If I've learned anything recently it's that learning to fly 3D with a scale plane is going to be frustrating and expensive. Beefing the plane to take that kind of abuse (learning) well enough just not possible. Guys that 3D well make it look easy. I'm here to tell you it's not! Those guys are a product of a huge amount of stick time (and crashes)! If that's the direction you're heading into, suggest you look into something in the way of a profile or 3D specific airframe. They're much simpler, therefore lighter, and for that reason they're more durable (less mass will incur less damage when stopped suddenly!). They're also MUCH easier to fly, especially on knife edge.

If you really want to get right down into it, learning 3D down low and slow on a near vertical learning curve, some guys are going with electric EPP profiles for super durability and ease of repair, at a very reasonable cost. They fly great, with very good vertical performance! Something like this:

http://www.nitroplanes.com/02a-004-swift-epp-arf.html

Or if you want to track down and purchase your own electronics separately, you can get that same plane like this:

http://www.nitroplanes.com/02a-004-swift-epp-kit.html

HK sells the same plane, and is a good source for the electronics if you decide to pick your own stuff as well. Good luck! -Al

EDIT/Second thoughts - For better wind penetration, good for 10mph+ without trouble, almost the same plane with a little less wing area:

http://www.nitroplanes.com/02a-008-1...d-epp-kit.html

I want to get into 3D but I dont like to snap the thing left right and centre. I like to fly slow with aerobatics. There was this guy at the airshow this weekend and he did a single roll distributed in the entire circuit. There is a certain grace in that kind of flying and thats what I like. I would love to harrier, hover flat spin, harrier roll, KE etc but my fingers just arent there yet. I dont like to endanger my airframes doing it low, I keep my airplane a couple mistakes high, atleast for now. I get very limited stick time on the sim after work, so I just want to enjoy when I go to the field. With my luck with glow engines, even the most well tuned engine that flies good when others use it, deadsticks as soon as I take the transmitter in my hand, thats why I went for gas

I dont want to go electric though, the battery and its characteristics are big concerns at home

Ameyam

I get not going electric. I fought it off a long time. Now though, once I got my feet wet and have seen what's possible, well let's just say I'm hooked. I doubt seriously it will have an affect on my gas flying though. Other than the fact I'll have maneuvers I want to try pretty well perfected on smaller less expensive, maybe easier to fly stuff?

I know also what you're saying about banging the sticks around as well. Not real crazy about that either.

And the fingers not quite there yet? That's what I'm talking about. Flying scale planes to learn 3D might not be the best plan? Those fingers will get there quicker if you'll get on a 3D trainer (for the same reason you don't use a military combat plane for your basic "learning to fly" plane?). Power it any way you like. Currently building a Mojo 65 from a big box of sticks. That will replace a plane I've lost track of how many times I've had to glue it back together. 3 serious crashes over the last couple seasons though. Both planes large 20cc gas powered profiles with a lot of wing area, under 8lbs. Super easy to fly, do very well at low speeds so you can fly low and slow comfortably. They give you more time to think and react when "stuff" happens? That's what makes them so good as trainers.

Whatever, recommend you consider a different plane if you want to get serious about 3D - whatever your style turns out to be. -Al

Well the recommended engine is 20-26cc and you said you are not into stick banging type of flight. I have a 17cc in a non 3d aerobatic sport type plane that weighs just over 9 lbs with a 72" WS and it will climb vert., I have a 25cc in a biplane with a 76" WS and it has plenty of power so I would think that a 20cc should hover your plane fine.

Its just my opinion but large scale aircraft are very easy to learn 3D as well as precision flying with when they are kept as light as possible and there is no need to add allot of extra structure for 3D flight loads because believe it or not, 3D flying doesn't place a great deal of stress on the airframe, in fact some typical IMAC maneuvers produce much more stress. The heavier the airframe, the higher the flight loads, it is just that simple.

Bob

Agreed on all points! But let's examine the results of a "miscalculated" maneuver with a scale type plane? Even a minor one? The cost for instance? The delay in getting a replacement ready and it's affect on your learning curve - IF - you're still interested in learning 3D??

Don't get me wrong. I love the bigger scale stuff. Have 2 30cc planes because I can't transport anything bigger very easily? My point is, there are faster, less expensive paths to follow to learn 3D. My opinion, FWIW, -Al

The truth is, I don't ever consider cost when I am flying one of my own airplanes, but maybe that just me. I would also say that one really should become accomplished in basic piloting skills before trying to learn 3D, that includes making the proper decision to stay at least 3 mistakes high when trying something new.

Bob

Good lord, can't even imagine not having to think about cost!

Point regarding having your basic flight ability is a good one. There's just not much forgiveness built into a 3D or a scale planes. There isn't a 3D plane built that wouldn't make for a great second plane though.

Flying 3 mistakes high, unless you're doing that from a safety standpoint (?), not necessary unless you're more concerned about cost than you think/let on? Not interested in cost? C'mon, get that thing down lower!

No right or wrong here. Weather prohibiting any flying. Talking the next best thing? -Al

Anything, I think we are digressing. If the consensus is that the airplane is already pretty strong for 3D, I wont reinforce too much- just firewall, LG (just a bit) and the CA in all the joints I can reach

Ameyam

Ame , only you and those that own plane can determine if it strong enought .
I personally dont fly anything that "I dont think" its strong enought without adding what I perceve as strength with benifit to weight ratio .
When flying a plane (rc model ) its the owners responcibility to have the experience to compensate for what the manufactures lack in basic understanding , especially if powered withen the range of factory specs . Many will disagree and say its the suppliers responcility and I would agree in theory and perhaps in court , but in reality as a modeler you have judge what is needed in ecah model and how it will impact performance .
An example , many composite warbirds arfs are cheap versions of fiberglass .They tin can if squeezed when picking up the fuse .
Personally I dont think they are safe to fly, so if I choose to keep or buy one I knwo I need to add my own version of strength to benifit mods to make the plane safe .
I know what it should feel like , and what security I want in a 12 lb or larger model . Now in the end I take total weight , weight needed if any for CG and I know if the plane is going to be a dog or a gem . Wing loading in my experience has been the #1 determining factor on if I am going to enjoy a plane or not .
I just finsihed a 66" composite fuse Seafury , the materials in stock form were total junk , my mods to the fuse made the plane feel like a Yellow Aircraft top quality model lol , but my weight gain was minimal due to my choice of material and realligment of the on board flight system .
So keep in mind , you personally need to get a feel for you plane , does it creek when you pick it up , when you screw in the wings , when your carrying it ? all of these things are signs of a weak structure , good luck and remember planes are built to fly not crash but some were never built to crash not fly , knowing the differance makes you a modeler

sorry meant to say "plane are built to fly not crash , but some were never built to fly and knowing that difference makes you a modeler

Cost really isn't a consideration to me, I guess if there is one thing I worry about, then it is how long it takes me to build a kit or scratch build a new airplane. Anyway here is a flight video from 2008 of my 40% Carden 260 I built in 2006, I lighten it approx. 12 lbs. during the build because I new it be a better airplane for my kind of flying style I like. The fuselage was glued entirely with the use of thin and medium C/A and the foam sheeted wings and tail feathers were glued with Gorilla glue, this airplane is still around and flying today with maybe 2000 flights or more on it, not really sure because I stopped keeping track years ago now. IMO Foamies are fun to throw around so don't get me wrong, but they don't really 3D or fly precision much like a large scale 3D/IMAC airplane, so my vote is still with the big stuff...

http://www.icanflyrc.com/JRFlyin/JH_...es/Bob260.html