HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Feb 09, 2015, 04:04 PM
Don't trust the milk
Israel, ת"א
Joined Jan 2015
82 Posts
Discussion
Pushers or "tough flyer" as first plane?

I don't even know if that's how they are called, but I just name them "tough flyers", and I mean planes like cessnas, or like this model :

http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store...sion_PNF_.html

Also I know there are lots of "pushers", like the Bixler, the AXN Floater etc...

As a first plane, regardless of the price, what is better?
FaithfulBurger is offline Find More Posts by FaithfulBurger
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 09, 2015, 06:15 PM
A man with too many toys
United States
Joined Feb 2001
18,438 Posts
That looks like a very nice first airplane. What is your flying field?

Pushers protect the prop if you crash a lot. Once you learn the basics a more conventional design like the Tough Trainer won't float as much and should be easier to land and do basic aerobatics.


.
RC Man is offline Find More Posts by RC Man
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 09, 2015, 07:39 PM
Registered User
United States, WA, Ferndale
Joined May 2012
368 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by FaithfulBurger View Post
I don't even know if that's how they are called, but I just name them "tough flyers", and I mean planes like cessnas, or like this model :

http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store...sion_PNF_.html

Also I know there are lots of "pushers", like the Bixler, the AXN Floater etc...

As a first plane, regardless of the price, what is better?
I went with a 4-channel pusher (Dynam Hawksky) as my SECOND airplane. If your going to learn on your own like I did with no up-front knowledge (no instructor, simulator, club, or real landing field either), I would suggest a Firebird Stratos. This 3-channel trainer has built in stabilization systems, it's made to come apart in a crash and be fixable, and it comes with everything ready to fly for $130 (2 years ago). What I liked about it was 1) it was cheap enough and lasted long enough so I actually started to have fun before I got discouraged, and 2) when I went to a 4-channel plane with ailerons the "feel" was much the same as the "stabilized" Stratos, which made it easy to make the transition. Don't know your situation, but it worked well for me.

Tom
black6088 is offline Find More Posts by black6088
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 09, 2015, 10:48 PM
Registered User
Joined Dec 2014
121 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by black6088 View Post
I went with a 4-channel pusher (Dynam Hawksky) as my SECOND airplane. If your going to learn on your own like I did with no up-front knowledge (no instructor, simulator, club, or real landing field either), I would suggest a Firebird Stratos. This 3-channel trainer has built in stabilization systems, it's made to come apart in a crash and be fixable, and it comes with everything ready to fly for $130 (2 years ago). What I liked about it was 1) it was cheap enough and lasted long enough so I actually started to have fun before I got discouraged, and 2) when I went to a 4-channel plane with ailerons the "feel" was much the same as the "stabilized" Stratos, which made it easy to make the transition. Don't know your situation, but it worked well for me.

Tom
Yah, it's hard to say without knowing his situation. I practiced for several hours on Phoenix but was humbled pretty quickly even with the Sport Cub S. I had to learn some basic repair skills and have luckily been able to get it back in the air and learn to fly decently. There's nothing more disappointing than going out on your first flight; only to have it end abruptly and going home with a wrecked plane.
agentorange90 is offline Find More Posts by agentorange90
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2015, 06:05 AM
Don't trust the milk
Israel, ת"א
Joined Jan 2015
82 Posts
I want to have a 4 channel plane. One that I will have fun flying even after I learn the basics.
FaithfulBurger is offline Find More Posts by FaithfulBurger
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2015, 01:34 PM
buyer of the farm
United States, FL, DeLand
Joined Mar 2009
5,114 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by FaithfulBurger View Post
I want to have a 4 channel plane. One that I will have fun flying even after I learn the basics.
Your second sentence, posing as a logical consequence of the first, actually has nothing to do with it. There is no correlation between number of channels and amount of fun. None at all. There are great three and four channel planes. There are lousy three and four channel planes.

