Student in Need of Help

[JasonK]

Uhhh. I would stray away from depron since it is the current foam that I have and it sucks. Readi board or or some kind of papered foamboard would be very preferable.

interesting, I haven't used it, but seen lots of stuff commenting about it being better then foam board.

 

[quorneng]

Josie
There is Depron and depron.
True Depron (its a trade name), if you can get it, is actually quite rigid and has a fairly smooth semi gloss surface.
Most of what is called depron is a fine cell polystyrene foam which is pretty flexible so needs some sort of structural strengthening in most applications.
As flyingkelpie says the FT planes are designed to use a paper covered board which is pretty rigid.

JasonK
Because it has no paper on the surface Depron is a bit easier to use to 'build up' a complex foam structure but that of course needs some skill and patience to do.

4 EDFs and all from just 2 & 3 mm thick Depron sheet. No balsa or carbon reinforcing anywhere.

 

[flyingkelpie]

interesting, I haven't used it, but seen lots of stuff commenting about it being better then foam board.

Nope. Its horrible. Its light. Good for gliders but for stuff I enjoy...

 

[flyingkelpie]

but that of course needs some skill and patience to do.

Correct. Patience I have not though...

 

[Josie]

Uhhh. I would stray away from depron since it is the current foam that I have and it sucks. Readi board or or some kind of papered foamboard would be very preferable.

Hey, what's the difference between the two? And why does one work better than the other? If you don't know that's fine too, I was just wondering

 

[quorneng]

Josie
The paper on either side of foam board is actually structural and greatly increase the strength and stiffness of the board. There is of course a small weight penalty.
Bare foam board although light is many times more flexible so needs significant additional bracing with a stiffer material, like carbon or wood, if it is required to do much more than just 'keep the air out'. It is possible to reinforce a completed foam structure by covering it with glued on paper or sticky tape.
If you remove the paper from one side of a papered board it is possible to bend it smoothly around a radius that would be quite impossible with the paper in place.

 

[flyingkelpie]

Hey, what's the difference between the two? And why does one work better than the other? If you don't know that's fine too, I was just wondering

Depron has no paper so it can be hard with folds. In order to do a fold you need to tape the fold, make the cuts and then fold...hope this makes sense. Papered foam like readi board makes life waaaay easier. No tape(except if it needs reinforcing).
If you do go depron I would go with the BluCub2.
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?532138-BluCub2-The-Next-Generation

 

[eric75]

No matter what material you use, the airframe needs to be designed to best utilize its structural characteristics. Each material has specific benefits and drawbacks.

paper covered foamboard:

• Paper adds strength to the outside surfaces where it is most needed
• The paper makes it a little more forgiving if you want to use hot glue (foam melts)
• It adds some weight
• It loses strength when the paper buckles
• There is a lot of variation between types as far as dimensions, weight, strength, and water resistance (water sometimes dissolves the glue that holds the paper to the foam).
• Flitetest has a history with this material, so most of their content is geared toward that. Adams Readi-board used to be available in the USA at the dollar store. Flitetest got started with very simple and inexpensive airplanes that made the hobby reachable for a lot of people.

Foam without paper:

• Its just foam, this makes it a little easier for designers to understand where the strength comes from in a model.
• Can be cut and shaped with some very interesting techniques that are are not available for paper covered board (sanded, carved, hot wire cut)
• Can come in many different sorts
• Characteristics are determined by the chemistry of the foam (density, rigid vs. flexible, chemical reactions to glues)
• Try looking around your home/building store for insulation and underlayment for hardwood floors
• Depron is a favorite for model airplane building and there are a lot of plans available
• Try looking at a model shop or online for a better selection of Depron than we have in North America
• It is not as strong as paper reinforced foam - you have to add your own reinforcement where needed.

If you substitute a different material you will need to make major design changes to accommodate, otherwise you will be disappointed with the result. The less confidence you have that you can design something that will fly well, the more important it is for you to find plans that are easy to follow - and a big part of that is having the tools and materials that they recommend.

