Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Hi guys
After 2 years of flying i want to start with 3D.I need advice on which plane is better (or if another plane is even better)for a beginner in 3D flying so i can get comfortable with 3D manuevers.
Thanks a lot:)

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Allex:

I have had both with YS 63's in them. They both perform about the same, the UCD a little easier to hover with. The 60 sized UCD with YS 110 is a much better flyer than either the flip of 40 UCD for some reason. My facorite of all time (a lot of time) is th Swaney MOJO 40. Have not had the 60 yet. Considering my many years experience, 71 yeas of age, slowing reflexes and deterioriating eyesight, the mojo recommendation whold be worth considering. With the YS 63 in it, can not complain in any direction. Loves to hover, elevator and all that good stuff. I have not found a flying attitude the airframe objects too yet!! A very solid flyer which a old gieser or novice will benefit from. ENJOY

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Thanks for your advice rmenke.About MOJO i don't like it because it is a profile plane and the Flip would be very hard to see so i'll go with the UCD

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Neither,go with Funtana X100, its better than a U-Can-Do,flys as slow as a "Do",tracks straighter,does every 3-D stunt. Its bigger than a Flip which makes it less touchy and easier to see. Never had a Flip, but have flown 4 U-Can-Do and one X100-no question, the X100 is a superior craft.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

You have no idea how a good 3D plane should fly if you think the Funtana is great.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

AlexBig

Since you asked about the Flip or UCD I'd suggest the U-Can-Do 46. You'll enjoy it. It recovers quickly from stalled 3D maneuvers and mistakes you might make at low altitude.
Assemble it and fly it while you're looking around for your next 3D model. If you keep hanging around the 3D forum you'll be sucked into the whirlwind of new 3D models that keep blowing into the market.
Even though I have other 3D models, including a 2-yr old Funtana 90, I still enjoy flying my high mileage UCD 46 occasionally. I also still have two UCD 60's flying.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Rocketman thanks for your advice.As for my second 3D plane i was thinking of FuntanaS 90.What is your opinion about it,how does it fly and what engine would fit it best?
Again thanks for your info

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Well, lets see here,it does nice walls,hovers DOD-tail touches,harriers are nice,rolling harriers are nice,HA KE is quite good,did I mention torque rolls?-no-it does nice torque rolls too,I've tried inverted harriers,can only do them for a second or 2 ,need more practice on that but looks like its possible,snaps,point rolls,flat spins,haven't tried a blender yet,water falls-yes. So I dont know what 3-D you are talking about but the X100 does all the above for a slightly above average pilot like me.(sorry,bragging a little bit)

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

UCD would be a mistake. Good to learn to hover, bad for anything else 3D. I have not flown a Flip but I have heard good things about its 3D abilities and I have seen videos of the Flip doing good 3D. Do a search.

If you decide to look beyond these 2 airplanes, the Funtana 100X would be a good choice. I've seen many fly at my field and have heard good things from the guys locally who fly 3D. The easiest choice for learning 3D is a profile. Get a couple of them and fly the heck out of them. If you crash one, fly your backup and then fix the damaged one. Who cares what a profile looks like - you said you wanted to learn 3D right? Once you get the moves down, you'll be able to do them on a nice looking giant Extra, Edge etc.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Thank you aviti but as i mentioned above i hate profile planes.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

You'll only hate them till you fly one, then all the sudden how it looks sitting on the ground isn't really that important any more and you'll be way to busy picking your jaw up off the ground after seeing how well they do 3D that you won't notice how they look in the air either.
So basically you need to decide if your going to fly it or look at it:D:D

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

If the end results is the same,who cares if you used a profile or standard fuse? It is just a hobby for most of us. Having said that, I like the looks of OMP profiles,if I went that way (again), I would look at the Fusion or maybe the 62" Katana profile. I watched an 80 yr. young man fly the Katana and he was starting to hover & harrier,he's been flying giants & glow for many many years,he can do a rolling circle with a giant just 20ft off the deck. He got caught up in the 3-D frenzy,crashed a giant scale trying to harrier for the first time and drove it right into the ground,he wouldnt let up on the elevator until it was over. The he showed up with this profile and is starting to get with it. Theres more than one way to get into 3-D,simulator,foamies,profiles,glow & gas,whatever floats your boat,they got one of those too.(flying boat-wonder if its 3-D'able?)

