First Plane Needed....Please make suggestions

Thanks for all the input guys. Think I will go with the Easystar setup to find out if I even want to seriously get into this form of RC....If I do become addicted and decide to move up to something else, rest assured that you guys will be the first I ask. Thanks again and please feel free to make more recommendations....I haven't ordered the Easystar yet.

And STILL only one flight! And a rather expensive charger or many less expensive ones and a lot of time charging or a huge investment in batteries.

Keep trying!

| Any of the above is sufficiently easy to fly to not NEED instruction,

... but even a few pointers from somebody more familiar with them will save you LOTS of frustration.

| but if you can't get help at a club, get a flight sim if you can. The | initial learning curve with 2 2 axis sticks is worse than a car.

Learning to fly is a bit different than learning to drive.

In a car, if you get totally confused or lost you can hit the brake, wait for the car to stop, get your bearings, and start again when you're ready. (Granted, you lose the ability to do this safely once you get into serious traffic, but hopefully by then you've gotten to the point where you don't need to do this often.)

There is no equivilent in a plane, though those auto-pilot devices (where you let go of the sticks and they immediately right the plane) may come pretty close.

It's just easier to ease into driving a car than flying a plane. And yes, the car does really have only two primary control channels -- steering and throttle -- though it's still a lot easier to do than a plane with only two channels, for example. Mostly because you can drive a car at 2 mph, but you can't usually fly a plane at 2 mph.

I mention this all because I just bought a little electric helicopter and am trying to teach myself to fly it. I've got all the right reflexes for an R/C plane, but the helicopter tends to foil my reflexes, even though the controls tend to do similar things.

I'm spending lots of time on the simulator on what ought to be simple

-- hovering mostly -- but the hovering just isn't stable, and you have to keep on it, and it's easy to get totally disoriented, even if you're hovering just a few feet in front of you. And then suddenly you get disoriented, the helicopter starts going off, and you have to make that dreaded split-second decision when you've lost it -- `do I cut power and ditch it, or give it power and try and save it?'

Hopefully the new blades from my `ditch it!' decision will arrive today! :) I'm better at hovering now, though I'm still not what I'd consider good.

Really, I'll bet one of those auto-pilots (FMA co-pilot and others), especially one that could detect the ground speed of helicopter and neutralize that too, would be really really really cool for this. I suspect they would work fine, but I think I'll just spend some extra time on the simulator instead ...

Check the prices again. For $350 you should also be able to get a 4 channel radio with the glow ARTF. So add another $140 to the electric price. Just adding the motor, controller and gearbox to that ARTF added $280. Compare that to a $70 engine and a $10 servo.

I think the biggest ineqity here is still the motors. Most brushless motors are so stupidly simple that they should really cost no more than can motors. Battery costs will continue to come down. That leaves the controllers as the high cost items and I don't see them coming down much.

...and since when was a TVR a good car for a learner? You might want to remind yourself of the title of this thread.

Since when is a Corsa a good car, period! ;^)

| Check the prices again. For $350 you should also be able to get a 4 channel | radio with the glow ARTF. So add another $140 to the electric price. Just | adding the motor, controller and gearbox to that ARTF added $280. Compare | that to a $70 engine and a $10 servo.

Well, 0.40 sized is quite large for a `cheap' electric. The electric really shines at around 0.10 sized and smaller. For now. As things get cheaper, that will change.

| I think the biggest ineqity here is still the motors.

I don't. More later.

| Most brushless motors are so stupidly simple that they should really | cost no more than can motors.

That much is true. And in fact many people do rewind CD-ROM motors and make their own brushless motors and they work quite well, apparently.

| Battery costs will continue to come down. That leaves the controllers as | the high cost items and I don't see them coming down much.

Actually, the motors themselves, even the brushless ones, are the cheapest part once you get above a certain size.

It's the controllers that really get expensive, especially once you start getting into the higher amperage setups, and of course the batteries, expecially if you want more than one pack.

Generally the motor + controller, even for a brushless, seem to work out to about the same cost as an appropriate 4 stroke for the same plane once you get above 0.60 sized or so. (And once you get that large, you might as well just go brushless, because anything you save in the motor+controller department you'll pay for in the need for bigger batteries.)

Here's a good example for you, though it's only a 0.40 sized plane --

they suggest a $100 brushless motor, with a $120 brushless controller and a $140 LiPo pack for this plane. As you get even larger, the cost of the motor goes up a little, the controller up some more, and the battery pack cost goes up linearally with the size of the plane -- doubling the size of the plane will roughly double the cost of the pack.

