Is foamboard really too heavy?

SSgt Duramax

Junior Member
I dont mind a little extra weight when im flying FPV, helps smooth things out. Helps with wind too.

For all the debates about power, best prop, cubic wing loading, etc. Its seems theres a pretty wide envelope for what can actually fly. As long as you get a good feel for the CG you can get most anything into the air!
Yeah, I'm not that hung up on weight anymore. It was really, really windy (for around here) today and I went to maiden my daughters super low wingloading trainer, and guess what? It would barely overcome the wind. Same winds as yesterday which my mig and my 3lb FPV plane sliced right through.
 

BlockerAviation

Legendary member
You know, when I participate in forums outside of here to discuss my other planes, in particular when it comes to scratch building, there are lots of folks (who typically aren't pro foam board) who claim that foam board is too heavy. Then, upon investigation of their builds, pretty much every single one of their planes of similar size to mine are bricks in comparison.

I see similar sized balsa and other foam planes that are heavier than mine all the time. So what gives?

Are they only using the heavy foamboard? Are they building it with 700lb of hot glue? Or do they just not like the stuff?

For instance, my Mig 29 is about a half pound lighter than the lightest 50mm twinjet I can find.

My FT p40 was about a pound lighter than the 1100mm banana hobby one.

My EPP planes are considerably heavier than their DTFB counterparts.

I know there are methods you can use to get lighter, and I know that it definitely is easier to get "true scale" by other means, but I don't quite get it.

The way I see it, is foam board does a lot of things decently well, but nothing particularly well. It is very cheap, and you can do some neat things with it, and build a whole airframe for south of $10, but if you want true to scale, or something feather weight, you should probably pick something else, or combine it with 3d printing or fiberglass.... which is pretty much what balsa people do anyways.
My biggest gripe with FB is that they tend not to fly as well as their balsa or epo counterparts. They normally are a bit sloppier and not as locked in. It's also hard to get a scale look from FB compared to balsa or epo. The best looking FB airplane I have is my cub and it has a substantial amount of balsa inorder to get the strength to make a cabin and I had to monokoat it as well. It's still not as scale as it's direct counterpart. I'm not saying it's a bad material I'm just saying it has limitations. It's great for park flyers but I'd take balsa over it in most scenarios because they're normally more scale fly straighter and more precise. It's not like balsa doesn't have limitations either, if I were to wreck the turbo raven in my pfp you better believe it probably won't fly again where as you could have a FB plane back up with a bit of hot glue.
The FB cub I referenced
IMG_20220406_210059.jpg
 

Flying Monkey fab

Elite member
My biggest gripe with FB is that they tend not to fly as well as their balsa or epo counterparts. They normally are a bit sloppier and not as locked in. It's also hard to get a scale look from FB compared to balsa or epo. The best looking FB airplane I have is my cub and it has a substantial amount of balsa inorder to get the strength to make a cabin and I had to monokoat it as well. It's still not as scale as it's direct counterpart. I'm not saying it's a bad material I'm just saying it has limitations. It's great for park flyers but I'd take balsa over it in most scenarios because they're normally more scale fly straighter and more precise. It's not like balsa doesn't have limitations either, if I were to wreck the turbo raven in my pfp you better believe it probably won't fly again where as you could have a FB plane back up with a bit of hot glue.
The FB cub I referenced View attachment 224715
The cool thing is that you don't have to commit to one build type. I've liked my EPO planes and will probably have a balsa plane at some point.
Also, you can mix and match all you want when building.
 

leaded50

Legendary member
I agree, outside the FT comunity there is a strange resistance to foamboard it seems. Also agree a lot of people dont know how to use it in the best ways.

In my area at least, the only people who fly models, to use a term longingly transfered from the gun world, are fudds. Nothing but the same old things they have always done and used are going to be warmly accepted. Is this the case on a national scale? Dont know, but it can't help.

The beauty of foamboard, along with the availability of relatively cheap quality electronics, is that it makes the hobby so much more accessible. The more people we have the more of a voice we can put to the bad legislation heading our way...
-
"resistance to foamboard" seems to be because everyone believes such planes use square shapes, mostly noboby understand (have seen) they can also be shaped to be close to a original , with rounded fuselage, wings with over/under soft profile shaping, eg.
 

Hondo76251

Legendary member
"My biggest gripe with FB is that they tend not to fly as well as their balsa or epo counterparts..."
For the time, effort, and expense I would certainly hope so! 😂

Like anything, with a little practice, one can hone the skills for foamboard building same as any other medium. They can me made to fly quite well and look spectacular with the right tweaks but they will still always be just foamboard. While im all for combinations of building materials, do it myself all the time, I think sometimes people put a lot more effort into their FB builds than i would. Maybe thats exactly why it has such a varied reputation at different levels of the hobby. Like you said @BlockerAviation, as a modeler, you look at an attempt at a scale build with foamboard and its just not as good, and certainly wont fly as nice as a balsa for something that's still a lot of work. Someone whos not that into building who might like to fly the PNP stuff, like my beaver or timber, will see the amount of work put in and again, it probably doesn't fly as well, and would question going that route.

For me, its in the middle wich is great. It fits what i want most of the time, mostly flying with a bit of building (if you're new it might be more building than flying for a while 😂) they're repairable and disposable. If you dont obsess about the build you can do all kinds of risky flying that you never would with a better model. I generally discourage people from doing too much "beefing up" on an FT plane. They'll just be heavier, wont take a crash any better, and with that amount of effort you could just build another one.

In other words, foamboard is for the "build, fly, crash, repeat" crowd! 😂😉
 

BlockerAviation

Legendary member
For the time, effort, and expense I would certainly hope so! 😂

Like anything, with a little practice, one can hone the skills for foamboard building same as any other medium. They can me made to fly quite well and look spectacular with the right tweaks but they will still always be just foamboard. While im all for combinations of building materials, do it myself all the time, I think sometimes people put a lot more effort into their FB builds than i would. Maybe thats exactly why it has such a varied reputation at different levels of the hobby. Like you said @BlockerAviation, as a modeler, you look at an attempt at a scale build with foamboard and its just not as good, and certainly wont fly as nice as a balsa for something that's still a lot of work. Someone whos not that into building who might like to fly the PNP stuff, like my beaver or timber, will see the amount of work put in and again, it probably doesn't fly as well, and would question going that route.

For me, its in the middle wich is great. It fits what i want most of the time, mostly flying with a bit of building (if you're new it might be more building than flying for a while 😂) they're repairable and disposable. If you dont obsess about the build you can do all kinds of risky flying that you never would with a better model. I generally discourage people from doing too much "beefing up" on an FT plane. They'll just be heavier, wont take a crash any better, and with that amount of effort you could just build another one.

In other words, foamboard is for the "build, fly, crash, repeat" crowd! 😂😉
I definitely agree, I think the reason my cub flys as well as it does comes down to how much balsa and hardwood was used when I built it. Normal FB airplanes are quick to build, fly good for what they are and dispensable so you can do all sorts of stupid stunts with them. I've just gotten used to how a good stuff balsa airplane tracks and handles so to be honest I feel more comfortable and confident with my 52" extreme flight Velox 5' off the deck in a rolling harriar than my ft edge, it's just more predictable and easier to fly. For how I normally fly, FB just isn't the best option for me, to make it handle some of the manuvers I do you'd need to beef it up so much that it wouldn't fly well at all, as seen by how I deleted the elevator in a crankshaft on my ft edge lol. After I beefed it up enough to handle it it was a bit to tail heavy then you get into trying to balance it and end up adding more weight. For sport airplanes it's great tho, I've seen many people have a grand old time with all sorts of foam board designs. FB definitely has its place in the hobby it just isn't my first choice.
 

SSgt Duramax

Junior Member
I don't have anything (EPP/EPO included) that flies as well as my F6F. But, I also put so much time and effort over the course of a month or two, that I may as well have built it from balsa plans.

When I actually do wreck it, It will probably be similar to wrecking a balsa plane. IE no sense in trying to save it, it will never be the same. And much like others, while the main building material is foam board, the entire thing isn't.

To me how well a plane flies is how well you put it together. Buying an EPO/EPP kit just idiot proofs the process to a certain extent.

I absolutely love my EPP wing. I don't sing it's praises all the time because I don't want to to be "that guy" but the thing is great, indestructible, and largely the reason my first jet flight went off without a hitch (it is a fast plane that takes a second to get up to speed, and you had better not slow down too much or you are death spiraling). It is dialed in and really you couldn't ask for something to fly any better. Everytime I think about building a DTFB wing, it gets put to the back of the line because I already have a great wing that is unkillable and fun. So I get it.

One other thing about DTFB is it's propensity for warpage. And while that can be mitigated to a degree, once spring time hit, and the heat and humidity came in, a couple of my planes had to go in the trash since I didn't seal them up right. I don't think you can truly have a DTFB "forever plane" if there is such a thing anyways.

So I know the heat and humidity will eventually get to my DTFB treasure plane, one thing I am thinking is that it is great for prototyping. My night fury for instance is a fantastic plane that I would fly anywhere. There are a couple of oddities happening like the body is beginning to warp, and the shiesty control rods I have in it are more easy to bend than I like, but when I flung it for the first time and it barely required any trim, I knew I had done it. Now I want to build one out of EPP because the design ended up so well. And I will.
 

L Edge

Master member
For the time, effort, and expense I would certainly hope so! 😂

Like anything, with a little practice, one can hone the skills for foamboard building same as any other medium. They can me made to fly quite well and look spectacular with the right tweaks but they will still always be just foamboard. While im all for combinations of building materials, do it myself all the time, I think sometimes people put a lot more effort into their FB builds than i would. Maybe thats exactly why it has such a varied reputation at different levels of the hobby. Like you said @BlockerAviation, as a modeler, you look at an attempt at a scale build with foamboard and its just not as good, and certainly wont fly as nice as a balsa for something that's still a lot of work. Someone whos not that into building who might like to fly the PNP stuff, like my beaver or timber, will see the amount of work put in and again, it probably doesn't fly as well, and would question going that route.

For me, its in the middle wich is great. It fits what i want most of the time, mostly flying with a bit of building (if you're new it might be more building than flying for a while 😂) they're repairable and disposable. If you dont obsess about the build you can do all kinds of risky flying that you never would with a better model. I generally discourage people from doing too much "beefing up" on an FT plane. They'll just be heavier, wont take a crash any better, and with that amount of effort you could just build another one.

In other words, foamboard is for the "build, fly, crash, repeat" crowd! 😂😉

I would add this to your build,fly,crash,repeat comment above.

You really forgot another area that foamboard is very good for. That is "experimental" crowd.
Make something that isn't on the market or doesn't exist and bring that for "show and tell" and/or fly it, the non-believers will think twice about what foamy planes can do.
 
I would add this to your build,fly,crash,repeat comment above.

You really forgot another area that foamboard is very good for. That is "experimental" crowd.
Make something that isn't on the market or doesn't exist and bring that for "show and tell" and/or fly it, the non-believers will think twice about what foamy planes can do.
That's exactly what I do. The design/build process. Can't buy a kit for that.
 

Bo123

Elite member
I think that is at the heart of the matter.

From time to time I get to a really nice AMA field. There are people there who have beautiful planes costing hundreds of not thousands of dollars. I show up with my $10 flite test foamboard planes. They will snicker at me until they see them fly. Then all of the snickering stops when they recognize my planes fly just as good as theirs. I'm having just as much fun with my $10 plane as they are with theirs.

They are just making excuses to justify why they are spending sooo much money on their plane.
It's kinda like high school, the cool kids "need" to have the $200 sneakers when the $20 ones work just as well.

Its really weird, because when I show up to my club with a foamboard scratchbuilt aircraft, all the oldies marvel at how some kid has made a what seems to be similar to an aircraft, and can fly.... usually. I am known at the club as the kid that shows up with the most jankiest aircraft, and they are genuinely interested, and often end up giving me a lot of their stuff, even though I don't really need it or want it. I mean some of them occasionally try to say a few thing which they think will help me, but they are usually what somebody else was saying about making it over complicated, for example: "Oh maybe you should have used some wood for a spar instead of foam" and "its a good idea to double the esc amps becuase that gives you more room to breath" stuff like that, its just over complicted and adds weight. Foamboard is a light building material, and also decently strong if you build right, so you don't need all of this super strong stuff to make it heavier.


Did anyone read all of this or am I alone right now..... probably?
 

Bo123

Elite member
my fields about the same, we have just about everything but I have seen that's not the case with a lot of them
Like my club for example. You got most of the guys flying their balsa sport planes, a few with some more scale planes, the one guy with the jet and the big planes, and some other guy flying his massive 3D Foamie. And then me with the occasional RTF foamie and foamboard plane.

