good trainer plane

Not sure if you have them on your side of the pond yet but the ARC Ready2 takes a lot more punishment than the traditional balsa jobs. It is a plastic 40 - 53 size trainer (62 inch wing span) from Italy.They cost about 70 quid over here and most of the UK online shops have them. No doubt you'll be able to get one mail order if you can't find one locally. They fly great and look more like a real plane too.

Nick

My brother just got a sig kadet senior arf (the kit has no eleveators, the arf does)..... it is big, has elevators and flies a 45 engine.... i tried it out and think it is a great plane for a beginner/advanced beginnner..... flies well and can do basic aerobatics like loops, barrel rolls, etc...... And, with it's color scheme (light/dark on top/bottom) very visible...... my bro got the red/white not the blue/white......

No, what do you mean? You need to be more specific. Electric? Glow? Just the plane? The whole outfit?

If you want an entire glow outfit for less than $200, forget about it unless you can find someone locally who is selling off theirs. The typical new glow setup is going to run a MINIMUM of $400, and that's if you only go with the most basic of field equipment.

There are many choices for electric park fliers in the

It' possible his kit didn't come with one. I wonder if he could fly it with elevons. :)

Scratch the elevator,,,, meant the kit has no ailerons, and the arf does...

There are many, but I like the Sig Kadet 40. You can build it yourself or buy an ARF. If you have a local hobby shop, there are many good reasons for going there.

I disagree on two points Norm. First , I believe much dihedral to be a bad thing . It teaches bad habits. Trainers are always correcting themselves thus giving beginners a false idea how planes fly (except for trainers that is) A "real" RC plane, and full-size for that matter, have very little self-righting tendencies. The Airmadillo IS a "real trainer" IMO, as is the SPAD Debonair. Sure they land a bit hotter than a traditional balsa trainer but many times track much better and ultimately have more capabilities thus ultimately being more fun to fly than any Sig Kadet or Eagle ! If you have many beginners coming through your club see how they do while learning and see how your Airmadillo student compares with them on the learning curve. I've seen numerous newbies with their trainers and on one of their first solos they crack it up and they never return to the field again. Sound familiar ? NOT TRUE with the SPAD or Airmadillo student. He'll be back... even after crashes that would devastate a wood plane! AND, he WILL learn more fully with a plane that stays where he puts it and therefore is MUCH better equipped to fly that "2nd plane" when he gets to it. The only time I recommend a balsa trainer is to the old guys who have zero xp with video games and computers. This type of person needs a plane thats rights itself because his spatial hand-eye coordination is nowhere near the student who grew up in the video game age(40yrs old & under?).

2nd, I believe that no matter what you learn on it is ALWAYS better to learn on a buddy box . Most of the newbies I've talked about who crashed , got discouraged and gave up on it, learned on the buddy box. The problem is that their crash happened on their 2nd, 3rd or even 10th solo ! If they were flying a SPAD or 'dillo they'd still be with us ! Actually with a couple of these guys Ive had luck getting them to build SPAD's , moving their engines and radios over and keep flying. Yes, they still crashed occasionally but they stayed with it and are still paying members of our club! As a parting note.....SPAD airframes are crafted from American made parts. There's not many ARF's you can say that about ! Take that China !!

-DE (and yes, you can learn to fly with a taildragger. I did.)

"Normen Strobel" wrote in message news:3f436c7b$1 snipped-for-privacy@corp.newsgroups.com...

Go to a full scale airport that has a Piper Cherokee parked there. Walk in front of the Cherokee and stand about 100 feet away. Now look at the dihedral angle of the wings. No dihedral?

Some airplanes need dihedral in order to fly safely. There is nothing wrong with dihedral. It is not a crutch, but one should be aware of the trade-offs.

Personally, I won't fly most of my models without some dihedral. I think it makes them "nicer" to fly. Some of my models have flat wings and some of them even have anhedral. Some of the models with anhedral even have it intentionally - but at least one does not. Don't ask.

The idea that dihedral is evil and to be avoided at all costs has taken on the quality of an R/C myth over the years. While it is true that some models perform aerobatic maneuvers better with either a measured amount of dihedral, or none at all, it is not true that all models fly better without dihedral.

You probably know all of this, Damien, but I am certain that some readers do not.