For comparison, an OS FS-70 four stroke would probably work well for this plane too, and the cost would be $210 at Tower Hobbies. (Though I suspect that the OS FS-52 might as well, at only $200.)

-snip-

Can motors are made by the gazzilion, don't have ball bearings, and don't have rare-earth magnets. I do see brushless motor pricing going down as more players enter the market. I don't think they'll get to be as inexpensive as can motors unless they start getting made as cheaply as can motors (and no, inexpensive and cheap are not the same word).

I also think that as brushless motors get more common you'll start seeing cheaply made ones cropping up. The first journal-bearinged, ferrite magnet brushless motor will be an eye-opener for anybody who thinks that "brushless" means "really good".

------------------------------------------- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services

Tim,

What I was referring to is the complete lack of complexity in a brushless motor. It eliminates the brushes, brush holders, springs, commutator, the solder joints and all the rest of the assembly needed to manage the brushed setup. After a bit of practice I would bet that most of the brushless motors could be assembled in a few minutes.

Granted, the magnets are a LITTLE more, but $40 more for a 400 size motor?

Ball bearings are $.20 each in small quantities. Machinig costs are the same whether you press in a bushing or a bearing.

Point being you can get a speed 400 equivalent brushless kit for $15.00. Add an hour of your time and you have a completed brushless motor. Kinda hard to justify $50-60 for a factory built one.

I think where the market would explode is if a company made matched sets of no-frills controllers and motors. Right now controllers have to be made to accomodate a wide variety of voltage and current requirements.

I think there is the greatest room for savings with the motors. There is also a good potential for savings with the controllers if they didn't try to make them work for every motor out there. A matched controller for a particular motor could be made much less costly without all the bells and whistles.

Go even better with an OS 46 LA at under $100 or a Thunder Tiger four stroke.

Which is why I stressed 'need'. There is no doubt that someone who has been there before who can recognise obvious mistakes like reversed controls is an absolute boon...

thats why I said its worse.;-)

They are getting that way already. The Himaxx range is popular, but frankly its no more efficient than a GOOD ferrite brushed motor, although its a bit lighter.

Never said it was - that's why learners drive them.

I have never flown an r/c airplane other than crashing an old aerobir

twice after it was in the air about 15 seconds each time. That wa several years ago. Since then, I have been driving an r/c stadiu truck. During this spring, I decided that I would try to fly again. have read this forum along with r/c universe for assistance i purchasing the proper "first" airplane. My local hobby shop i recommending either the Parkzone J-3 Cub or the Slo-V. Frankly depending upon which hobby shops I contact, these are the more commo responses, however, some say one over the other and vice versa. Other have recommended the T-Hawk. I have asked this question previousl somewhere on this site. I believe that I'm ready to purchase somethin and I am leaning towards a Parkzone product. Any suggestions and/o comments concerning these two (2) airplanes would be helpful. Than you

-- gf

----------------------------------------------------------------------- gfl's Profile:

this thread:

I have a Parkzone Cub and Decathlon. These both fly great although they aren't stock. Bought replacement parts to build them so I wouldn't have to buy radio and all since I already have all that stuff. The Decathlon flies great with an Axi 2208/34 brushless and I'm sure it flies good with the stock motor , although I have yet to fly one thats stock. I've been helping a guy learn to fly on his Parkzone J-3 Cub which has the stock motor and radio that comes in the complete package. The Cub flies great with the stock setup. It's a barrel of fun and looks like a scale Cub in the air , and looks pretty darned good on the ground..

There are so many good planes out there it's hard to recommend just one , but I don't think you'll go wrong with either the Cub or Slo V. The cub is a little trickier to take off and I would suggest you get some help until you get used to it.

I would try to get help with either of these planes. It's nice to have someone there who can check it out , trim it for you and it's a great security blanket knowing you can pass the radio off if you have trouble.

A very big plus for these two is the looks , quality , and availability of parts. They're pretty tough and you can buy any little part on the aircraft.

Ken Day

I think the Frog from

is hard to beat: all foam, flie

slowly, takes a lot of abuse, easily repairable, inexpensive, availabl as an easy-to-build kit or as a plan. Check the web site for pix an videos

-- FirstShir

----------------------------------------------------------------------- FirstShirt's Profile:

this thread: