socolofs

I'm interested in RC pattern flying and want to kit-build a model that performs with excellent precision.

This will be my second plane, and my question is: why start with a low-wing trainer and not jump directly to a precision aerobat? It seems like with a trainer, you might be fighting its stability, making precision aerobatics more difficult. And most web pages for advanced planes (e.g., the Extra 300S) say they "land like a trainer." So, what is a low-wing trainer helping prevent?

If I go with a low-wing trainer, I'm considering the Sig 4 Star 60 or the Goldberg Tiger 60. Will these planes track "on rails" and go where you point them? Are they really not "trainers"?

I'm flying a high-wing trainer now (Hobbico NexStar without trainer aids) and lots of flight simulator time. So, I feel comfortable keeping track of the plane's attitude in flight and sticking to a flight plan that keeps me from getting confused.

My main concern is that I now have time to build a kit, but probably won't for another few years, so I want to build something that will grow with me as my skills improve. I don't want to be looking for a new plane in a couple of months.

If there's already a thread for this, please point me in the right direction--and I look forward to your insights!

Thanks,
Scott

apereira

Scott,

Pattern airplanes flies different than trainers, they will stay in the position you command, trainer will always tend to auto stabilize due to dihedral mostly, there are several model to choose from, the Tiger is one of my favorites planes (years ago anyway), is an excellent model but far from being flying like a pattern, you can also consider the Camodel Epsilon, there are not too many kits, also the Groovy 3A is very very cheap as an ARF, and if something goes wrong...., oh well.

My first plane was a Top Flite Head master with no ailerons, and the second a Quiquie 500, and had no simulator, with the simulator you will do good.

shomenda

My Feedback: (2)

Scott,

It appears you are considering transitioning from a high wing trainer to a kit built low wing airplane, as your second airplane, in preparation for pattern flying, however, you did not mention whether or not you are interested in competition pattern flying, nor mention you're building experience level. I'll assume you're a beginner.

Perhaps the best advice I could give you would be to attend a pattern contest as an observer and ask questions. For a seasoned competitor like myself, I have a kit built Four Star 40 which I can practice my maneuvers with, but use it primarily for testing new receivers, servo's and batteries and switches, destined for my 2 meter pattern plane. There are so many other different low wing easy to build kit built aircraft on the market. Look for something like the Four Star 40, 60 or the 120. Same with the Tiger. The Tiger is an excellent second plane and I believe gives you the option for tricycle gear or a tailwheel. Then there's the Ultimate 60 or the 1000 which are very nice larger sport airplanes, however, I have no experience with building these.

Good luck.
Steve

socolofs

Thanks, Steve and Apereira. Here are some answers to your questions. I've built a few balsa airplanes before (but not for glow power) and am looking for a die-cut or laser-cut kit of easy to intermediate difficulty. I'm mostly interested in being able to get my plane to perform pattern maneuvers at the AMA Sportsman to Advanced level. Eventually, competition sounds like fun. My trainer can do those patterns at the novice level, but inverted flight is difficult.

How is the Tiger different from a pattern plane?

What is an example of a competition-level kit? Are they difficult to fly with no low-wing experience?

mmattockx

First, a pattern (or sport-pattern) model will not self-correct, as you say. Different people react differently to this. I loved it when I flew my first model that did not fight me. I found it much easier to fly than a trainer. Not everyone will agree with that.

Second, when a people say it "lands like a trainer" this is not really the case. What they mean is, it is a gentle, smooth plane to land. But it will NOT be the same as a trainer. Any pattern plane will land easy, but they all fly faster than a trainer, can stall if slowed too much, and are generally built lighter, making them easier to break in a rough landing.

So, I don't think you need a low wing trainer. I never bothered and never felt like I missed anything. But everyone is different and you need to find out for yourself. Maybe try to get some stick time on a more advanced model at your field, to see if it is something you like or not.

From the sound of it, your next model should be an Ultrasport 40 or 60 kit. Easy to build, they fly very well and are a decent pattern trainer. They are not really pattern planes, but they do pretty good if built straight and light, are powered properly and trimmed well. The trimming is the most important part of making ANY plane work for precision aerobatics. I would take the Tiger 60 over the 4* if that is your list to choose from. I have a scan of an article from a year or so back that gave mods to a Tiger 60 to make it a better pattern plane. With these it is much better than the stock setup and would likely make a decent first aerobatic model. PM me with your email address if you want the article, or search on Tiger 60 in the kit building forum, the article was posted up there.

Edit - Here is a good build thread on the Tiger 60: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_49...tm.htm#4997091
Mark

perttime

A pattern plane is designed to fly a predictable manner, so they are not particularly difficult to fly. One thing is that they are not self-correcting.

I started my flying on a high wing electric foamy with ailerons and it got easy to fly. Then I moved up to a "pattern style" foamy (GWS Formosa). It was a pretty big step. The plane goes where I point it, but my system (brain and fingers) did not immediately know how to point it where I want it to go...

Competition level 2m pattern planes are not cheap. The first low wing should probably be something that will not break you heart and bank in case of a total loss.

blw

My Feedback: (3)

Besides the Epsilon, the CA Models Widebody 40 is excellent too. Very predictable handling. Very smooth. Very easy to land with a decent stall speed. It is easy to make some mods to it when building so that it is very smooth.

randy10926

My Feedback: (19)

In many ways it boils down to money. Learning to fly with precision takes a while and almost all people lose a few planes during the process. As noted pattern planes are not the most rugged as weight is important on them. The ain't cheap as well. The planes, engines and servos are all more expensive. If you can afford the replacement cost then go for it. Personally I would start with a 60 sized then move to a 120 sized after a few hard lessons. If you like kits then the Koas or tiger 60 are good choices. A few changes during the building can make then decent precision trainers. I would follow up with something like a focus sport. I am building a focus sport to use while I move up a level and have a harder sequence to learn. If I make a terminal mistake If have only paid half price for it.

socolofs

Thanks for all the help, guys. I understand much better what the differences are. I guess my budget was showing me the more trainer-like aircraft.

That said, I'd still like to build something in the ~$150 range for the basic kit. The Ultrastick 60 is sold out, but the Tiger and Four Star 60's are still available, as well as the Ultrastick 40+. Some of the other kits you all mentioned aren't available here. Which planes are my best bet? Does anyone have experience with the Sig Somethin' Extra? My main goal is to get a plane that will do a beautiful four point role without a lot of extra fighting by the pilot. That seems like the test to me as to the plane's neutral stability.

-Scott

cmoulder

Scott, at this stage of the process, where you're still learning basic flying skills, I would recommend a Great Planes Venus, which would also fit your budget.

You seem intent on building a kit, which is fine, but the Tigers and the 4-Stars are really advanced trainers with dihedral in the wings. You will always be fighting them on KE and rolling maneuvers because dihedral and rudders don't get along well in axial maneuvers. If you really know what you're doing with a computer radio you can do a lot of mixing to counter these tendencies somewhat, but it takes a very good understanding of your model's flying characteristics, largely based on flying experience, to accomplish this. What you need is a good flying model that doesn't need a ton of tweaking to get it to fly well.

The Venus flies very well and is sturdily built, and you can get into the air and start flying a lot sooner.

flyintexan

My Feedback: (1)

Scott,

You may want to consider the Great planes Tracer. It is being offered again in kit form for $75. It is only a .40 size plane, but it is a good flier.

You are located right in the middle of some great pattern contests starting in April - Temple.

Bob makes a good point. The Venus is a very good flying plane.

Best Regards,
Mark