I receive a lot of questions as to what someone should choose for their first plane. My first recommendation is always use a simulator if at all possible so you can find out if you enjoy flying a model plane, and to teach you how to fly without crashing right away. My second recommendation is to find an experienced flyer through your local club who is willing to mentor you in how to fly model aircraft. They are no less complicated or difficult to fly than full-scale; in fact, in many ways they are much harder than full-scale due to parallax shift, eyesight limitations, and control reversal. Here’s my response to a friend with this same question.
On Mon, November 3, 2008 14:33, Richard wrote: > What would you recommend I consider for a good starter plane setup and > vendor(s)? I would prefer something that I could still use after I advanced > beyond a beginner stage. I appreciate any input.
I get this question a lot. I still fly my trainers for fun; although it’s challenging to do certain aerobatics with them (notably inverted flight), even after five years of flying I love whipping out a trainer and surprising people with what they can do. If you have enough power, though, you’d be amazed at what a well-built trainer can do!
Basically, it all depends on your budget and transportation. Any good moderately-aerobatic trainer will continue to be a lot of fun for years to come. If you can’t put together $200, though, I really strongly recommend saving your money a bit longer to buy something nice and be able to afford spare parts. Investing a bit more money ($500-$600) will afford you a good starter radio.
If you can, buy a *used* aircraft. Bring them to a club meeting to help get a look over the aircraft, or even mention that you’d like to buy a ready-to-fly trainer. Often, club-mates have a spare trainer sitting in the garage that they haven’t flown for a few years and would be willing to part with. Sure, it’s going to have battle scars and repairs, but you’re going to inflict your share of them by the time you finish learning!
Small/park-flyer (electric “400” or nitro “.049” size): HobbyZone Super Cub. $160 RTF, buy a spare battery or two and a spare charger or two (figure an all-up cost of around $250 once you figure in spare parts). Slow, stable, fun to putt around with. The 8-cell battery upgrade (or going to a 3-cell Lithium Polymer batteries) is REALLY worth it due to our altitude. It can handle a little bit of wind, but really the wind should be less than 5MPH for learning. Downside: it’s only three channels (throttle, elevator, rudder) so the aerobatic potential is limited.
The Super Cub is the only one of these that I’d advise teaching yourself on. Even with that, time spent on a simulator or with an instructor is totally worth it in money saved on spare parts on an entirely new airplane.
Larger (“.15” size): A superb choice is the “Apprentice 15e RTF with DX5e Radio”. The radio can be used with multiple receivers (though it’s not a computer radio) and is 2.4GHz DSM2, so you can fly just about anywhere without worrying about radio interference. The plane is EPP foam so it’s really durable for the “oops” moments, and easy to fix with a little bit of epoxy or hot glue. Downside: it only comes with one battery, and Lithium Polymer batteries require an hour to recharge. Additional batteries are quite expensive. But it’s an excellent, quiet, large-park or flying-field capable aircraft and I’ve been really impressed with it (I’d like to buy one myself). $300, plus the cost of extra batteries and possibly a dedicated second charger. At 12 oz/sq ft, the wing loading isn’t light (it’s a little fast for a rank beginner), but moderately aerobatic, tough, and fun. Awesome on a buddy-box.
Traditional size (“.40” size): The Hangar 9 Alpha 40 DSM2 includes the same radio as the Apprentice, but is built-up balsa with a lighter wing loading, slower flight, and similar maneuverability. It’s also glow-powered, so plan on adding another $150 to the $400 purchase price for a flight box, fuel, glow starter, etc. However, the advantage of glow is that you can usually get in 4-7 flights before the receiver pack battery is exhausted, which is generally a full flying session. And if you recharge for 15 minutes after each flight, you can basically fly the plane all day if you have the fuel. Over the long term (200 flights or so), glow and electric have similar costs, but over the short term, glow is much cheaper than electric in these larger sizes. This size and larger pretty much should only be flown at a dedicated flying field.
Slightly larger than traditional size (“.60” size): Hangar 9 Alpha 60 ARF, or the Hobby Lobby Telemaster Senior. You will need to buy servos, engine, radio, etc. and that drives the cost up (plan to spend close to $700-$800), but a lot of flyers say they love the larger size of this class of airplane because it’s easy to see in the air, response time is much slower (nice for newbies), and they really “float” well.
Planes I recommend against: * Hangar 9 PTS planes. Unless your first several dozen flights are on a buddy box with an experienced trainer, these are not really good for “training” on. They look cool, but you really need an experienced buddy on the trainer cord or you’ll end up with an expensive pile of balsa wood. If you have a patient trainer willing to spend a lot of time with you, though, they are great.
* ParkZone J-3 Cub. Just say no. Horrible flyer. Even with the recent brushless upgrade.
* FlyZone planes. They fly… barely. Our altitude kills their performance.
Let me know if this helps!
–Matt
Why the ‘2008’?
Matt, I’m not a model airplane hobbyist, but briefly skimmed your post and wondering why the use of ‘2008’? Is it for new models bought this year? Thought you might want to explain for those interneters wandering to your blog in search of info and reading the post.
The info becomes dated
The main problem is that the info becomes dated very quickly. For instance, the Alpha 40 trainer was just introduced this year. It has several advantages versus previous-year all-in-one ready-to-fly packages, including:
* DSM2 spread-spectrum radio. This means you just pull out your airplane and go fly, rather than have to worry about ensuring your frequency is clear. Also it’s highly interference-resistant; getting “shot down” by someone turning on a radio on the same frequency as you is a regular and very expensive occurrence. Heck, even some poorly-built CB Radios, mobile phones, two-way pagers, and electric motors can interfere with many model aircraft radios in the traditional bands. DSM2 is a great step up, and extremely resistant to this kind of interference.
* The Alpha 40 uses modern construction techniques to reduce weight; it’s a real “floater”, yet is pretty tough and can withstand many of the “oops” moments every new flyer encounters.
* Internal combustion engines today produce approximately 25% more power for the same displacement compared to model aircraft engines of twenty years ago. This is also true with many modern car engines, too! This is due to ABC or AAC construction, CNC-molded or lathed construction with extremely tight tolerances, and superior ball-bearings and/or bushings that reduce lash, wear, and frictional resistance.
The other thing is, the face of model aircraft “trainers” has changed radically over the past few years. Lithium-Ion-Polymer batteries have made electric-powered aircraft viable with run-times and power comparable to internal combustion engines, resulting in a revolution of electric aircraft. It’s still very expensive to “go big” — fly big aircraft — and go electric — particularly if your goal, like mine, is to be in the air as much as possible in a 2-4 hours flying session — but viable, and many new designs are coming out to take advantage of this.
Next year, I hope to find that A123 M1 cell-based electric airplanes of the “forty-sized” (around a six-foot wingspan) category will be increasingly popular. With five-minute recharge times, lifespan measured in thousands of cycles, and no explosion or fire risk (unlike fuel or Lithium Ion batteries), I think they may be exactly what new pilots need to get in the air with their feet on the ground.
—
Matthew P. Barnson