Trainer list

[Tim Mackey]

Well done David - a nice idea

[Ultymate]

Having been an instructor for a long time now, I personally would not reccomend a three channel model in this day and age. There's no financial saving these days and it just prolongs the learning experience ie the student gets to grips with three channels and then has to learn the new ballgame of ailerons including getting a suitable model JMHO

[Tim Mackey]

I think I would agree with that Brian.

Edited By Timbo - Administrator on 02/03/2010 12:35:52

[Jonathan Lewzey]

i don't see why anyone would want to build there own trainer with the multitude of ARTFs around. They're an almost disposable item to teach you to fly, not something to get 'emotionally attached' to from the building board to flying. As a newbie, i'd much rather get flying straight away.

 

agree with Ulty, 3ch trainers are obsolete and harder to fly in stronger winds, especially vintage models. Ailerons are a must. 

[Richard Wood]

People build models because the building itself is half the fun of the whole thing.

Building a trainer can teach a lot about construction, covering & radio installation.

They also tend to be stronger than their ARTF alternatives.

The job satisfaction from building  'just' a trainer can be very worthwhile.

Each to their own.

 

 

[Bob Cotsford]

not to mention that learning to build = learning to repair - a usefull skill for beginners.

[Ultymate]

The only problem with beginners buiding a trainer is quite often I've found they build in warps and twists and present the instructor with an ill flying model. The way ARTF trainers are these days as a rule they fly straight as a die and give the trainee a good experience. I think if they do have the building bug to put it on hold for later models, again JMHO

[David Davis]

1. I compiled this list for those who want to build a trainer, perhaps those who built models many years ago and are returning to the hobby, perhaps building an R/C aircraft for the first time. Those who would prefer to buy an ARTF are already well catered for.

 

2. Jonathan, you are probably a much better pilot than I am and being young, have soon learned to fly but I stand by my conviction, based on years of teaching beginners how to fly, that a three channel model is a better first model for most  older novices, especially retired novices, who frequently lack the co-ordination and reactions of younger fliers. For the same reasons they shouldn't learn to fly in a wind, at least at the beginning of the learning process, because the model is constantly being blown off course and the beginner is chasing it all of the time, feeding in signals which are too late and too big with tragic results unless he is on a buddy box.

 

3. Even if you have learned to fly, building a trainer is a good point to start off at when learning how to build. Their construction is usually pretty simple and robust and having learned basic building and covering techniques on a trainer, you can go on to something more demanding later on.

 

4. A nice big trainer makes an excellent chilling out machine, toffee bomber, camera ship, glider tug etc etc.

[Josip Vrandecic -Mes]

I'm happy when I hear that some new young guys wont to fly R/C.They are probably less happy when we are initially set up a rules for beginners (build models from the kit etc).Undoubtedly would be good for all beginners learn on easy way...but unfortunately it is not possible.New times-new methods. 

P.S.I agree with Jonathan and Ulty ,and also think that minimum TX channels is 4.Because a

rudder is disastrous for any beginner....back  to me nightmare from the past.

[Tim Mackey]

JVP - A rudder should not be a disaster for a beginner !  If its  3 channel model then its the primary steering control, coupled with elevator, just like an aileron really

If its 4 channel, I often switched out the rudder function until the traineee was ready to try the ground handling - and then it becomes a vital part of the training process.

[Reno Racer]

4ch Uno Wot was my trainer, solidly built and easy to cover the foam veneer wing using solartrim for the first time.

 

trainers need to be rugged; some artfs seem a litte fragile - great looking cnc cut things that turn to matchstick at the very idea of a tuff learner landing.

 

If it does have to be an ARTF, the seagull range are good, either ic boomerang or ep innovator

[David Davis]

I've nothing against ARTF trainers. I find that the Irvine Tutor and the Eflite Apprentice are especially good, but they don't teach you how to build.

 

Once you can fly, the ARTF manufacturers will sell you a Mustang or Spitfire but if you want something even slightly out of the ordinary, a Hawker Typhoon for example, then you'll have to build one yourself.

 

If you haven't learned how to build, you're restricted to what the ARTF manufacturers are willing to supply.

 

Regretably, lots of fliers are quite happy with that situation.

[Tim Mackey]

Its horses for courses, and as stated, some are happy with the ARTF route - and thats fine, others may like the challenge, satisfaction and skill building experience of a proper traditional build.

All the OP is doing here is giving options to the latter crew - and thats fine too

Edited By Timbo - Administrator on 02/03/2010 22:37:06

[Jonathan Lewzey]

Posted by Richard Wood on 02/03/2010 15:09:31:

People build models because the building itself is half the fun of the whole thing.

Building a trainer can teach a lot about construction, covering & radio installation.

They also tend to be stronger than their ARTF alternatives.

The job satisfaction from building  'just' a trainer can be very worthwhile.

Each to their own.

 

 

 yeh, i do know the joys of building, being halfway through a Brian Taylor Fw 190 and having finished several traditional builds. These have mostly been scale though as scale ARTFs still leave a certain authenticity to be desired unless heavily modified. I'd always try to talk a keen builder/novice flyer into buying their first model and learn to fly while building something that they really want to fly, as, lets face it, most people don't aspire to fly a trainer .

 

I'd only ever consider letting a newbie loose on a buddy box till they're competant to go solo so here, except at the lowest of altitudes, the instructor's reflexes nd flying skills should be good enough to save the model.

[Richard Wood]

I take your point Jonathan.

Trainers do get knocked about a bit though & often end up looking

a little sorry after a few months. A bit of advice on beefing up

an ARTF trainer would certainly help a beginner.There's a thread

here on this sort of topic I think.

 

David, could I cordially suggest that you consider adding the Galaxy

Gazelle to the list?

It can be built as a 3 or 4 channel trainer or as a 'super' aerobatic model.

It's a 40 size 56" span foam wing job and the one I have is very good.

Galaxy are a long established British company & worth a mention eh?

 

Richard

 

 

 

[Ultymate]

I wouldn't wish to stop someone building if that's their inclination just pointing out that depending on the skill level of the build you can end up with a model that doesn't fly quite as well as it should

[Wayne Glover]

Well being one of the old lads coming back to flying,I started as a young boy building rubber powered Keil Kraft progressing onto jet-x.Balsa frame covered with tissue then doped How I wished  I could have had R C then 50 years ago now having time to indulge myself I would like to build my own craft to fly, model building I would find less of a problem than flying it,Reflexes being a bit slower now at 64 and never having control of a model in the air before I would find 3 channels more than enough to cope with enjoyment back then was always more of the build than the flying now I`m hoping the reverse to be true! I find the list and comments to be very helpful thank you very much.  Wayne.

[Phil 9]

David,s list has some nice models. A lot of which would also make good sports models when "training" is finished. Most ARTF trainers beginners do want to get rid of and progress to something better looking as soon as they can

But most real beginners to come to the hobby in complete ignorance. Myself being one. I started out by buying a copy of rcm&e  and I built the free plan that came with it. Unfortunately for me it was not a trainer model and the inevitable crash and bin bag followed.

We have all seen beginners getting stuck and needing help with their first build project that usually turns out to be a Spitfire, some jet model or something else just as unsuitable for a beginner

[John Sheehy]

I would suggest to any beginner that he or she buy an ARTF and learn to fly with that.  If they are interested in building they can build a traditional model at the same time.  Knowing how long it takes me to build, cover and setup a traditional kit, I imagine they would have learned the basics of flying before their kit is finished.  They would also have a better chance of flying it successfully.

John.

[Josip Vrandecic -Mes]

Strongly agree John Sheehy !And after 40 years in modeling,I have a problem with the cowling for an old trainer...let alone design and build.There are no easy tasks,in RC, dears beginners

[David Davis]

It would certainly be cheaper for a beginner to buy an ARTF and learn to fly on that, but if he also wants to learn how to build, then any of the trainers on the list will give him a good starting point.

 

Once you've built a trainer or some similar simple model, you then have the skills to go on to build a Spitfire or Tiger Moth or whatever it is that blows your skirt up! 

[Peter Wood]

I have nearly built a Super 60 , but wish I had bought an artf Junior 60. Is it easy to convert to Electric the Junior 60.

 

Pete

[Phil 9]

I tried to buy the artf junior 60 but could not find one in stock anywere

[David Davis]

I hear that the ARTF Junior 60 is no longer available but please check with Flair to get confirmation.

 

I feel that the Super 60 would probably be a better trainer than the Junior 60 owing to its flat bottomed wing section and its longer nose. The wing section allows for easier pentration of the wind. The longer nose means that it is easier to balance the model without adding too much weight if you've built the tailplane too heavy.

 

Neither model is difficult to convert to electric flight. A 500 watt motor and 3S Lipo should be ample to power either model.

 

Ben Buckle does a kit especially for electric power.

[Peter Wood]

I have a super 60 kit, and was adviced by a local model shop that they did not have a round tank so sold me a square one that was too large . Unfortuneately i have made the model unattractive  by trying to fit that tank. so it is not finished.

 

I believe the Super 60 is not in artf.

 

Peter