If a plane has no bad characteristics it makes learning 3d easier, IMO. After 5 flights I'm doing things with this plane I though would take alot more practice. OK, maybe BEST is too strong a word. I'm sure there are other planes out the as good or maybe better. But I did a lot of research and it almost always came back down to either the Sledge or the OMP Edge. After flying the Sledge I'm truly amazed. Again, we all have opinions. This is mine.

Nope....

In addition, just the category of easiest or best all by itself does not contain only one single loan plane....

....as most RC enthusiasts seem to believe.

{You have to learn on a balsa, high wing trainer, with a 40-46 sized engine, on Saturdays and Sundays only, you have to use an APC prop with a OS glow plug, a fuel containing not less than 15% Nitro, at least 20% castro, it has to be a 4 channel plane --- I don't buy it...beware of the single plane solution theory}

And what is best: Cheapest, most economonical, most crash-proof, most aerodynamic.

Well, how far are you going in this hobby. Are you just gonna sport fly the rest of your r/c carreer or are you gonna eventually go to IMAC and pattern. If you chose sport pilot, i would pick a profile like the Sledge by morris hobbies or some other 3-d trainer. If you chose the latter, i would pick the funtana or a pattern/3-d plane like the CA widebody. If all you want to do is 3-d so you can say "hey, I can 3-d" then get a profile. They will do all of the 3-d that you can throw at it, but they are not very good at pattern stuff. If you get a more pattern type plane or scale looking plane, then it will pattern good and 3-d good but that may or may not take a little more work depending on the plane. That is just my $.02. good luck making a decision.

I stand corrected, If you are looking for a profile I would highly recommend the Sledge. If not, I'm sure there are quiet a few very good planes for learning 3D. And who else better to get opinions from than the people on this forum. Keep up the good work.

SPAD 3D being the "BEST".

Its good for what it is (3D trainer and fun to kick around with) but its a long shot from the "BEST". Lets say 40% Carden Extra 330 V.S. Spad 3D in a freestyle contest...hummmm...my money will be placed on the 40% 330.

Or did you mean BEST 3D trainer. In which I still disagree b/c it will NOT fly the full range of 3D manuvers. Its good but it aint that good.

What little it lacks in it's flight envelope is made up for 20 times over by how tough and easy to build it is. No 3D ship takes the fear factor out of getting down low and taking risks the way the Spa3d does. Unless you have too much money and free time on your hands for repairs, it IS the ultimate 3D trainer. I have already read quite a few accounts of pilots who have become profiecint flying it, and how much it helped tremendously in the transistion to other 3D ships. I can say the same. I practiced endlessly trying to hover my Sig Somethin Extra (I know, not exactly a 3D bird) with no luck. After spending a few months with nothing but my Spa3d, I went back to the SE, and hovered it like I never had before, and flats spins, and waterfalls, and harrier, etc.

I agree that it takes the fear out of learning to hover down low. I have built 23 of these things so I know what they are capable of.
Here is what the SPAD3D's do very well (3D related):
Hover
Harrier
Flat spin

It will also do an alright waterfall but it doesnt seem to like to do consecutive axial waterfalls.
Harrier rolls suck
Knife edge is all but impossible
Harrier loops just wont happen
Any Precision style of 3D is out of the question. It seems to wallow through the motions instead of being crisp and responsive (not a lot of planes are).

For the money its the best hands down. I highly recommend that everyone try one out. But just dont fly the SPAD and expect to become some great 3D pilot. Suppliment it with other 3D planes. 3D is all about having a "feel for the plane". Its hard to get people to understand what is meant by that until you put them in a hover and give them the really simple instructions. "If it falls left then feed in right rudder, if its falling back push forward, when the belly is towards you the rudder is reversed and manage the throttle to keep it in one place" Sounds simple huh?

I would agree with this, sure. But I would also say it makes an excellent FIRST 3D experience, for all of it benefits that have been gone over so many times. Besides, not all of us want to be Jason Shulman. Some of us just want to have fun, and a Spa3d is or isn't many things, but it IS a fun bugger to fly.

I am learning 3D on my Capiche. I had not done any 3D before finishing this plane (other than hovering my limbo dancer)

I have had a dozen flights max so far on it.

Last weekend I harriered down the strip and dragged my tail on the ground.

Obviously I am doing something wrong as I should not be able to do this with balsa built kit [&:].

NO, you SHOULD be able to to it with balsa, just we do it with SPAD for 1/10 the cost and heartache.
Balsa, foarm, CF, FG planes all fly FANTASTIC, just SPAD do it just as good and a lot less cost

"But I would also say it makes an excellent FIRST 3D experience, for all of it benefits that have been gone over so many times. Besides, not all of us want to be Jason Shulman. Some of us just want to have fun, and a Spa3d is or isn't many things, but it IS a fun bugger to fly. "

With the Exception in my case of me wanting to get better than Shulman (thats a long shot) then I totally agree. The SPAD is a great first 3D experience and I will probobly always own one. I can fly my spad in a very very small area and at night where there is only one or two security lights. Which really pays off here in GA during the summer where the heat index might get to 110 during the very humid day. That just burns out those little engines like mad.

"Balsa, foarm, CF, FG planes all fly FANTASTIC, just SPAD do it just as good and a lot less cost"

If we are considering turnover as a factor then yeah. But I can build a Glow powered 3D foam profile for about the same as a SPAD. It does a wider range of stuff but it doesnt hold up like a SPAD during the crashes (at all).

I got into the hobby last year about the same time our club had a fly in. We had some pros come out with large, expensive planes, and all they did the whole time was hover, harriers, torque rolls, and walls. Now i'm not complaining, but it seems these guys were only interested in these moves, maybe because they are the toughest to master. It seems the spad teaches them realitivly easy with little expense. IMO, build the spad and practice hovers and harriers close to the ground where it is most likely you will trash a balsa plane, and take your balsa plane and practice other pattern or 3d moves at a safe altitude. To me its not worth trashing a nice plane or even a profile, just to learn how to hover, it's not necessary.

The Spads purpose is to "teach the basics" while giving the pilot "total confidence". There is no way in hell a pilot, who is trying 3D for the first time, is going to have total confidence flying any sort of balsa plane a foot off the deck. Again, the spad is to build confidence, without the fear of damaging a plane if it happens to hit the ground. Give a pilot the sticks of any type of wooden profile plane and tell him to come down five feet off the deck and pop up the nose. He's probably going to tell you where you can go! Or tell the pilot to put the same plane in the harrier position and bring it down about a foot off the deck. He's probably going to tell you the same as before. The thing is, he's not comfortable enough to try these maneuvers because of the fear he will damage his plane, and if he's scared and tries to do these maneuvers, he's probably going to dirt nap his plane, resulting in some sort of damage. Now, if he's doing this with a spad, after he realizes that the plane can't be hurt, he'll have the confidence to try anything. The most damage you can really do to this plane is break a prop, or maybe tear off the landing gear, which can be fixed in a matter of seconds.

Some of you guys that are replying just don't understand the point of the SPA3D. A person can build this plane and learn the basics of 3D for about $15.00, and have total confidence while doing so. There's not a thing he can lose with this plane. On the other hand, he can go out and buy a profile plane of his choosing, attempt to learn the basics of 3D, and possibly damage his plane in the process. He's definately not going to have the confidence level he would have with a spad, and that's what learning is about, having confidence. One or two dirt naps witha wooden profile, and the pilot is probably going to say "to hell with 3D".

Like it's been said before, a person can't expect to be able to do all of the 3D moves with the spad. It is limited in what it can do, but what it will do, it does it perfectly. Those of you who keep pushing the wooden profiles, give it a rest. After a person has learned the basics on a SPA3D, then you can start giving advice of what to buy.

There's really nothing left to say,

John

I couldn't have said it better. It will, as is, getting a lot more folks involved in 3D flying. That's a good thing. In the end, that mean more balsa profiles as well!

Grayfox. I was in your shoes 6 month ago. I built a SPAD and boght a Funtana. They both do different things well. For hover practice the spad is the way to go. It is so easy to hover or harier.
Plus it's hard to tear up. The Funtana does walls and waterfalls and elevators 100 times better than a spad. One wrong move though and it's gone. I really think a person should have both. Or at least have something else to fly besides a SPAD. I fly one then the other. The control inputs required on a SPAD are totally different than any other plane. If you put ten flight on it and then jump on something else you will be all over the place. I might mention also I use Real Flight sim.
It is really to easy to hover on but trains your thumbs for the correct inputs.

Good Luck David

See David gets it!!!!

how about a u-can-do 3d 46 or a great planes cap 232 with bigger ailerons

GreyfoxVt,

Michael,
Sorry, just trying to give advice and opinions. But apparently some of us know nothing about I'll "give it a rest" now.

Wooden profiles are great too. I learned to fly 3D on a giant stinger (which is NOT THE BEST CHOICE AT ALL). I then went to a Laser3D and polished up on 3D very quick. I would suggest this airplane to anyone wanting to learn. However it has a design flaw with its weak tale (which requires special attention while building). They hover and fly a lot like a UCD but maybe a little better. I thought I would never grow tired of it but as time has passed there are things that I want to do that the plane is limited in doing, though I still own two of them I think I have outgrown it. It just doesnt hold its harrier rolls on an axis like my profile does. For years and years many great 3D pilots have suggested profiles as a good starting point and I totally agree. The SPADS are also great and I suggest building one but go with the profile as well. You will fly your SPAD more at first but after about 2 months you will be dragging out the profile a lot more b/c of its close to unlimited 3D ability.

Southern Touch9 has the right idea. There is no reason you can't go ahead and buy another plane to fly while learning on the Spad. Being able to get the feel for a new plane will only benefit you in the long run. If you have built up enough confindence to try something with the new plane, go for it. If you still have doubts, stay on the Spad a bit longer. Just remember, the new 3D plane will be able to do more than just harriers, hovering, and flat spins. Try some waterfalls, blenders, walls, inverted harriers (high) with your new plane. I never once stated that a new 3D plane couldn't be bought and flown, I simply didn't reccomend it to learn low maneuvers with. An O.S. .46 FX with a 12X4 prop is more than enough to power a profile or Spad.

John

What ever guys, i've had profiles and I have to say the best profile I have is a tt profile extra with a magnum 46 in it. but that does not out do my love for my Zimpro Ultimate the best all out plane I have, its even awsome at 3d with a supertiger 2500 in it. jm2c

Josh

What's the best spa3d design or mods out there? The original or something close to it? Weight savings?

I'd stick to the original, but use a 5/32 wire gear. With the stock alum gear, you'll bend the "U" channel on impact. The wire gear bends and makes the SPA3D virtually indestructable.

My buddy built a SPA3DT and we did'nt like it as much as the SPA3D. Dunno, seemed kinda heavy in flight and was not nearly as stable.

supertigers [:'(]

A bit heavy, gas guzzelers and poor throttle transitions.

not with an OS carb it definaty has perfect throttle transition!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Definetly better than the Y.S. 140 i had in it. There not too heavy it is lighter than the Y.S. 140 with a hatori pipe!!!!!!!! But any ways the ZIMPRO ULTIMATE is gorgous you should definatly check it out!!!!!!!!!! Its an ARC too

Josh