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Alex,
Your first 3d plane is a tool like a hammer. You don't say I won't use a claw hammer because of the way it looks. Besides you will probably crash your 1st 3d plane early and often. Performance, ruggedness and ease of repair are much more important than looks.
I fly a U-Can-Do, Mojo 60, Burrito and Mojo46 now. The Mojo 60 is the easiest to fly and does stuff that no one else at the field can do. It is the best all around plane I have seen under 10 lbs. The UCD flies OK but fragile and a little clumsy. Not a bad 1st 3d plane, just not great. Funtanas are reported to be snappy and fragile. The reason people get them as a 3d learner are they think they look cool and the learner has an inflated impression of how good they are at flying.
Profiles are simple, rugged, light, strong, fly great and are cheap. They don't look as much like real planes. You are not getting married to the plane. Use it, learn and move on. BTW if you get the Funtana 100 they will tell you to get a $300 to $400 engine to pull it.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Snappy!!?? Showtime,yes,X100 absolutely not. $400 engine??!! OS 1.20 AX or even the 1.08 will work,both less than $$300, new. Actually, the Evolution 100 is less than $200 I think, but I have never run one of those, I stick with the trusted names.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Do you really think an X100 is the best choice for a relatively new flier as a 1st 3d plane? I would for sure start with a smaller , less expensive plane that could use std servos and a smaller engine. Most of the x100 guys on that thread say a Saito 1.25 isn't enough engine for one and are going to YS engines. I guess you could fly it with a big 2 stroke but why get a big plane and not use a 4 stroke for 3d?
I picture a guy that has a couple of years with trainers and sticks wanting to get into 3d. But we don't know that and he may be a pattern champ or something. A friend wrecked his trainer, then wrecked a Slowpoke,all in a few flights each. Then after watching us fly 3d went to his favorite hobby shop and brought home an X50. He finally got his Saito that he bent up back from the shop and will have it going soon. I will learn how user friendly the X50 is for learning fliers. I am not optimistic. He is another guy that has to have pretty planes right now and so far its cost him $$$. If you have lots of money for RC stuff get whatever looks good, bigger is better, you get what you pay for, etc and have fun.
Note that WHYNOT (a few posts above) doesn't even think the X100 is much of a 3d plane.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

If it looks like a duck,walks like a duck-you know ? The guy has never mentioned what he can afford,so there is some assuming going on here,he does NOT want a profile,thats clear. Learning 3-D on a smaller plane might be cheaper but in this case, the difference between a UCD(.60) OMP profile ARFs in the 60" size,Flip, and the X100 is not that much and a little bigger size does help to some degree. We dont know if he uses a simulator,if so, that might mean he's more ready than some, in either case he just wants an opinion,he got yours and he got mine & others too. The only other thing I can think of telling him is dont try anything down real low until you have done it higher up many times over. For a lightly loaded wing like a Do,X100, or most profiles,I would guess 30-50 feet up at first would give you margin for mistakes.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Because it will be my first 3D plane and it will crash lots of times i want something relatively cheap.I have lots of standard servos and about 4 hi torque(they were for my dad's Laser but it isn't built yet),an OS 91 4S and a Saito 80 that i can use on that plane.So i will need the plane only.About profiles i hate them because of their shape(i've never flown one to see how they fly).I use RF G2 now and i practice hovering almost every day but G2 isn't made for 3D in my opinion.Lastly i am familiar with the saying"Fly at least 2 mistakes high":D

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

:)Interesting comments...

I just purchased an OMP Fusion 90 size for comparison and to see if I was really missing out on a spectacular plane (profile)

Simple: I had a much harder time putting this thing together than my UCD. I had to cut the complete fuse into to open it up to make a passageway for the 3 servo wires in the tail. I also found it difficult to find a way to install the receiver and battery. I got it done and it works but was much harder than the UCD. Also, I mounted the tank on the CG on my UCD. This is impossible with the Fusion. Simple with the UCD. Covering was very low quality compared to the UCD

Rugged: So far I think you are right. I believe the Fusion will be "tougher" than the UCD.