Ed Cregger

Toytronix

Yeah your right Ed ! Even my 2nd plane, a 4-star 60 has a good amount of dihedral...it needs it to be as stable as it is (though some build it out). Im certain now that I didnt clarify myself enough to satisfy you. Of course I was talking about high wing monoplane designs, some of which Im sure you can point out , need some dihedral to accomplish their inherant stability. The point , if you can recall Ed, is the self-righting tendencies of most trainer designs. I take objection to them, I imagine your opinion may be different. Further I cant see where I asserted that "dihedral is evil and to be avoided at all costs " and cant see many rational folks imagining that when I said too much dihedral is a bad thing they will come to your conclusions..... "You probably know all of this, Damien, but I am certain that some readers do not." Maybe, people arent as ignorant as you think they should be ???

Ed, If youre not a newsgroup troll why then do you come across as one from time to time ? Im not the first person here to say it, btw. (Had to mention that as some newcomers might think Im just being harsh.)

DE

Damien,

How long you been doing this? I have been flying and training for 35 years. I have trained MANY people on the evil buddy box system and have NEVER lost a plane while doing so.

I have flown several versions of the Airmadillo and would not recommend them to any beginner. Sure, they can take a beating. They HAVE to.

Recommending an aerobatic plane for learning does a disservice to the newbies. After all, no one learns to fly full scale in an F-16, do they? They usually start out in something like a Cessna 150 or Piper Tomahawk.

Well I only recommended "trainer" never any aerobatic type planes. Also there are a MULTITUDE of learned pilots that have PROVEN you wrong about the Airmadillo. It's a fantastic plane for 'a lot' of beginners, but like I said, not all. Both the 'dillo trainer and SPAD Deb fly MUCH better than any duraplane or aircore plane. Funny, folks usually seemed very surprised how well they fly. You sure youve flown them ? Your right though ...." Recommending an aerobatic plane for learning does a disservice to the newbies." I'll certainly never do that and Im curious why you think I have ?

lost a plane while doing so.

Also Paul, remember it wasnt me who said anything bad about the buddy box system. I said... "I believe that no matter what you learn on it is ALWAYS better to learn on a buddy box". BTW, Im 36 and have been flying since I was 17. I certainly am not trying to rile you up more than you already are but please, putting words in other peoples mouths only does a disservice to yourself and your own reputation.

The problem with this is that such an attitude is driving many many many people away from the hobby, and giving R/C clubs bad images. "The only way to learn is on a .40-sized glow-powered trainer," just ain't so anymore.

Yes, it's best to use what the instructor feels most comfortable with, but that doesn't matter to the people spending the money. They want what they want, and telling them what they want is counterproductive. Best to let them make their own mistakes...

Eh, no. If you want to go it alone, get a Slow Stick or a Firebird Commander. You've got a lot less money invested when you get disgusted and quit, and it's pretty likely you won't kill anyone.

Too bad the original question was for under $200.

Well, the Airmadillo is built right up the road from me, I like 'em, and I've had one since about 93 or 94 or so. And it's (being polite) less than ideal for training someone on, IMO. It glides like a brick and flies too fast for someone just starting out. I've had to do it with several students and it took much longer to get them to start thinking ahead of the plane. They spend too much time reacting, rather than acting. The only really good point they have as a trainer is landing practice. Pretty low stress there.

And saying they are better than the Aircores, while true, isn't saying much. The kombat dillo makes a decent second plane if you hang a good motor on it. Takes a good beating, and doing a flat spin all the way down to the ground never gets old. It's a good plane to throw in the back of the car and learn to push the edge with. Full throttle doing continuous rolls down the length of the runway about a wingspan above the ground, that kind of stuff. But any old stick is better at being a trainer, and a primary trainer is still the best way to start someone.

Hmmm ...funny my Airmadillo trainer floats quite well and glides a good long time at idle. Maybe their making them different nowadays ? Are you sure youre talking about the trainer (60" ws) or the stick (48" ws) ? Sure the trainer doesnt float like a typical wood trainer but its not that bad either. The Debonair is even better...just about like a Kadet. All I can speak from is my own and several other peoples experience. Ill end end it like this....My first recommendation is to build a SPAD Debonair but if you dont want the (minimal) trouble ....and your money-conscious, from the video game generation and want a pretty damn good flying trainer that will last and stay in the air throughout the learning curve, its a great choice. 'Nuff Said

Does the Cherokee fly on 'rudder only'?????

Dihedral is necessary for stability on free-flight or any RC plane that lacks ailerons. It is also necessary to turn an RC plane with the rudder.

Personally, I like less dihedral. My SPAD Debonair has only 2" dihedral when the instructions call for 5" !!!

David

ready 2 has a one piecve wing and wing bolts IIRC. Probably not screwed on tight, or over tighteded and stripped them, or tried something way OTT and sheared them in conjuction with one of the above