KB> ... so now I'm in the market for another plane.  My instructor 
 KB> suggested I might want to step up to something a bit more advanced 
 KB> like a Big Stik but I think the Super Sportster looks a lot better 
 RM> Well, I have had both these birds over the years - both fly very well
 RM> but the Super Sporster gets my vote for both looks and flight
 RM> performance - especially the Super Sportster 60.  And I'll give you
 RM> another suggestion - take a look at the Great Planes Trainer 40 or
 RM> Trainer 60 (not the PT series).  These birds are easy to build, are
 RM> very rugged and tolerant of "mistakes", and will perform aerobatics
 RM> with ease since the wing airfoil is semi-symmetrical.  I'd also
 RM> suggest you build the tricycle wheeled version for easier ground
 RM> handling, takeoff and landing ease.
Hmmm, I see it here in the latest Tower Talk.  It looks like a 
good candidate.  By the way, the description in the catalog says 
the airfoil if fully symmetrical.  I only have the .40 engine 
salvaged from the Tower Trainer so I'll probably get a 40 size 
plane rather than buy another engine.  It's tough enough getting 
that 40 size plane into my 41 size Honda. 
 RM> Be advised - ARFS are generally very well built but they are NOT
 RM> substantial and will not tolerate rough handling (like the GP Trainer
 RM> series I mentioned earlier).  I have been negatively impressed with
 RM> every ARF I have ever seen...trainers or otherwise.  
True, that Tower Trainer ARF needed several changes and it seemed 
damage prone.  Ditto for my Thunder Tiger Windstar ARF glider.  
But, at least, an imperfect plane makes it easier to deflect the 
blame for accidents. :-)  Time is valuable and I'd rather fly than 
build.  Also, it's less nerve wracking to fly (or crash 'n trash) 
a plane in which one has invested minimal time.  But you seem 
strong-willed on the matter so I'll reconsider kits.  
You know, now that I think about it, I've probably invested more 
time in mods and repairs of ARFs than the initial assembly of kits 
would have required.  If kits repair more easily than ARFs then 
reduced repair time tends to justify them.  
 RM> ... BTW - my
 RM> experience in R/C modeling goes back 35 years so I feel I can speak
 RM> from a position of knowledge.  I'll look for you again on the echo -
 RM> let us know how you come out on the next bird.  Good luck and TTYL -
 RM> Roger 
I appreciate the voice of experience.  Thanks.  
I'll keep you posted. 
--- Blue Wave/Max v2.12
---------------