 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / September 2006Sportsman Aviation Ryan STA
Has anyone here seen or flown one of these? I'm looking for a low wing trainer as my first step up from a high wing Seagull Boomerang 40. While the Boomerang is a good plane and can be thrown around a fair bit it is time to move on to a low wing. My eventual goal is some ARF warbirds (Sportsman Aviation P-40E) but I realise I need some low wing/tail dragger experience before going that way. The Ryan STA looks nice (on the web) and has both low wing/tail dragger but is it too advanced for a first low wing? I really like it, as it's a break from the typical non-descript low wing trainers, has the features I need, fits into the warbird category, and will suit my humble little 40LA. Serious comments welcome. PS. As for my experience: 250 estimated flights on my trainer, a few poor landings, one loss of depth perception (nailed a tree), a couple of holes in the covering, and lots of loops/rolls/cubans it's still in very good condition.  SignatureThe Raven http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3 ** Now I will bring chaos to the world! Ted shuffled out of his cave and grunted these great (and sometimes not so great) words of knowledge: In the "States", the typical "2nd plane" tends to be a Sig 4 Star or a Tiger II. The 4* is a tail dragger and the Tiger II can be either trike or tail dragger (with optional landing gear). I like and used the World Models Rambler 30 for a 2nd plane. I found it very easy to fly, aerobatic (I did my 1st knife edges with this plane) and a "floater". I have had 2 of them. The 1st was powered by an OS 46FX and the present one by an OS 52 4 stroke. I feel the performance with the OS 52 is slightly better than the one with the 46FX. If you want retracts, look at the World Models Rambler 45. Slightly larger wingspan, but has mechanical retracts. > Has anyone here seen or flown one of these? > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > the covering, and lots of loops/rolls/cubans it's still in very good > condition. > Ted shuffled out of his cave and grunted these great (and sometimes not so > great) words of knowledge: > > In the "States", the typical "2nd plane" tends to be a Sig 4 Star or a > Tiger II. The 4* is a tail dragger and the Tiger II can be either trike > or tail dragger (with optional landing gear). Phoenix Scanner seems very popular locally (Australia). They are a bargain ARF, low wing, tricycle undercarriage. Seems like everyone has one simply because they are cheap and easy to throw around. Beginners (to low wings) and experts all seem to fly them. There is at least a dozen in our club, mostly as part of a members hangar. > I like and used the World Models Rambler 30 for a 2nd plane. I found it > very easy to fly, aerobatic (I did my 1st knife edges with this plane) and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > look at the World Models Rambler 45. Slightly larger wingspan, but has > mechanical retracts. Did a quick check and they aren't readily available here, plus the price puts them above most basic low wing aircraft. >> Has anyone here seen or flown one of these? >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> in the covering, and lots of loops/rolls/cubans it's still in very good >> condition. SignatureThe Raven http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3 ** Now I will bring chaos to the world! The Raven Wrote: > Has anyone here seen or flown one of these? > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > off well. Good luck, you cannot go wrong with either of thes > aircraft. Vagabond324 : -- Vagabond32 http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=385777 Check it out, might be what you need. I have no contact with thi person in any way. : -- Vagabond32 Thanks for that but Canada is a bit too far from Australia. Interesting that amongst other things I was trying to keep the costs down to satisfy the other half. She saw some of the models I was looking at and thought they were all ugly. She spotted a Phoenix Strega and said I could have one of those. Reading reviews, looking at one flying at the club, and with the annointment of my other half I think I've made my choice. Perhaps this weekend I'll buy one, along with a 46AX to power it.... SignatureThe Raven http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3 ** Now I will bring chaos to the world! > http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=385777 > > Check it out, might be what you need. I have no contact with this > person in any way. :D Raven, I learned to fly on the Hangar 9 PTS P-51, I bought the Sportsma Aviation Ryan STA as a second plane. First, unless you want t reengineer the wing, landing gear, and elevator pushrod, I wouldn' recommend it. The wing is way too soft, with considerable flex ( wouldn't go near a full size airplane that had that much flex unless i was a B-52!) because it has only lower balsa spars, no cap spar, I-bea or spar web. I did one test flight, and won't fly it again until stiffen the wing. The landing gear mount needs additional wood in th wing to beef it up, and you will have to JB Weld the landing gea because the soldering job on it is lousy. The elevator pushrod is joke, I replaced mine with a David Brown carbon fiber rod. The wood o the fuselage is so soft it dents easily. If you want to do that muc re-engineering, you will find it is a pleasant flying plane with ver little tendency to swerve on takeoff, just remember to flare fo landing or it will nose over. I would recommend something else -- kbr > Raven, > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > little tendency to swerve on takeoff, just remember to flare for > landing or it will nose over. I would recommend something else. What do you think are the odds that yours was just a poor example? Know what I mean? I can't blame you if you are hesitant to fly a model with an uncomfortable feeling wing. I would be too. Soldered landing gear? I thought that those went the way of the dinosaurs. Sorry to hear they are still around. I have to admit that I was looking at a couple of their models. Can't remember which ones right now. Don't think I will bother looking any further. Thanks for the tip. Ed Cregger Ed Cregger Wrote: > What do you think are the odds that yours was just a poor example? Kno > whatI mean? > > Ed Cregger Not very likely. Read the review in the March 2006 issue of R/ Reports -- Chuck > Ed Cregger Wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Not very likely. Read the review in the March 2006 issue of R/C > Reports. That's what I was going to suggest. There was even a photo of the model being held up by its wingtips. The wings looked as stiff as wet noodles. Good flying, desmobob I don't think I've ever heard a good word about this particular ARF. Normally Sportsman Aviation ARFs are regarded as good quality, so this particular ARF of one of the all-time great classic airframes is extra disappointing. >> Ed Cregger Wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Good flying, > desmobob |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.