Register | Help | Store Account | FliteTest Dashboard
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Mesa, AZ
    Posts
    47

    Full size vs mini's: what is your preference?

    Just a discussion. I've been kit and scratch building a few different FT designs, and mods of FT designs. I just wondered what you guys preferred in terms of plane size.

    The other day I totally hard munched my P-47 mini, which is mostly based on a mini-Scout. Think mini scout, but with reshaped wings, rudder, stabilizer, and turtle deck. It hit so hard it snapped one wing clean off, and twist-broke the fuselage just fore and aft of the wing. 15 minutes with some hot glue and it was amazingly straight and rigid. I've put bigger planes in the trash for lesser crashes.

    Before & after:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180211_163612.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	726.3 KB 
ID:	102131
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20180213_025511.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	739.6 KB 
ID:	102132

    It got me thinking of big vs. little.

    Pro's of mini's:
    • It seems that the mini's have an amazing strength-to-size ratio as compared to their big brothers.
    • Mini's require less foam and materials.
    • Mini's fly in smaller spaces.
    • Mini's fit better in your vehicle.
    • Mini's fly with cheaper/smaller batteries.
    • Mini's fly comparatively slower, which allows for better reaction time.


    In favor of the "big 'uns"...
    • Easier to see at distance/altitude.
    • Easier to build, especially for those of us with "mega-mitts" for hands.
    • Bigger "wow" factor.
    • Handling tends to be more forgiving.
    • Crashes are much more spectacular!
    • Easier to balance and manage thrust angles.


    What are your thoughts and preferences?

  2. #2
    Big flies better, less twitch. I build a lot of 150% FT planes.

  3. #3
    Skill Collector rockyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alexandria, VA USA
    Posts
    3,641
    I'm usually caught between these two forces...

    Easier to pack lots of little ones into the car.

    vs.

    Easier to see big ones in the air so I know which side it up.
    I want YOU to join us in the 2018 Flite Test Forum WWII Design/Build Challenge!

    My hanger listing, build threads, conversion projects, and Taranis radio mods are Over Here....

  4. #4
    Construire Voler S'écraser Répéter French's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Tallahassee, FL
    Posts
    1,124
    I have lots of mini components, which makes my decision for me. Also, space to store is limited. Maybe I’ll build a simple cub soon.

  5. #5
    Maneuvering With Purpose SlingShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Campeche, Mexico
    Posts
    880
    I like the bigger ones. But the minis have insane vertical performance. Especially with the lighter water resistant foam.
    Active Hanger: FT Simple Soarer, FT Mini Cruiser, FT Mini Arrow, FT Mini Mustang, FT Mustang.
    Under construction: Simple Cubs. On Deck: B-25 SS

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    gainesville, florida
    Posts
    208
    Bigger seems better for me to actually fly, but there is something to be said about the portability of the minis. I know I'll continue to do both as they each fit specific needs.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    South Bend, IN
    Posts
    669
    Quote Originally Posted by rockyboy View Post
    I'm usually caught between these two forces...

    Easier to pack lots of little ones into the car.

    vs.

    Easier to see big ones in the air so I know which side it up.
    +1
    I agree both have there merits. Big ones are easier to fly and see. I have both, if that clarifies anything.
    Enjoy a blessed day!

  8. #8
    I have zero luck with the mini's :-(

    I love the way they look, but every one of them I've built (SE5, Mini DR1, Baby Brit, Mini Sportster, mini mustang and a bloody wonder) all suffered the same torque roll to the right and crash symptoms. Not sure if I over-motored them (either a 2204 or an 1806) or over-prop'd them...just no luck. I was going broke buying props since just about every crash resulted in a busted prop even with a prop saver....so I went back to the big birds.

    I can fly the SE5 and DR1 fine in Realflight...but no luck at all for real
    Defining difference between crashing and landing is a simple equation of how much glue and tape is required.
    Flying Hangar - Too many to list

    On the workbench:
    Wizard x220 racing quad
    FT Old Fogey
    FT Storch
    FT Mini Sportster
    Scratchuilt "HoopSkirt"

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Mesa, AZ
    Posts
    47
    I am itching to scale down some planes to mini size, like 24-30" wingspan. I like the WW2 warbirds, but I need some diversity in my lineup. I am thinking about doing a PT-17. I have no idea how a biplane will behave, so it might be an adventure. I think the build would be pretty easy.

    Mini's don't take up as much storage space, either.

  10. #10
    Toothpick glider kid foamtest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    North East Ohio
    Posts
    434
    I am actually liking very slow flying micros lately, but I do really like the larger models if I have the space for them. Right now I don't, my 04 mazda 3 can only fit so much plane in it.
    There isn't anything a little packing tape and hot glue can't fix.

    Maker of toothpick glider and staple plane.

    Mystery link I bet you won't click it

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •