin the hobby with a basic trainer and progress through different levels of models until his goal is reached.

A trainer is a specific type of model aircraft that is designed to be stable in flight. This means that it has an inherent ability to correct itself and overcome the rotational forces applied so that it regains straight and level flight. Most trainers are designed to that they remain stable in slow flight so that they are easy to land.

There are certain criteria that a trainer should have in order to be satisfactory for a beginner.

1. High Wing - A high wing model is inherently more stable than a low wing model due to pendulum effect. Since the weight of the model is below the wing, the fuselage tends to swing downward like a pendulum in order to equalize forces.

2. Flat Bottom Wing - The wing cross section should have a virtually flat bottom. This type of cross section has more gentle flight characteristics that are necessary for a beginner.

3. Dihedral - The wing should have some dihedral. This means that the tips of the wings are higher than the center. The effect of the dihedral is to try to equalize forces and keep the wings level or to return the wings to a level orientation.

4. High Aspect Ratio - The ratio of the wing length or span should be at least 5 1/2 times the width or chord. This will reduce the rate at which the model responds to command input allowing more time for a beginner to react.

5. Constant Chord - The width of the wing should be the same from the center or root to the end or tip. This distributes the weight of the airplane evenly over the entire surface of the wing.

6. Low Wing Loading - The weight of the model divided by the area of the wing should not exceed 19 oz./sq. ft. This reduces the speed required to maintain an acceptable rate that the model descends when the power is reduced resulting in a lower landing speed.

7. Moderate Size - Most trainers are for engine sizes between .15 and .60. The smaller ones are more susceptible to the effects of wind and normally the wing loading is higher simply because of the weight of the radio equipment. The larger sizes are easier to fly and easier to see but are more difficult to transport. Most trainers are for .40 size engines. These trainers have been widely accepted as the optimum size.

8. Structurally Sound - A trainer must be able to take the abuses imposed by a beginner. This is especially true for hard landings. It must be able to withstand minor crashes with minimal damage. It should be relatively easy to repair.

A trainer that meets these guidelines will give the beginner excellent service without the frustration that can occur with an inappropriate model. With proper instruction, the beginner can progress quickly to his solo flight and on to the novice stage and still get years of sport flying from the trainer.

There are several trainers on the market that meet and far exceed the guidelines. These range from the most basic kit to beautiful Almost Ready to Fly (ARF) models complete with engine and radio. There are a lot of considerations when choosing a trainer but the two most basic are time and money.

A trainer built from a kit has the advantage of being less expensive in some cases. It gives the builder the pleasure of building, the option of color and trim scheme, and the knowledge of the structure to perform repairs. The biggest disadvantage is the time required to construct the model when the beginner would rather be learning to fly. Another disadvantage in some cases is the emotional attachment the builder develops having spent many hours on his creation.

The big advantage of the ARF models is that they can be assembled in a matter of a few hours and the beginner can be ready to start his flying lessons. The disadvantages are the cost, the unknown structure that is sometimes weak, and the fixed color scheme. Most ARF models perform as well or almost as well as any kit built model on the market. Any beginner who purchases an ARF model should get an experienced modeler to check the model before assembly is started. An experienced modeler can point out areas that may need to be reglued or reinforced.

Ed_Moorman

My Feedback: (1)

Let's not forget the person in the equation. Age and ability in hand-eye coordination type games or sports can tell you a lot about what type plane a person needs.

I get students who are retired and in their 60's or 70's. These people, and I'm not knocking age since I'm 65, need a slower, more stable trainer than a 10-year old. I taught a 10-years old who shot touch and gos on his second flight. He said there wasn't much to this and I only saw him one more time.

For those in between, I look in the eyeballs and ask if they were any good at sports or video games. This can tell me what type of trainer to recommend. I especially want to know if a person flew CL or FF earlier in his life.

As for equipment, I always tell them to buy the best they can afford. If they are serious, they may as well get a 6-8 channel radio that they can use later on a 2nd and 3rd plane. I don't buy this jusk about starting off cheap and moving up. I've seen guys end up with 6 4-channel radios not being able to do things their buddies can with a 6-channel.

As for ARFs or building, I always recommend an ARF. I have seen too many poorly built trainers in my life. An ARF from one of the major outfits is going to be straight and easy to put together. Some don't even need glue.

I hear about the experience of building and I think it's just bunk. They don't want to build, they want to fly. They can build their second or third plane, but these people didn't grow up building like I did, going from solid models to rubber to CL to RC. They have not known a world before men went to the moon or before computers. Space flight is a given. Forget cutting and gluing balsa, that's 20th century. As for kits, they aren't even kits any more. They are CAD drawn and laser cut. They snap together and you hit 'em with CA. The hard parts are ABS or fiberglass. You don't cut out ribs or carve unless you build from plans or design your own.