Light: Fusion = 7lbs 7 ozs with YS 110. UCD 7lbs 12ozs with YS 110. Not much difference really. I certainly can't tell any difference while flying.

Strong: The fuse flexs a lot on my Fusion but other than that I feel it is more strong than the UCD.

Cheap: Fusion = $279.00 plus shipping. UCD = $155.00 (with Tower discounts) and shipping is free. They don't seem that cheap to me

Flying: UCD is easier to fly for beginner. UCD is better at hovering (it may be the best in class here) Waterfalls are easier and tighter with the UCD. Flat spins/Blenders are quite a bit better with the UCD. (I can do a rising inverted flat spin with the UCD) Rolling circles are easier and have less tail waggle with the UCD. The Fusion is better at Knife Edge, Harriers and Rolling Harriers. The Fusion will do all of the 3D stuff, no question about it, and I like the way it flys. I'll be flying it more to get an extended evaluation. But in my book...my first profile isn't CLEARLY better than my non profile planes. I'm comparing it to the UCD which I think is it's closest rival...not my Velox which out flys it in every area. Every area. No question about it.

The bottom line...The Fusion is about the same as the UCD but is a little more sturdy, but is also more expensive and I don't think it's as fun to fly.

I'm still waiting as to why the profiles are considered by many to be "So much better" than the full bodied airplanes. I just don't see it.

Thanks
Barry

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

People bought into profiles(I did too)for lightness,simplicity and they were some of the first models with the fat air foils for really slow flight. A few years back they were quite cool,I had a Morris Hobby SuDo Koi & loved it for several years,I think I tried my first harriers with it,the maneuver didnt have a name then,it KE the best I ever had up to then. Nothing but kits were available then,they were fairly cheap compared to conventional kits. I got down on the deck and as close in as you can get with it,it was pretty cool for its time. I had to deal with the same issues you mentioned above,I ended up with the tank inside the wing,had to squeeze it in,just 8 oz. was it,I used extended brass tubes thru the wing leading edge to connect fuel tubing from the outside. Cut channels in the fuse for servo wires to be concealed,had to re-inforce the fuse/wing bond because engine vibration constantly broke the glue joint there. Now that the weight difference between modern ARF's and profiles is not that much,performance is the same IMO, even the price is not much of an issue either,not many want to build kits anymore around here,the quality of ARFs combined with price has changed things. I dont see any special advantages to profiles like I used to,hell, look at the UCD fuse, it is as narrow as you can get without being a progile. Looks like Alexbig is going .40 - .60 size with his engines/servos,X100 might be a little too big for those but I bet it would fly. Flip,.60 Do,.46 Do,some of the Flinton models look very interesting,Harrier .46 by Seagul, Sig Mayhem,there are plenty to choose from,pick one and get going.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

One purpose of these forums is to provide info to fellow fliers so they can have the experiences of others to help decide what plane, engine , etc will work for them. Barry has lots and lots and lots of full body ARFs and one profile. He apparently has never even seen anyone fly a good 3d profile. He has a very high opinion of the UCD, an opinion not shared by some 3d fliers. He also writes alot of comments on planes that are useful when looking for something new. He is the sole reason I got a Mayhem 40 ARF when I got close to running out of planes last summer. So I listen to what he says. Except about profiles. He has a wild hair about convencing the world that profiles are worthless.

I have and fly a UCD 46 and a Mojo 60. There is not one thing that I can do with the UCD that the Mojo will not do better. The Mojo comes as a kit, costs $90 , assembles quickly, weighs 5 1/2 lbs with a Saito 91. Anyone can tell the Mojo is structurally way stronger than the UCD.

I have an OS 91 4 stroke on my UCD 46 and it is about right. My plane weighs 5.7 lbs - I weighed it. I have recommended it as a 1st 3d plane in the past. If you want an Arf for learning 3d it isn't bad. BUT it isn't better than a Mojo 60 in my experience. My Mojo is cheaper, stronger, lighter and does better tricks than my UCD.Has anyone else owned both and have an opinion?

