SEEMEfly1

I want to get in to scale stuff and I like the cargo plane and would like to find the right twin trainer. I am currently learning on a hobbico avistar. The next plane i would go with would probably buy is a twinstar but don't know if that is the right one. After i learn on a trainer twin I would buy a nitroplanes C-160 and then based on how that was i would go with something like a B-25. I will also be training on a Sim before I buy a twin trainer.


Is fling a C-160 that fun is it to much of a hassle? What is the pros/cons of this plane? Is the twinstar the right trainer? What is the right trainer? Pleas help I would like to have a solid anser.

thanks,
SEEMEfly1

SEEMEfly1

I just looked at another fourm and they suggested the Seagull Dual Ace. Wich I read the review and I like it a lot better then the twinstar so info on this will help

Wayne22

My Feedback: (2)

Get yourself some high performance low wing time first..... The twinstar is a great place to start on multis. It is a bit faster than your average sport plane, and has a very high sink rate if you pull the power all the way back. It is great fun to fly though.........

SEEMEfly1

what plane then

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

The Great Planes Super Sportster ARF has flight characteristics very much like the Twinstar. The Twinstar is a better twin trainer than the faster and heavier Dual Ace. That would be the order I would recommend. (Sportster first, then Twinstar.) After the Twinstar, you could go to either the C-160 or the Dual Ace, whichever you like.

Unsolicited advice: If you want to fly multi-engine airplanes, teach yourself to be very, very good at tuning glow engines, or save up a lot of money for electrics.

Jim

SEEMEfly1

by" or save up a lot of money for electrics" you do mean in electrics right if so no i dont do electrics yet but might

SEEMEfly1

by" or save up a lot of money for electrics" you do mean in electrics right if so no i dont do electrics yet but might

SEEMEfly1

sorry about the doubel but i was looking for a 60 sise and they have a Super Sportster - 60 would that work

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

The Super Sportster 60 is a kit. Do you want to build it from a kit?

Losing one engine on a twin usually results in a crash. Electric power systems make it much less likely that you will lose one engine, but in the sizes that we are talking about, they are very expensive. So you need to either become very good at engine tuning, or save up your money for electric power systems.

Jim

SEEMEfly1

not relly is it that hard

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

A "kit" is a box of wood and a set of blueprints. You need to cut, glue, carve, sand and cover. If you have never done it, you don't want to start with a Super Sportster.

Go to the Tower website and look at the Super Sportster 60 instruction manual.

I think you want to stick with ARFs.

Jim

SEEMEfly1

what makes this a better kit then other

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

I don't really understand your question, but if you are asking about the difference between an ARF and a kit, we are not going to be able to do you much good here. You are going to have to find a hobby shop and take a look at one of each type. Better yet, find a club and talk to the members.

How are you learning to fly that Avistar? Can't your instructor give you some basic idea of what the differences are between an RTF, an ARF and a kit?

Jim

SEEMEfly1

i know the diferance betwen a kit and and arf what i waned to know if thist is the right kit to get if i will do scale

SEEMEfly1

i lookd at there manual and that is somthing i would do but dont think i will have the time so the arf would be better i will talk to my instructor but i do want to learn more about the c-160

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

Do a search on RCU for the C-160. There are several good threads about it.

Jim

SEEMEfly1

ya but i want some more like a detaied overview or something

SEEMEfly1

oh and i found this http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXH756&P=RF i think that would be better but if it has a few thing you would like to tell me about go on

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

Excellent airplane. Easy to fly and a very good low-wing/aerobatic trainer.

Jim

Edwin

My Feedback: (2)

JRF has given you a lot of good advice. The only way you'll get a detailed overview is to search RCU and read everything you find on it. Fortunately the C160 is unique enough it should be easy to find with RCUs search engine. I havent flown the tiger60 but it should do the job. I also agree that the twinstar is a much better twin trainer. The engines are set for 3deg down and 3deg out. So if you loose one, you have time to react. (Never turn into the dead engine and throttle down when you hear an engine die) I've flown the pattern on mine with one engine. Its a good plane. Dont get so stuck on scale until you've been flying awhile. This happened to my students a LOT! They didnt listen to my advice and buy a decent low wing trainer and ended up with a two flight plane that was beyond their capability. Seems like everyday you see a newbe on RCU that wants to get into warbirds or scale right away. Its a learning process that takes time. I would suggest a 60 sized ugly stick. The engine is easy to maintain with easy access and builds pretty fast. AND is an arf. A word about cargo type planes, you generally wont be doing many loops or rolls. Just flying the pattern. If you find later on that you like to throw the sticks around, you probably wont be happy flying a heavy cargo type of plane. Just my opinion.
Edwin

SEEMEfly1

ok so the tiger 60 is a good second plane then if you want twins go with the twin star ok that relly helps

i want to go cargo/bomber something fun so i dont relly know i gusse time will tell

Edwin

My Feedback: (2)

Multi's can be a lot of fun. Especially if you set them up to drop parachutes, bombs, and such. I've always wanted to see an rc C-130 do a lotar drop with a rc hummer and have someone drive it off the runway.
Edwin

SEEMEfly1

dropping bombs would be fun

Edwin

My Feedback: (2)

A former student setup a GP 60 sized ugly stick with bombs. Then put whistles on them.
Edwin