Advice on Aeroteks' "Big T" electric plane, plse

My criteria for an electric trainer are that it be really BIG, stable, not stall-prone, and easy to build, easy to repair. I heard that
the Big T is a really good trainer, easy to build & repair, etc. However, J.K. Aerotek is not updating their web pages, I checked into the Big T plane on thier website 6 months ago, and it has not been changed since. The copy was written when it was newly offered, and so it still sounds "tentative". This makes me a bit leery of ordering from them.
I already have a radio outfit for it and a speed controller to handle 40 amps, so I am thinking that I might build a complete plane for a lot less if I just buy the plane kit---not the combo---buy a used speed 600 motor/ gearbox/ prop separately, and build up a 10-cell pak myself. The other concern I have is that although they say it is crash-resistant, the first time it hits a tree or thick brush head on (or the ground!) the prop and gearbox (no doubt expensive to replace!) are history. So I am thinking that a twin design with prop/motor mounted on the wings would be vastly better for minimizing expensive damage, although the initial cost would be higher. That way, you would have the nose of the plane (since it protrudes forward of the props) hitting first, sparing the motor/props from a direct hit. But then you pay a big weight penalty, making it more stall-prone, etc. But is there any foamie like the Big T that is a twin? Or what about something like Big T but have the single prop/motor mounted on a pod over the wing, like a Lakes amphiibian?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are WAY over thinking this. Get yourself a Sig Kadet Senior kit, drop your gear in it and fly. Whether the motor is on the nose or in the wings, isn't going to matter much in a crash. The prop is probably the cheapest thing on your plane, and a speed 600 motor isn't that expensive either unless you go brushless or cobalt. The most expensive thing is probably going to be the batteries, ESC and reciever which are all internal.
Picking a plane based on it's crash worthiness isn't a good idea.
--
Normen Strobel
snipped-for-privacy@zoominternet.nospam.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I completely agree! Buy a plane for its FLIGHTWORTHINESS. Planes that fly well tend to need a lot less repairs!
--
Paul McIntosh
Desert Sky Model Aviation
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Give them a call. JKAerotech is kind of a side project, done for the love of the hobby, not as a commercial enterprise. The person or people that run it have day jobs, families, homes, vehicles, etc. to take care of. You can see how the website wouldn't be a priority, especially if their product line hasn't changed.

Take a look at the Multiplex TwinStar. It's a Speed 400 twin that will run off a single 8-cell pack rather than two hefty 10-cell packs like your twin Big T idea.

Well, if you want ugly and crashable, take a look at this "Manta plane" thing I've seen in the back of R/C magazines.
Might I suggest a different approach? A small, light park flyer like the GWS Slow Stick is practically indestructable. The odd prang won't destroy the drivetrain, at least. You can develop adequate skills to handle the Big T without risking your expensive motor and gearbox.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That is an excellent idea about developing skills with the park flyer first. Thanks

into
changed
mounted on

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.