Thinking about pre built balsa pnp or ARF planes?

[pricelesspp]

I am not interested in scratch build or building from a kit please do not talk me in to that side of the hobby I like PNP/ARF/BNF/RxR only.I am a good pilot with my nanos and micro 4 channel planes and i can safely fly and land the Eflite Apprentice and i can fly it confidently fly my planes.

And i am thinking about trying a pre built PNP/ARF balsa and ply plane i got a few questions.

0 Are they worth trying>
1 Do they fly better then foam?
2 Can they handle wind better?
3 Do they look nicer then foam planes?
4 Are they durable?
5 Are these two good first balsa and ply planes?
6 What is the fun factor on these two types of planes?

Great planes Kunai
http://www.greatplanes.com/airplanes/gpma1815.html

Tower Hobbies Vista Brushless ARF 78.5"
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...P?I=LWL173&P=8

Can this receiver and the Anylink 2 work with these two planes?

Tactic TR624 6-Channel SLT Receiver
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXZNR1&P=ML

Tactic AnyLink2 2.4GHz Universal Radio Adapter
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXDZRS&P=ML

Help would be appreciated.Thanks for helping.

 

[mlh122]

I'm on my 2nd balsa plane after having a lot of foamies so I'll try to answer your questions.

0 Are they worth trying? - Yes, but to me just about anything is worth trying.

1 Do they fly better then foam? - In my opinion, yes. They seem to be heavier, so they tend to be able to go faster, fight through wind better, more stable in the air, but not as floaty as foamies. But i think it's a weight-to-wing ratio issue. A balsa plane with giant wings like a glider would be very floaty indeed. But planes of identical sizes, I think a foamy would generally be lighter.

2 Can they handle wind better? Yes, I think that really has do to with weight though, a really big foamy with a big motor would handle wind better than a tiny balsa plane.

3 Do they look nicer then foam planes? Some foamies are really nice, but yeah I think a nice ARF balsa kit looks nicer.

4 Are they durable? Yes and no. In my experience a balsa plane can take more mild abuse, like bumping into stuff, hard landings, mild crashes, and come out with no injuries. But stuff like that will put dents and rips in foam, pull chunks out, crack wings etc.. But if you compare major nose-in high-speed horrible crashes, a foam plane can be glued back together pretty quickly, but a balsa plane is completely destroyed. Usually in both you can recover most of the electronics and put them into a new plane though.

5 Are these two good first balsa and ply planes? I think so yes, they are both powered gliders so they should fly pretty easy. But you must be careful to fly them like a glider. I just totaled my glider basically because it could fly around all day with no issues but it couldn't do any acrobatics, I was getting bored and making it do high speed low passes, inverted flying, trying to knife-edge etc... it ended up I didn't have enough elevator authority to pull out of a very high speed dive and it crashed at about 100mph and broke into a thousand pieces. If you like the glider flying style though then go for it. I'm gradually trying out all the plane types to see what my favorite is, so far I seem to be leaning towards fast aerobatic pattern planes.

6 What is the fun factor on these two types of planes? What those 2 planes are good for is tossing into the air and motoring up to a good altitude and cut the throttle and fly around until you get to low altitude and motor back up again. You can catch thermal pockets of air that you can ride on for quite a while. Those planes are usually really efficent on battery time. Most other planes get 6 to 10 minutes of of flight time. But on my 54 inch motorized glider I got about 20 minutes per battery without even trying to manage my throttle.

 

[pricelesspp]

I'm on my 2nd balsa plane after having a lot of foamies so I'll try to answer your questions.

0 Are they worth trying? - Yes, but to me just about anything is worth trying.

1 Do they fly better then foam? - In my opinion, yes. They seem to be heavier, so they tend to be able to go faster, fight through wind better, more stable in the air, but not as floaty as foamies. But i think it's a weight-to-wing ratio issue. A balsa plane with giant wings like a glider would be very floaty indeed. But planes of identical sizes, I think a foamy would generally be lighter.

2 Can they handle wind better? Yes, I think that really has do to with weight though, a really big foamy with a big motor would handle wind better than a tiny balsa plane.

3 Do they look nicer then foam planes? Some foamies are really nice, but yeah I think a nice ARF balsa kit looks nicer.

4 Are they durable? Yes and no. In my experience a balsa plane can take more mild abuse, like bumping into stuff, hard landings, mild crashes, and come out with no injuries. But stuff like that will put dents and rips in foam, pull chunks out, crack wings etc.. But if you compare major nose-in high-speed horrible crashes, a foam plane can be glued back together pretty quickly, but a balsa plane is completely destroyed. Usually in both you can recover most of the electronics and put them into a new plane though.

5 Are these two good first balsa and ply planes? I think so yes, they are both powered gliders so they should fly pretty easy. But you must be careful to fly them like a glider. I just totaled my glider basically because it could fly around all day with no issues but it couldn't do any acrobatics, I was getting bored and making it do high speed low passes, inverted flying, trying to knife-edge etc... it ended up I didn't have enough elevator authority to pull out of a very high speed dive and it crashed at about 100mph and broke into a thousand pieces. If you like the glider flying style though then go for it. I'm gradually trying out all the plane types to see what my favorite is, so far I seem to be leaning towards fast aerobatic pattern planes.

6 What is the fun factor on these two types of planes? What those 2 planes are good for is tossing into the air and motoring up to a good altitude and cut the throttle and fly around until you get to low altitude and motor back up again. You can catch thermal pockets of air that you can ride on for quite a while. Those planes are usually really efficent on battery time. Most other planes get 6 to 10 minutes of of flight time. But on my 54 inch motorized glider I got about 20 minutes per battery without even trying to manage my throttle.

Is the Hobbico NexSTAR Select Brushless Trainer RTF 68.5" http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSGY1**&P=0 a better choice for a introductory balsa and ply rc plane flying?And do you like full balsa and ply or foam or both?I have seen some planes foam and balsa have no spare parts is that any thing to worry about?I am a good rc plane pilot.

 

[airhawk]

balsa is not the most durable easy to repair thing and also most prebuilt planes are not very durable. balsa is known for building kits mostly. i would choose a strong foam plane unfourtunatly dtfb durabilty is not found anywhere unless you look hard also whats your flying expireance balsa is a beutiful side of the hobby but wood planes tend to need higher skill level most tend to be 3d or heavily scale warbirds but there a some great traniers out of balsa
if your not a begginer theres great option in the balsa area
Hope this helps
Airhawk

 

[razor02097]

PricelessPP:


Please do not misunderstand what ARF means. Just because a plane is ARF or PNF don't think you won't have to put it together. Some are easier than others. Most ARF will still need you to install the tail surfaces and wings at a minimum. Most ARF balsa kits also require you to install power systems and servos. The ARF means you do not have to assemble the airframe or cover it (which is the biggest chunk of time it takes to get a plane in the air).

As a person who also flies micro and nano models, crashing is NOT the same... a micro that crashes might need to be repaired. A larger, heavier, faster model that crashes WILL need repair. So might I be so blunt as to say if you have no interest in building you probably aren't going to have interest in rebuilding...so a balsa plane is probably not for you. Balsa planes are gorgeous! But take a lot more skill and patience to repair than foam.

I'm not trying to be mean but a big part of the joy of owning wooden planes is building them. With building experience comes the ability to properly repair them when damaged. Foam is different... you apply some hot glue on the broken piece and put it back together in the same shape it was before. For people that want to spend their time flying not in the work shop, foam is GREAT!

 

[airhawk]

i agree with razor building is the best part of balsa and yes most arfs and pnfs do require building some times there pnf modles that dont have the fuse built i would not start balsa unless you have good building skills

 

[airhawk]

and also to add on to my other comment balsa is not a begginer's material foam and balsa fly differently and in a very noticeable manner balsa flys heavily and more like a very scale warbird.id reccomend 3-6 planes before you enter balsa. also for any hardcore balsa flyers that i may offend im sorry this is my opnion

 

[bstanley72]

I recently purchased my first balsa plane. It was an ARF. It took me 8-10 hours to assemble it, so even the ARFs take a lot of effort. If I ever crash it I suspect it will be nearly that much time to fix it.

My suggestion is to stick with the foamy kits, I'm not so sure I'll purchase another balsa plane either.

 

[pgerts]

Go for Balsa!
It is a lot better in the air.
It does not get old looking as foamies will after some time as the cover is a lot more easy to clean than foam.
It flies a lot better because the plasic cover is a lot smoother than foam.
Try to find something from Horizon if you want everything to be as smooth to assemble as the Apprentice.
PNF and BNF is a lot better and faster up flying than ARF.
If you are a good RC pilot you dont have to think about any repairs.

 

[razor02097]

Go for Balsa!
It is a lot better in the air.
It does not get old looking as foamies will after some time as the cover is a lot more easy to clean than foam.
It flies a lot better because the plasic cover is a lot smoother than foam.
Try to find something from Horizon if you want everything to be as smooth to assemble as the Apprentice.
PNF and BNF is a lot better and faster up flying than ARF.
If you are a good RC pilot you dont have to think about any repairs.

I have to disagree. Even skilled pilots crash. Wear and tear on a plane isn't material specific. Balsa planes covering can be punctured and torn just as a foam plane can get dings and dents. Both can be repaired fairly easily.

Balsa vs foam in the air is all the matter of preference. I started out with balsa exclusively (foam planes didn't really exist back then). Now I have only one balsa plane. Foam is actually why I got back IN the hobby!... and brushless motors... and lipo batteries...and 2.4GHz radios...man I feel old...

 

[mlh122]

Is the Hobbico NexSTAR Select Brushless Trainer RTF 68.5" http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSGY1**&P=0 a better choice for a introductory balsa and ply rc plane flying?And do you like full balsa and ply or foam or both?I have seen some planes foam and balsa have no spare parts is that any thing to worry about?I am a good rc plane pilot.

Yeah the NexSTAR is a good one. I've never flown one but I've heard good things. Spare parts for almost all planes are hard to find, especially balsa planes. All my local hobby stores stock lots of parts for parkzone, ares, and eflite foamies but nothing for balsa planes. I just crashed my balsa plane this weekend and ended up fixing it with just plain balsa sheets and glue and it flew just fine afterwards. It took some engineering though.