Looking for first RC build...

Yeah,

I was going to say the Rascal as it looks prettier however,
Kim had to go and make it all technical and took the fun out of it.

So I guess the other one is better for first time flight.

cribbs74 wrote:Yeah,

I was going to say the Rascal as it looks prettier however,
Kim had to go and make it all technical and took the fun out of it.

So I guess the other one is better for first time flight.

That's me...The Spoiler !!!!

As a first RC plane, I'd go for the "trike" LG over the "pretty" tail-dragger. "Tail draggers" present some problems not found on "trikes".

Swings and roundabouts Travis.
I thing the Sig is prettiest no question.
As for trike/tail dragger debate the plus of a dragger is the tail lifts to let you know lift's building and take off is imminent.
Whereas I've seen many juniors attempt rotation too early (usually steeply as well) with a trike only to stall on take off.
The Cessna is full house as well which you'll really appreciate once you've got an hour or so's flight time.
I think I'd go for the C150 because of that although the Sig is bigger and will 'present' better in the air.
Finally if going for the Cessna do yourself a favour and shun the Y lead aileron setup.
Besta luck

John:

Don't you find it curious that most planes billed as RC "trainers" have "trike" LG's?

There must be a reason. I learned to fly RC using one and it survived my misques for quite some time. It made "bouncing" a landing pretty hard to do.

BTW, have the pics taken of my Cox Champion race car taken now and will post then soon.

It's not so much the takeoff as it is the landing, which is the inevitable.

A trike allows you to over flair and to usually still set down resonably. A tail dragger requires a bit more finess or knowledge on the landing. You have to stick it perfectly with a even main gear touch and then set the tail down or you are going nose over tail. or bounce-porposing down the runway.

The trike setup is more of a confidence builder as far as landing are concerned.

Just my .051¢

Of course...you could always totally raid your War Chest...and get both...

Kim wrote:Of course...you could always totally raid your War Chest...and get both...

You can't take it with you, and I'm not leaving any behind!!
(hmm, a new signature idea, )

Yep...it only causes the relatives to fight !!!!

and roger on the signature !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kim wrote:My vote is for the boxy C-150.
The Rascal is pretty, but square structures are easier to repair, and a nice fat airfoil is generally friendlier.
Kim's 2 cents !!!

The Rascal is a beautiful plane, but I've got to throw my 3 cents in with Kim (get you to a nickle). A nice boxy structure is probably your best bet for a first time build.

Since you're looking at SIG, there are two other planes that you might consider: the HERR Star Cruiser (trike) and the HERR Cloud Ranger (conventional geared). HERR, paired with SIG, makes super kits and you have the backing of a long established company to boot.

When looking at smaller planes, one specification I pay attention to is wing loading. Planes with a higher wing loading need to fly faster and generally have a poorer glide ratio. Both the HERR models have a lower loading than the Cessna 150.

Conventional wisdom says that trike geared planes are easier to manage on the ground than tail-draggers, but unless you're flying from pavement, the grass will need to be shorter than a drill sergeant's haircut to take off regularly. Many, if not most, 1/2A's are handlaunched and ground handling becomes less demanding. I confess that I prefer taildraggers to trikes and that landing does require a bit more finesse, but with a slow light plane, you can develop good habits early on.

Lastly, with a steerable nose gear, you can transmit some hefty shock loads to the rudder servo --- the micros have a tendency to shed teeth if stressed.

My 3 cents worth.

andrew

'Tis true...but at least for me, the landing gear is a distant second place to the performance of the plane in the air.

Not to disparage my beloved 1/2A's, but if you could swing it, ANY of the larger Sig Kadets would also be an excellent choice. With a nod to Andrews comment about wing loading, these large models are loaded lighter and can be made to drift in for a landing. I can also fix you up with some larger servos for them !

Just two more cents...Kim

I'm not a stranger to RC flying. I have a mixed bag of trikes and tail draggers. I was looking for input as a "first build" not a "first plane" .

WingingIt74 wrote:I'm not a stranger to RC flying. I have a mixed bag of trikes and tail draggers. I was looking for input as a "first build" not a "first plane" .

Oh...Ok...surely should have known that !!!! Got caught up in the moment ! Sorry !

WingingIt74 wrote:I'm not a stranger to RC flying. I have a mixed bag of trikes and tail draggers. I was looking for input as a "first build" not a "first plane" .

Scratch or kit build?

WingingIt74 wrote:I'm not a stranger to RC flying. I have a mixed bag of trikes and tail draggers. I was looking for input as a "first build" not a "first plane" .

Hmmmmmm........ I'm not sure how to interpret that. Please explain.

SuperDave wrote:

WingingIt74 wrote:I'm not a stranger to RC flying. I have a mixed bag of trikes and tail draggers. I was looking for input as a "first build" not a "first plane" .

Hmmmmmm........ I'm not sure how to interpret that. Please explain.

He has flown RC for a while. He owns and flies both taildraggers and tricycle landing gear equipped planes. He is looking for a first balsa build, but not a first plane or trainer as he already knows how to fly.

I had an awesome instructor, so the switch from trike to dragger was not terribly hard. Did some prop strikes and bounces before getting the hang of it.

[quote="microflitedude"] He is looking for a first balsa build


Had that been made clear from the start by the OP the thread would have taken a different direction.

[quote="SuperDave"]

microflitedude wrote: Had that been made clear from the start by the OP the thread would have taken a different direction.

Well the subject said looking for first RC build, didn't say first rc plane... All the planes I own are electric and are either foam or ARF (balsa/ply) construction. I have not built one from the ground up yet...

I wish you well in any plane you chose then. Hope you enjoy building. I certainly do as I tired of "foamies" long ago.

The newer foams are much better then what they use to be. EPP foam has helped that out quite a bit. My favorite to fly is a HobbyZone Super Cub that I built from the ground up. The Stinson is another nice one, in the looks department

OK, we'll ride a different horse now. I had also interpreted the OP as asking about a first R/C plane. Since you already fly, we can look at a good first build.

1) Pick a constant chord wing -- laying out a hershey bar planform and keeping it straight is easiest with a constant chord.
2) Pick a slab sided fuselage with no compound curves.
3) Plank stab, fin and rudder is an easy build and easy to keep true.

That being said, the SIG/HERR kits are tough to beat. Laser cut with excellent plans and instructions written by the English speaking world. So, my vote still goes for the HERR Star Crusier, the HERR Cloud Ranger or, if you're looking for something with a little more zip, the SIG Hummer.

andrew

WingingIt74 wrote:I'm not a stranger to RC flying. I have a mixed bag of trikes and tail draggers. I was looking for input as a "first build" not a "first plane" .

Sorry T I'm gonna stay behind after school and write a hundred lines.
"I must read thread titles correctly"
"I must read thread titles correctly"
"I must read thread titles correctly" etc etc

I can't help ya mate I'm not good at the building thang.

They're both nice and both would be fine, get the one you like. Opinions are like elbows, and everyones usally got a couple.

I like the Sig kit, you'll probably be hand launching it anyway, at least at first. It also might be fun to put some oversized light weight tires on it. Tail draggers are a lot more fun for touch and goes. The Sig kit still might even be made in Iowa!