You definitely can build and fly radio controlled aircraft, but for the timeframe of a school assignment, I recommend you keep things as simple as possible. Build something that will fly, learn how to fly, worry about speed and appearance later.

 

[Hoomi]

For beginners, larger and slower tend to be better. A larger plane is easier to keep track of in the sky, and one of the "fatal" mistakes most of us make as beginners, is taking our eyes off the plane while it's flying. With a big, slow, plane, it's less likely to end up in a critical attitude before you get it back in view. A small, fast plane is more than likely going to auger into the ground before you spot it again.

The balance on that, though, is that the larger a plane is, the more vehicle you need to transport it to a flying field, and the larger work surface you need to build it. The Tiny Trainer is a good size for starting out, despite its name. It has plans for a 3 channel trainer wing version that is very stable, and a four channel sport wing that is more maneuverable. Even with the sport wing, it slows down nicely, and doesn't need to fly fast to remain airborne. It flies on a small 'A' pack motor, and flies nicely on a 3S 850 mAh battery (which is one of the least expensive batteries for RC planes out there). Give it a bright paint scheme, and it shows up well against the sky.

You might also look into one of the RC simulators available, to practice some of the flying techniques before putting an actual plane into the sky. While not a perfect way to learn, as there are some differences between simulators and real flying, it does help develop the basic skills of not over-controlling (another fatal beginner mistake), and of keeping plane orientation clear (it's easy to forget, when the plane is moving a direction other than directly away from you, which way to move the sticks for the control you want). The nice thing is, when we mess up in the simulator, it's a simple reset button to try again, rather than needing to repair a broken airplane before the next attempt.

 

[flyingkelpie]

The paper makes it a little more forgiving if you want to use hot glue (foam melts)

Depron holds up fine in my experience. I mean if you hold the nozzle of the glue gun up to foam for ages it will but putting hot glue on won't do that.

 

[flyingkelpie]

but for the timeframe of a school assignment

I could build the BluCub in a day if I had all the electronics ready so it is a very fast and simple build. I'm a slow builder but I still could make it in a day easy.

 

[Josie]

Josie
There is Depron and depron.
True Depron (its a trade name), if you can get it, is actually quite rigid and has a fairly smooth semi gloss surface.
Most of what is called depron is a fine cell polystyrene foam which is pretty flexible so needs some sort of structural strengthening in most applications.
As flyingkelpie says the FT planes are designed to use a paper covered board which is pretty rigid.

JasonK
Because it has no paper on the surface Depron is a bit easier to use to 'build up' a complex foam structure but that of course needs some skill and patience to do.
View attachment 188134
4 EDFs and all from just 2 & 3 mm thick Depron sheet. No balsa or carbon reinforcing anywhere.

Thank you so much, I'll do the best I can, since this is my first time creating anything like this

 

[Josie]

For beginners, larger and slower tend to be better. A larger plane is easier to keep track of in the sky, and one of the "fatal" mistakes most of us make as beginners, is taking our eyes off the plane while it's flying. With a big, slow, plane, it's less likely to end up in a critical attitude before you get it back in view. A small, fast plane is more than likely going to auger into the ground before you spot it again.

The balance on that, though, is that the larger a plane is, the more vehicle you need to transport it to a flying field, and the larger work surface you need to build it. The Tiny Trainer is a good size for starting out, despite its name. It has plans for a 3 channel trainer wing version that is very stable, and a four channel sport wing that is more maneuverable. Even with the sport wing, it slows down nicely, and doesn't need to fly fast to remain airborne. It flies on a small 'A' pack motor, and flies nicely on a 3S 850 mAh battery (which is one of the least expensive batteries for RC planes out there). Give it a bright paint scheme, and it shows up well against the sky.

You might also look into one of the RC simulators available, to practice some of the flying techniques before putting an actual plane into the sky. While not a perfect way to learn, as there are some differences between simulators and real flying, it does help develop the basic skills of not over-controlling (another fatal beginner mistake), and of keeping plane orientation clear (it's easy to forget, when the plane is moving a direction other than directly away from you, which way to move the sticks for the control you want). The nice thing is, when we mess up in the simulator, it's a simple reset button to try again, rather than needing to repair a broken airplane before the next attempt.

If I do end up crashing the plane, since I've got no previous experience in the field, would any of the internal wiring or motoring be damaged in any way? Should I buy two of everything to make sure I have enough to create a second aeroplane?

 

[Josie]

No matter what material you use, the airframe needs to be designed to best utilize its structural characteristics. Each material has specific benefits and drawbacks.

paper covered foamboard:

• Paper adds strength to the outside surfaces where it is most needed
• The paper makes it a little more forgiving if you want to use hot glue (foam melts)
• It adds some weight
• It loses strength when the paper buckles
• There is a lot of variation between types as far as dimensions, weight, strength, and water resistance (water sometimes dissolves the glue that holds the paper to the foam).
• Flitetest has a history with this material, so most of their content is geared toward that. Adams Readi-board used to be available in the USA at the dollar store. Flitetest got started with very simple and inexpensive airplanes that made the hobby reachable for a lot of people.

Foam without paper:

• Its just foam, this makes it a little easier for designers to understand where the strength comes from in a model.
• Can be cut and shaped with some very interesting techniques that are are not available for paper covered board (sanded, carved, hot wire cut)
• Can come in many different sorts
• Characteristics are determined by the chemistry of the foam (density, rigid vs. flexible, chemical reactions to glues)
• Try looking around your home/building store for insulation and underlayment for hardwood floors
• Depron is a favorite for model airplane building and there are a lot of plans available
• Try looking at a model shop or online for a better selection of Depron than we have in North America
• It is not as strong as paper reinforced foam - you have to add your own reinforcement where needed.

If you substitute a different material you will need to make major design changes to accommodate, otherwise you will be disappointed with the result. The less confidence you have that you can design something that will fly well, the more important it is for you to find plans that are easy to follow - and a big part of that is having the tools and materials that they recommend.

You definitely can build and fly radio controlled aircraft, but for the timeframe of a school assignment, I recommend you keep things as simple as possible. Build something that will fly, learn how to fly, worry about speed and appearance later.

Thank you so much, do you know any good supplier for these materials in the EU? Since I have to purchase them at some point, and the shipping costs would be expensive

 

[JasonK]

If I do end up crashing the plane, since I've got no previous experience in the field, would any of the internal wiring or motoring be damaged in any way? Should I buy two of everything to make sure I have enough to create a second aeroplane?

I did multiple hard nose down crashes with my tiny trainer... broke a bunch of props, bend a bunch of foam, but the electronics all took it just fine (I was crashing in a grassy field... if your crashing on something hard, your more likely to break the electronics)

 

[flyingkelpie]

If I do end up crashing the plane, since I've got no previous experience in the field, would any of the internal wiring or motoring be damaged in any way? Should I buy two of everything to make sure I have enough to create a second aeroplane?

As @JasonK said, electronics wont be damaged. However, the motor could be if you nose dove it into the dirt. Magnetic particles can get up there and mess round with it. Also the motor shaft can be bent. This will mean the motor will need chucking out but just try not to crash on your planes nose. But as for the other electronics it should be right.

 

[flyingkelpie]

Thank you so much, do you know any good supplier for these materials in the EU? Since I have to purchase them at some point, and the shipping costs would be expensive

Hobbyking. They ship from a European warehouse and a UK warehouse.

 

[mastermalpass]

As @JasonK Also the motor shaft can be bent. This will mean the motor will need chucking out but just try not to crash on your planes nose. But as for the other electronics it should be right.

I have managed to replace the shaft on a motor before. But I did so by stealing the shaft from another identical motor (the one I was fixing had its leads running into a hard-to-access part of the plane, which is why I didn't just change the motor). Hobbyking seem to stock quite the selection of shafts.

 

[flyingkelpie]

I have managed to replace the shaft on a motor before. But I did so by stealing the shaft from another identical motor (the one I was fixing had its leads running into a hard-to-access part of the plane, which is why I didn't just change the motor). Hobbyking seem to stock quite the selection of shafts.

Ok nice! Sounds great if you have spares!