Anyway back to the weight of foamboard. Down here in australia, the only foam we have access too, is super heavy, super expensive, and you can buy it in bulk. For a plane like a FT tutor, you would be paying for about 10(!) times the price of the foam.
1651057740061.png

And we also have to deal with the weight, which is probably 2-3 times heavier than your DTFB.
I have resorted to buying foamboard from amazon. At this point I really don't care about the weight, but the price and shipping cost. ATM I am looking for alternatives, because getting foam in A1 sheets has an ENORMOUS shipping cost, like Coreflute, which is heavy, but super strong, and hotwiring airframes too. So far however, I still haven't managed to find a good alternative.

(yes i have tried FTFB, which is super nice, but costs like $80 to get it into the country)

Anyway that is my rant done, if anyone can suggest any alternatives, I am open to suggestions.
 

Attachments

  • 1651057723104.png
    1651057723104.png
    8.8 KB · Views: 0

Ligbaer

50 Percenter
Like my club for example. You got most of the guys flying their balsa sport planes, a few with some more scale planes, the one guy with the jet and the big planes, and some other guy flying his massive 3D Foamie. And then me with the occasional RTF foamie and foamboard plane.

Anyway back to the weight of foamboard. Down here in australia, the only foam we have access too, is super heavy, super expensive, and you can buy it in bulk. For a plane like a FT tutor, you would be paying for about 10(!) times the price of the foam. View attachment 224852
And we also have to deal with the weight, which is probably 2-3 times heavier than your DTFB.
I have resorted to buying foamboard from amazon. At this point I really don't care about the weight, but the price and shipping cost. ATM I am looking for alternatives, because getting foam in A1 sheets has an ENORMOUS shipping cost, like Coreflute, which is heavy, but super strong, and hotwiring airframes too. So far however, I still haven't managed to find a good alternative.

(yes i have tried FTFB, which is super nice, but costs like $80 to get it into the country)

Anyway that is my rant done, if anyone can suggest any alternatives, I am open to suggestions.
depron? or even blucore its a little more expensive but not 10 bucks a sheet and in theory it should be lighter.
i know @L Edge uses blucore
 

quorneng

Master member
My own view is that the lightest and strongest for weight plane is one that is hollow. This applies to foam just like anything else.
The trick is to use a foam that has sufficient strength (density), thickness and support to withstand the forces involved.
It makes the build more complex but the final strength to weight can be remarkable.
Structural weight saved means more payload (battery in the case of electric) without detriment to performance.
 

Merv

Site Moderator
Staff member
...Down here in australia, the only foam we have access too, is super heavy, super expensive, and you can buy it in bulk...
I thought depron was everywhere down there. I’ve seen Andrew Newton use lots of depron on his builds.

 

Hondo76251

Legendary member
Id actually love to find some depron for a reasonable price. I spent the $ a while back and got a couple sheets of the really thin stuff to play with. I was working on some small builds at the time and that stuff would've been awesome but i just couldn't make myself spend the money to get more.
 

Piotrsko

Master member
You can buy it here in the states, typically used for floating wood floor or sheet vinyl layover underlayment, but it isn't necessarily called Depron which seems to be an EU branded material. If you can get it from bulk rolls with no creases, so much the better. Orange box and competition has it sometimes, its pink or baby blue back in some flooring sections but I have seen it white..need to read the label, the flooring people don't know what it is.

Back when I first started here, @quorneng was always mentioning it so I went and researched it some. Ended up deciding brown Adams was good enough, white DTFB was going to work for what I do, fell in love with black dtfb.
 

L Edge

Master member
Worked with Depron until it got to expensive and is so hard to find. I am down to my last bluecor FFF sheet.(had 10 bundles since 2007) and I can't see paying wild prices for Elmer's foam board.
I am exploring some new materials and building methods(planes still have to be light, good strength and hold up) which will fit the bill. Don't know about paint.
I am going to try with a 70mm EDF (landing gear?) F-117 which is a tough design and very few exist. This should tell me if it is good.

We may see the day it will be cheaper to buy a "Foamy" that we want to fly rather than purchase the raw materials.
 

danskis

Master member
I love DT foamboard - its what got me started in RC again. I will continue to use it. That said I will never be able to build my competition high start glider (F3RES) in foam board.