Which Park Flyer is best?

TIA for any answers this post brings.
I'm fairly a newbie, solo'ed in my SIG LT40 a few months ago. *WHEW* *What a RUSH!!!*
Any silly fool can get one in the air, takes balls 'o steel to get it back on the ground in one piece! I hate cross winds!
The airfield is a few miles away and there's a Junior College with a nice large grassy soccer field just around the corner. Would love to have a plane that I could fly after work when the wind dies down, without all the fuss of my LT40. Not to say that I don't love the smell of nitro ('cuz I do...), but would be nice to get some air time in small bites after work.
What park flyer would be best? I'd prefer electric, and something that takes off and lands like the big birds. Something that will handle a little wind, and still do loops, rolls, etc. Something that will fly slow enough to have fun with, and fast enough to make it interesting.
I don't want a wing plane, whatever it is, it's got to have landing gear. I love to watch the Zagi's combat, but feel a little cheated when you've got to throw them into the air and land them on their bellies.
It's got to be big enough to see and not one of those boom and pod silly little toys that seem to be the rage. (don't care how good they fly, they just look silly).
Ideas, guys & gals?
Appreciate the help.
TomC RC Lurker
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Crabtree wrote:

Tough call. To be large and fast enough to handle wind makes it rather large for flying round parks..
I'd say you need somethig in the speed 400 or even larger class...maybe a Sig Rascal would suit you.
Google for it.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A GWS Beaver fills most of the bill - except for rolls - as it's rudder and elevator. But you need something fairly slow if it's only one soccer field. Geared 300 motor, 1100 or 2200mAh 2-cell Li-ion/poly. Climbs well, loops and can take a little wind. Can carry a small glider on top, too. R-o-Gs well, lands beautifully and flies for 30mins or an hour depending on battery. That's a lot of touch and goes. And it's very quiet, too.
--
Mark Lee

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Check out our "Nemesis 3D-II" parkflyer at www.m-a-e.com . Fully aerobatic for sport or 3D. Tough, handles winds up to 10mph with ease. Check out the videos on our site... especially the one on landing gear.
Randy Model Airplane Engineering www.M-A-E.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
GWS E-Starter? That might do it for you, with the 400 motor.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<snip>
<snip>
How come? I've had a Zagi for two years and I've had a blast with it. I've since replaced it with a Unicorn, a wing that's a bit larger and IMHO flies better. One thing that can be said with all the foam wings is that they're darn near indestructible. I will be honest and say that they're harder to see than conventional airplanes, especially from the edge, and that they don't have a trainer's self-righting tendencies. Also, a lot of "Speed 400" planes require a hand launch, especially from a grass field.
Morris
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Crabtree wrote:

I have a Northeast Sailplane AcroPhat which is very aerobatic and will handle a reasonable amount of wind. It is an ARF with wood and monocote construction. I have a brushless motor (don't know the make and model) that I got from NES with the plane. So far, I've flown it with 8 cell NiMH batteries and get maybe 6-7 minute duration, but I may start using lithium batteries as soon as I build a fireproof bunker to store them in.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I like the Graumpner "Tipsy" foam pusher park flyer. I like the fact that you can pack it up in the box that it came in and keep it in your car until ready to fly. I fly mine in an area next to my house, but I have 35 acres of land. I found it a forgiving, stable flyer that will give you lots of stick time. On the minus side, only rudder and elevator and no landing gear. Also the foam will splatter into many small pieces if crashed hard. That happened to my first one and so I'm now on my second Tipsy.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I got a Tipsy when they first came out 2 years ago, as my first ever RC plane and learned to fly on it. It always flew 'OK' but not a barn burner with that high revving shallow pitch prop. I assumed Graupner had optimized the prop to the plane. NOT! Four months ago I got the bright idea of trying a higher pitch prop, a Gunther 4.9X4.3, otherwise known as the 'Wingo' prop (also used on Zagis). The plane was totally transformed! It acquired a phenomenal climb rate, would loop from level flight, and ROG off asphalt using just a belly skid. The motor is the stock 280. I had been concerned the higher pitch would stress the motor, but so far there is no sign of stress and it is barely warm on landing. The plane will cruise at much lower throttle, with the motor just ticking over. Whereas before, it took high throttle with the prop wailing away just to maintain altitude. I'm careful to use high throttle only briefly, for takeoff, climbout, accelerating to loop, and brief speed runs. Continuous high throttle is never called for. The plane is flown an hour or more just about every day. It has now acquired permanent landing gear and steerable tail wheel, and is a pure joy to fly. One caveat is the plane is extremely fragile, and from the outset requres considerable beefing up with packing tape. I can't imagine Graupner's rationale for using (and continuing to use) that silly, rediculous folding prop which hugely impairs the plane's performance. Bill (oc)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.