The SPAD question.

Wasn't the SPAD a French biplane in World War I?


Yeah, just kidding.

Plastic.... Simple, yeah sure.


Many of us develop opinions for no real logical reason. We sometimes like or dislike something but cannot explain the reason why.

Perhaps also, the plane just does not fit your style?

Perhaps, someone else that likes to "bash" kits can make it work?

If I still lived in Hillsdale (Exit 168) I'd be there in a minute to pick up your supplies.

Just like having sport planes, warbirds and fun flyers, to me a SPAD is just another arrow in the quiver.

Jack

No rudder, just aileron/elevator/throttle control. It really hauled with the 32SX. I crashed it and was too lazy to clean the mud out of the 32SX right away, so i just bolted on a 40 LA that I had lying around. It wasn't quite as fast with the 40LA, but still flew well and hauled *****. After crashing and re-gluing the wing several times, I ended up with a slightly warped wing the last time I re-glued it, so I just trimmed it out with aileron trim! Had some interesting throttle to roll coupling after that, but was still fun to fly. Very easy to hand launch, just toss it 30-45 degrees up at full throttle and it will climb right out of there.

You can add me to the "geezer" (or perhaps "near geezer" is more appropriate) list who is relatively new to the hobby. I'll be 59 in June and have been flying about a year. Trained on an Alpha 60, then a Sig 4* with an OS 75 on it. (which I managed to total out a couple of weeks ago[&o])

I found the 4* much more fun to fly than the Alpha, a notion that was solidified when I took the Alpha back out in place of the crashed 4*. The crash was attention related, rather than reaction time. Got distracted.

+1

Great responses guys, I especially love the first couple of posts that had pictures of some early attempts at building a flying machine.

Yeah, I really like that era myself.

Perre, My first read of your post had me thinking, gosh this guy really is a geezer. Then I noted that I'd made a mentally error and added a D on "like"

Otto Lilienthal and I went to school together...

In an effort to post IN topic this time will simply add that there really is not any plane that "No one should have". For every plane there is someone somewhere who will like it for one reason or another.

CGR, in all fairness I will admit my SPAD attempts thus far have come in on the heavy side. But built right they do fly reasonably well and you cannot beat the price tag. SPAD's are just one of those planes that are not for everyone, but some of us like em so they dont qualify for the "No one should have" list any more than the other model aircraft posted.

Amen Adui!

Fixed.

So, audi, using that logic, anything mentioned in this thread should really not be here because there is someone out there that likes to the mentioned aircraft, spad or otherwise. In the spirit of this thread, I said what I don't like and will stick to that regardless of what others think. It's an easy concept, really. S.P.A.Ds re not for me.

As I said, you like 'em, you fly 'em.

OK, I can agree with that logic, and in keeping with the thread I guess I'm not qualified to add an aircraft as I have not yet flown any I didn't like.

I guess that settles it. One man's trash is another man's treasure.

I personaly have never flown a plane I didn't like. I've crashed a few that didn't like me.

Mike

And another AMEN to that one, brother!