BTW I can understand why people find profiles less attractive than some scale like planes. If you can't get past the looks you won't be happy. I am very much of the pretty is as pretty does camp. My planes look like NASA development hardware and that is fine by me. My Mojo does great knife edge loops,and flat spins better than my UCD. I can do rising flat spins with both the lowly Burrito and the Mojo 60.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Hey, the guy doesnt want a profile,he said it twice. Thats just the way it is. I would probably still have a profile if there was some special advantage to one,better selection & size range & if they had more ARF's,I dont want to go back to building kits when there are so many great flying scale -like models out there. A $90 kit will end up costing you over $200 when everything is added up incl. hardware. Aound here,even if I could do more than anyone else with a profile, they would be saying things like " yeah, try a REAL plane and see if you can do that". The same guys still knock the SFG's on the X100,one guy said "take off those training wheels,they look rediculous". I'm not knocking profiles,I dont think anything less of someone fly one,if its working for you, then go with it, I just think they have lost the advantage they used to have.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

Alright, here's my "2 cents". I quit flying seven years ago when my son was born. At that point I had about 1 year experience with my most "advanced" plane being a GP 40 size Stick. Recently I took back to the hobby and jumped right in with a U-Can-Do .46 powered by an OS .50SX. I can't speak for other 3D models, but this thing has been a blast. It can do everything from being "wadded up" to landing at the slowest of speeds. It gives me plenty of recovery for my low altitude mistakes and at high control throws it'll really get with it! So far I've logged 80 flight without incident. Happens to look good also.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

The Do is a good choice for learning 3-D,a good profile is a good choice to start out with,if you like what you have,keep it as long as you can and get the most out of it,then start thinking about your next step if you want to. I dont think it really matters if its a profile or full fuse,long as you get something out of it. My whole point here is I dont believe there is any special advantage of one over the other anymore. I was looking at Flinton models yesterday,their 60 size 3-D birds come in 3-5lbs! Unheard of when I was flying the SuDoKoi.

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

:)I really don't have anything against profile planes. Sorry if I came accross that way. I like my Fusion and as I fly it more I like it more. I always try to be critical of planes because that's what I'd like to hear if I was in the market for a new plane. What is the down side. What are the good points. I believe, by and large, that most people have a honeymoon period where the plane they just got is the greatest plane on earth. It couldn't be better in any way. Usually this is not the case. I try to tell exactly what my findings are.

In this case...Clearly the Fusion is "tougher" more durable than the UCD. It flys on the side better than the UCDs but not as good as I expected frankly. My Velox does much better KE than the Fusion. The Fusion is very easy to fly but slightly harder to land/take off etc. than the UCD. I think this is because of the "thin" wing on the Fusion. You have a lot less concern of overspeeding the Fusion. In fact I don't think you even have to worry about that unless it was on a long down line.

So...in case anyone misunderstood, I do like the Fusion. My trouble is I'm getting to the point that the only planes I have I like very much. They are all similar but different. Now I'm having a lot of trouble deciding which one to fly. I like them all. I really do. I'm kinda expanding into the Gas planes a little bit and I like them also, but guess what...they aren't the perfect plane either. One thing is...you wouldn't know it by reading these threads but you still have to "clean up" a gas plane. And I think the residue left from the gas engines is harder to get off. From what I read there was zero clean up. No so. That's the kind of info I'm talking about.

Anyways...I just wanted to clear up that. And I am sorry about letting you on that I might not like the profiles. I do.

Thanks
Barry

RE: Flip or U-Can-Do?
 

UGH! Profiles are just flat ugly. A flip-flopping plank is a very poor and unrealistic representation of an airplane. Some people just can't make the connection and cringe when they see a profile and I can understand the feeling.

As for aerobatics and 3D, I think most builder/fliers are impressed by the performances of full size planes flown by pilots like Leo Loudenslager, Patty Wagstaff, Sean D. Tucker, Mike Goulian and others and like the challenge of duplicating those performances with a model that at least looks like an airplane.
So, if someone just doesn't like profiles why try to beat him into submitting to your view that a plane has to be flat.[:o]