ORIGINAL: opjose
ORIGINAL: at101
Foam planes make better trainers than balsa panes. Some look nice in the air or at a distance in my mind that is where they should look good
Eh, yeah right... that's why most clubs REQUIRE non-foam "trainers" in their training programs....
Foam is cheap and easy to shape in a mold. The production costs are rediculously low with expanded foam items, which is why you even find them in such "throwaway" things like packaging.
We pay an outrageous amount for a foam fuselage, or even replacement parts given the above.
Foamies ( not the electronics, just the airframe ) and their parts should be dirt cheap. Instead they are outrageously priced!
A few flights later and a foamy, particularly a nice painted one, looks like cr_ap.
Just compress your foam airplane components sometime, in a bit of a bad landing, and see how "easy" it is to uncompress!
A few scraps of Balsa and covering, plus a small bit of work, and my balsa planes look as good as or better than new, and they tend to be stronger too.
The "foam is better" mantra is usually spouted by those who have yet to learn how to fix their own wood planes, or who have never built a kit.
Foamies have their place... and can be better suited to some venues, indoors, parks, etc.
But better? No.... Hence Kmot's original post...