Boy, I know I am going to stir up a can of "worms" here but this is my honest opinion!!!

The best thing any new flyer can do after soloing and coming off a trainer, before he buys that perfect "second plane" is go to
www.Spadtothebone.com and build a DasPlasStick Spad.

"I know" "I know" this is not the way it has always been done, but before all the old balsa guy's start bashing me listen:

I have been flying for 2 years now (48 years old). I now have 5 Balsa airplanes (H9 Ultra Stik 60 & GP Extra 300 my favorites).

I started flying my Spad's about a month ago, and I have learned more about inverted flight, snap's, aerobatics (on a crude scale)
disorientation, and generally anything you can do screwing up flying a RC airplane.

Guess what guy's I crash it, and I put some new rubber bands or a new prop and I keep on flying.

I will be the first to tell you I don't think there is a Spad out there that fly's with more precision and grace than a GP Extra 300 or more forgiving than a H9 Ultra Stik 60, but why trash a perfectly good balsa plane trying to get past the second or third plane learning curve, when you can spend 25 bucks and build 4 or 5 Spad's.

I will always fly balsa & Spad's, but I am a better RC pilot because of Spad's.

...but use a balsa airplane for training?

An investment just as good, if not better, would be a simulator. A Simulator will teach you just about any manuever possible. It will teach you orientation, recovery, and the control inputs for anything. Even better than a SPAD because you don't even replace a prop!

Just don't forget, nothing is a replacement for real stick time.

Yes !!!! Any good Balsa trainer:

Superstar 40 (the one I trained on)
Avistar 40 (my opinion the best trainer)
Any good 40 size trainer, with dihedral and a symetrical wing.

The Spad DPS is a good second plane, but not as forgiving as a trainer, you have to fly it constantly.

Excuse me I may be old school a simulator is not the same as flying the real thing, it helps but no replacement!!

I guess I did not make myself clear with my stupid sarcasm.

Why use a fragile plane to learn on, but then go to an indestructible airplane after that?

I learned with an EPP foam glider (Boomerang). I would recomment this for the same reason as the spad. The thing was indistructable! I used both bungee launch and slope soaring. When I finally got a trainer, I just started flying with no other instruction.

Tom

I respect your opinion, but I disagree. I kinda know "tattoo", one of the SPAD founders. He has combated at my field before. SPADs are pretty much indestructible, but in order to make them such, performance and aerodynamics are sacrificed. I think you are really limited on what you can learn with a SPAD with respect to a second plane. I'm not bashing SPADs. They have their place. Its just that you'll learn a lot more with a better tool, i.e. higher performance plane.

I realize that SPADs are popular as second (or even first) planes.
As I see it, this is because most novice move too quickly to their second plane. They solo a couple of times and presto, "I need a second plane." So they get a good flying balsa plane. They bash up their good flying balsa second plane so they decide to get an indestructible second plane (OK, I guess it would be a 3rd plane.)

If you really haven't mastered your trainer, then I can see where an indestructible second plane is required. However, if you master your trainer, you will not need an indestructible second plane and you will want a good performing plane.

Trainers are more aerobatic than most pilots think they are. Trainers will fly rolling circles. Now I don't expect a student to master rolling circles on a trainer, but they better be able to do basic aerobatics (loops, rolls, snaps, spins, stall turns, cuban 8's, immelmans, etc.) very well on the trainer before I'd recommend an aerobatic second plane.

There is a learning curve to everything. However, with good instruction and a little discipline, you can learn how to solo and fly aerobatics without crashing. Most crashes are due to poor judgment, be it lack of maintenance on the ground or a bad decision in the air. This all goes back to "Master Your Trainer." If you are crashing your second plane, you probably failed to learn something on your trainer. Fly the SPAD, you may never solve the judgment errors. Why should you? Just bash it up, it goes back together in a snap. Worse case, just build another for $20.

I'm not saying you need to crash to learn or that you need to put a high cost plane at risk. What I'm saying is that if you really learn how to fly your trainer, there shouldn't be an issue putting a nice aerobatic plane in the air because the risk of crashing is extremely low.

Regardless, I'll try to keep an open mind and consider what you have posted, but I'd like more info. I'm curious as to why you are learning more on SPAD compared to the other very capable planes you mentioned. Maybe the "cost factor" and "It won't break" factor come into play? What it is you have learned on the SPAD that you didn't on your trainer?

