I'm a proponent of neutral stability in a trainer. "Self-righting" trainers such as the PT series actually fight the pilot. I live in a windy part of the world and the PT's just don't hack it in the wind. The ailerons lack authority, to put it mildly, and the three-channel high-dihedral versions blow over real easy when taxiing. To me, it's just a lousy flier. The Goldberg Eagle and its ubiquitous ARF copies seem to do much better, but the Sig Kadet LT-40, the Hobbico Avistar, and the many "Stick" planes do best. Around here, that is.
Very good manual and kit. I'm a fan of the Great Planes manuals.
I think they were, especially the reduced dihedral. Put some bigger (wider, like 1" wide) ailerons on it and you'll be all set. You shouldn't let mine or anyone else's personal preferences psych you. Get an instructor and go have fun!
Texas Pete AMA 59376 ================================= Thanks for the input. We had a 3 channel PT-40 at our field and it looked like a flying V; which was the driving reason for me to reduce the dihedral of mine. This one blew over on takeoff pretty often.
I'm currently flying a Global Right Flyer 60 with an instructor. It's a trainer with a semi-symmetrical airfoil and very little dihedral.
Unless I crash my current plane, I really don't need another trainer, but thought it would be best to build one as my first kit. Everything other than a trainer seems to assume you know 'something' about building.
Even though I hope I don't need the PT-60, I'm anxious to fly something that I actually built. I've made my share of mistakes on it, and hope wood filler and sandpaper can hide the cosmetic errors. I think I've done a good job of keeping it straight and strong.
I wanted to build an Astro Hog, but that is too much of a "builder's kit" for a first attempt. I had the Hog built; so, when I'm ready for another plane, it will be ready to go.