Cheers

If it flys, its safe, and you enjoy it, then that is the plane for you. Doesn't matter if it is paper (wood) or plastic!

Oh oh oh...Monkey boy .. tough combat planes are tough combat planes...but there is a difference. Has a BUHOR, DPS, Spadet, Spadstick or Spa3d shown up at your field yet?

I only wish Spads would have been around in the late 70's. If they would have been, it wouldn't have taken over 20 years and 40 airplanes to get as good as I wanted to be so that I could move on to my third plane. BTW, for my opinion on using these planes as a first plane see this thread: http://www.rcuniverse.com/showthread...highlight=spad

And I'm still learning. Just this year I've done my first Hover, first torque roll, first inverted climbing flat spin, first tail touch...waterfall...harrier...inverted harrier...rolling harrier...inverted stab drag...etc...etc...stuff I wouldn't have even tried in a million years if I had a lot of time or mony into my plane. It's a lot like water skiing. If your gonna get good, you gotta be on the edge, and we all know what happens I would now have the taters and confidence to do these stunts with a balsa plane if I desired to.

I'm with Hooter, if there is one nitche that these plane fill perfectly, it's as a second plane...to get you to "jump the wake" so to speak before trying it with a lot of money and time involved. Sassy will tell you that the biggest difference between learning on her LT-40 and soloing on her Debonair was nerves. Some of us have forgotten how much of a player that is to newer pilots. These planes take that out of the equation.

Some people (like me) continue to fly them exclusively, because aerodynamics, performance, weight and wingloading has indeed progressed to the point of equaling and in some case exceeding today's conventional airplanes. Some people (Like Kraut and Mr. Clean) continue to fly plastic as well as Balsa, as both are equal and viable options to our hobby. Some people will use these planes as a stepping stone to gain the confidence and reactions they need for their pride and joy dream airplane (Fun Fly and 3D guys have really picked up on this!), and some people are not interested. And if you've ever wanted to try your hand at designing your own airplane, this couldn't be more perfect...but, as I've said before...that's a topic for the Spad forum)

I'll use this as an example for my point.

I have been flying combat with my DPS with three other
guys in our club, so needless to say after two headon's and four
crashes into the dirt the wing has become distorted and has numerous prop strikes in the wing.

So now everytime I takeoff the DPS snaps badly to the right. After dumping it a couple of times I have learned how to recover from snaps on takeoff.

You can't do that with Balsa.

I agree with Tattoo (imagine that!)

While it's true that I bash SPADs (Stupid Plastic Aeronautical Disasters), it's really all tongue-in-cheek. I think any of those "Indestructable" type planes are great for learning on for just that reason, you don't have to worry about them. It takes the "Fear Factor" out of the equation.

But, as always, Different strokes for different folks.

So if you don't mind being seen with a flying election sign (), go out and build... er... fold one together.

This is the kind of comment that really bugs me.

Exactly why can't you learn to take off without snapping a balsa plane? If you must learn everything by crashing, may I suggest skydiving? :stupid:

Jim_McIntyre


Looks like you might have quoted out of context.

I think he was refering to the reduced repair time when compared to Balsa. But don't worry nobody is gonna take your balsa from you Jim

What would happen to 50% of balsa pilots planes if their plane
snapped 3 ft. off the ground?

I am just saying rather than trashing a $200 plus plane, why now
learn from the mistakes that we all make while we are learning to
fly.

They'd buy another ARF and repeat the following weekend?

Seriously, if this is a real problem for you, I'd suggest finding a instructor and asking them to cure you of your "slam the throttle and pull up" takeoff habit.... it may work for an overpowered congealed hunk of petroleum but, not if you want to fly airplanes.

MonkeyBoy,
I'm with you on this.....

Its not the planes that are the problem, its the people flying the planes...People seem to think that Spads are the alternative to stick time...They don't create bad habits, they just exaggerate them (I'm always reading on here about someone who brags about crashing a plane a dozen time with only minor damage. I hate crashing any plane, balsa or spad.....).

I'm having a hard time figuring this one out. Could it be that you are a more confident flyer b/c of Spads??? I can do the same maneuvers with my balsa planes and my spad planes. IMHO my SPA3D is harder to fly (or should I say require more work) than my aerobatic balsa plane (perfectly balanced, super smooth controls, etc.), but I like flying my SPA3D equally well.

[QUOTE]Has a BUHOR, DPS, Spadet, Spadstick or Spa3d shown up at your field yet?[\QUOTE]
Yes they have (I have a SPA3D myself). This is where I draw my opinion from. People who say that Spads are indestructible ought to come out to my field and be a witness to some serious destruction (never knew plastic could explode like that). I'll say it again, people build a plane they are not ready for and get frustrated when they cannot fly it (not to mention very dangerous). Point-There is a guy at my field who built a SPA3D. It really surprised me when he pulled it out of his car b/c I know he is not ready for it. To date, none of his flights has lasted more than 30 seconds. Instead of getting better he only gets more frustrated.

And, lets not forget, especially in the case of newbies. The Spads may be cheaper, last longer, easier to build, but, they still use the same engine, receiver, servos, etc. as their balsa counterparts. These items are definitely getting abused at my field. So, who is to say that, in the long run, one is more cheaper than the other.

As for me, I love my balsa and Spad planes equally, and again I want to thank Tatoo for building such a fun, easy to build plane (SPA3D). In fact, if you had not come up with this design I still would not have a Spad. Sorry I missed you in Tulsa

You're more than welcome! Tulsa was a blast!!! I sure hope Gordo-plast makes the Poor Boy Fun fly a yearly event!

I second that Tattoo.

Trust me he does not care.

The rest of you this is so funny. Why can't we all just get along. And trust me I will never use the words "you can't do this with basla" It causes too much contraversy.

Yes I fly SPADs, who cares. It is what I enjoy. Jim enjoys helis and scale. Great that is what he loves. MinnFlyer hates plastic, great don't use it. Some like ARFs some hate ARFs. Personnaly, I would not mind flying with any of you guys. Its the Flying part I like. This apple and oranges crap is getting tiresome, it is all fruit to me.

Also, I don't think these discussions should be done in the beginners section. If i was starting out, this would send me packing with the thought that "none of this is worth my time and effort"

Trust must be earned.

I, and apparently others, don't see where it was out of context. Apparently in your comprehension, any detraction from SPAD is "out of context".

I'm not saying SPAD is bad, it's just not a solution to the problem cited.
-------------
back on topic;

I've been instructing for many years and strongly feel that choosing the right trainer is a key factor in determining your success.
I'm not convinced the "plastic fantastic" fold-n-fly designs live up to a well designed, well built balsa plane. Sure the Spadet looks like a Kadet (intentionally) but I doubt it has the same characteristics or that you average newbie can successfully build and fly one from the "plans" I've seen....

Well I think that a beginner that is doing research and his own homework before jumping into this hobby will like this thread...Has some good information and both sides of the issue.

I agree with Monkey Boy, Jim, and Wildnloose...

I think this says it all-

Too many people think trainers are there just to get you solo and then you get rid of them. That's far from how it should be. You're not ready for another airplane right after you land a trainer...Are you ready for a 3rd airplane right after you spin the second plane? Then it's time for the 30% Cap 232 that your ready for because you can loop and roll...

A trainer can take you much farther into flying than any student thinks in the beginning. They get this from most of their instructors that say "You're ready for a Tiger 2" right after they solo... You need to get A LOT of time on that trainer before you're ready for another airplane. You need to "master" the trainer...

I don't have a problem with SPADS. I think they are a great. All that I have flown flew GREAT. In this case though, I don't think it's such a great idea.

"One could see if one was not blind."

Jim, I have built and flown a spadet and have flown different balsa trainers. They fly about the same. I can say that because I have done both. You on the other hand have not built a spadet or any other spad, so how can you actually know how they fly. Oh you have seen others, wooptie do. I have seen the large 1/3 scale birds fly also, but I could not tell you how they handeled. To knock what a person doesn't know is just arogant and shows how shallow they realy are.

Metal ships won't float.
The earth is flat.
The sun goes around the earth.

Are these you beliefs also.

I think this is the perfect forum for this kind of discussion...

I have been flying for about 13 mos.. I'm one of those guys who flew the snot out of my trainer before he moved on (I realized that is had more oomph left in it when I saw a guy doing rolling circles with my trainer).
My 2nd plane is what most people would consider a third plane, a Global Freestyle. I did not have any problems flying it (well, my maiden was kind of interesting....it went into a vertical climb in about 10ft), but it was nothing...did not even startle me(played like I did it on purpose).

I started on low rates and went to high rates after about a week. Most people thought I learned really fast.....but they forgot I had ran about 7 gallons of fuel thru that trainer (BTW- those same people were telling me that a Sig Kadet lt-40 could not hover, knife edge, or fly inverted well...boy, talk about eating crow....)

I bought a Ultrastick 40 as a throw around plane I could use to practice all that crazy stuff (usually down on the deck)....it was like I took a step back. I ended up maxxing out the throws just so it would respond the way I wanted (the Freestyle spoiled me)It was even a little harder to land (just a little too slow for my taste) but as my skills increased I could make it do anything I want (another lesson learned...its not the plane, stupid...)

I gave you a little history about me to say this:

I am no expert, not even close, but I am past the beginner level. Even now, my SPA3D is a handful (I'm still tripping off all the wing flex). There is no way I could have flown it safely without a lot of stick time.

There is no substitution for stick time!!!!!

Well guy's, I knew this would turn into a Spad versus Balsa contest, but that was not my orginal intention of this thread!

I hold the record in the West Tennesse RC Flying Club as taking the longest to solo!

To say that I am a conservative flyer is a understatement!!!!!

But I can say and I have as much or more flying hours as anybody in our club in the last two years and I have never crashed a
balsa plane.
(I know the RC God's will strike my Extra 300 down this weekend!)

My intent of this thread was to let beginners know that there was an alternative to learning all the hard mistakes which if you guy's will think back we all have done, in a more cost effective manner!
From what I have seen "most not all" are more prone to crash their second plane than their trainer!!

The Spad has allowed me to do all the crazy sh##, that I always wanted to do, but with alot less strain on my pocketbook.

By the way Jim I am a Club trainer at the WTRC and I am currently working with four students and if I do say so myself I am pretty damn good at it!!!!!

First, I'm not posting here to tell someone what plane they should enjoy flying. Fly what ever turns your crank... it is all about having fun. The sky is big enough for all types of planes and pilots.

"Some people (like me) continue to fly them exclusively, because aerodynamics, performance, weight and wing loading has indeed progressed to the point of equaling and in some case exceeding today's conventional airplanes." - Tattoo

You gotta be joking. I've never seen any coreplast plane come close to even a poorly built "conventional" model with respect to aerodynamics. Thier selling point is they are cheap and basically indestructable... don't push it.

I've had "indestructible" planes similar to SPADs before. They serve a purpose, but they are far from being aerodynamically clean. I used mine for full throttle inverted flights into the weeds, inverted landings, knife edge landings, passes under the sun shelters, etc. Basically stuff you just don't do with a conventional plane. They are a blast to fly for that reason; BUT, they don't fly cleanly.

It is possible to learn 3D without crashing. I learned 3D on a 35%, 400+ flights, no crashes and yes I get VERY low. However, I do sometimes "practice" with an modified IFO... basically an indestructible electric. I find that the IFO helps keep me sharp, but to really learn the maneuver, I got to fly the 35%.

I still think it goes back to "Master Your Trainer." If you master your trainer, not just solo, but really be able to fly the snot out of that thing, the odds of crashing your second plane are very, very small.

Hooter: Let me get this straight. What you are saying is that you crashed a plane repeatedly. Now it performs so poorly that it snaps on takeoff. Because the poorly performing plane survived repeated snaps into the ground you eventually learned how to recover from a snap on takeoff. Your point: A balsa planes won't do that? Your're right! A well built well performing balsa plane won't throw you a curve ball like a snap on takeoff.

Please don't take this as a personal attack, but what you are learning IMO is how to fly a poorly performing plane. I'm curious, all this new stuff you are learning, how has it applied to flying your H9sitck and GPE300? When was the last time either of those snapped on takeoff? See my point?

Cheers

Monkeyboy, Point well taken!!

But you are still missing my point, the biggest majority of
RC flyers today are never going to pattern flyer or aerobatics experts (including myself) most of these guy's want to come out to the field, hang out with a bunch good people, fly their planes and mostly sluff off the crappy week they had at work!!!!!!

And I am trying things now that I would have not tried before because I have the confidence to do it now!

How many times have you seen a trainee stall a trainer on a takeoff or landing? At least now I have a chance of keeping him from trashing his plane.

By the way I have never snaped My Extra 300, H9 Ultra Stick, Magic Extra 330, or my Agwagon on takeoff but who knows it might happen one day!!