But let's test your theory that 3-channel planes aren't any fun. How about some 3D flying? With a 3-channel sailplane. If your theory is right it can't be any fun. Jarred, you're up!
Parkzone Radian Hover and Slow-flight (3 min 19 sec)

What's that you say? Boring, who wants to do 3D? All right lets do some aerobatics, like perfect axial rolling circles. You could work for a year getting this right. These Knuckleheads insist on taking the 3D plane from the previous video and torturing it. Knuckleheads, you're up:
Knuckleheads - Parkzone Radian EP R/C Sailplane (3 min 24 sec)


Crap! Sounds like they were having that F word with a 3-channel. How about some of the most watched RC videos on the Internet, Trappy's 3-channel flying wing! As a matter fact a flying wing usually only has two control surfaces, elevons and three channel operation. Boring? Let's look at another flying wing. Go bezerk, Lee!

Ballistic Assassin Doing Flat Spins (6 min 24 sec)


Well, that's all I got. I guess you're right. No fun in a 3-channel at all. Just don't say that within earshot of Lee and his buddies in Utah when they're doing this. You could be toast.

2 sWARm 5 2014 (5 min 1 sec)


Yes, they are TRYING to run into each other. Naw, boring. better get a 4-channel.
Rockin Robbins is offline Find More Posts by Rockin Robbins
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2015, 01:41 PM
Don't trust the milk
Israel, ת"א
Joined Jan 2015
82 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins View Post
Your second sentence, posing as a logical consequence of the first, actually has nothing to do with it. There is no correlation between number of channels and amount of fun. None at all. There are great three and four channel planes. There are lousy three and four channel planes.

But let's test your theory that 3-channel planes aren't any fun. How about some 3D flying? With a 3-channel sailplane. If your theory is right it can't be any fun. Jarred, you're up!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggGG-09fOdQ
What's that you say? Boring, who wants to do 3D? All right lets do some aerobatics, like perfect axial rolling circles. You could work for a year getting this right. These Knuckleheads insist on taking the 3D plane from the previous video and torturing it. Knuckleheads, you're up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxqguF8sZSw

Crap! Sounds like they were having that F word with a 3-channel. How about some of the most watched RC videos on the Internet, Trappy's 3-channel flying wing! As a matter fact a flying wing usually only has two control surfaces, elevons and three channel operation. Boring? Let's look at another flying wing. Go bezerk, Lee!

http://youtu.be/Q30borwvS0E

Well, that's all I got. I guess you're right. No fun in a 3-channel at all. Just don't say that within earshot of Lee and his buddies in Utah when they're doing this. You could be toast.

http://youtu.be/VxWFK0slPeg

Yes, they are TRYING to run into each other. Naw, boring. better get a 4-channel.
Oh no you misunderstood me. I said these 2 sentences without any connection between them. I said 2 totally different sentences.

btw, what do you say about my question?
FaithfulBurger is offline Find More Posts by FaithfulBurger
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2015, 02:08 PM
buyer of the farm
United States, FL, DeLand
Joined Mar 2009
5,114 Posts
Well, pod pushers (there are a few pod pullers out there too with the same characteristics) aim to protect the cheap, easy to replace propeller with the expensive, more difficult to replace, fuselage and contents. Do the math. Not a particularly valid concept.

And they do it at the expense of flying characteristics. Put the center of thrust several inches above the center of gravity and weird things happen. Like the infamous pod pusher pile driver, where you take the advice most given. You launch your plane at shoulder level, pushing it forward at a very slight down angle at full throttle and the pod pusher just forces the nose down into a full throttle, maximum impact collision with a medium sized rocky planet. Who wins, the plane or the planet? My son-in-law sacrificed a Bixler that way.

Of course there is a solution, or pod pushers would be extinct as the dodo bird. Toss the bird overhand way above your head. Do it briskly, like tossing a football. And do it with about a 20 UP angle. Finally do it at half throttle. You could actually do it at no throttle and it would glide to the ground Your plane leaves your hand and you blip down to level. Now it's at 10' or more. Let it fly level to gain speed, throttle up and fly away.

Of course pod pushers only have the distance between the top of the pod and fuselage for the prop so you're going to have to go with one of those small diameter screaming meanie props--inefficient, loud, not friendly sounding.

A tractor plane can use a larger, more efficient prop turning at lower RPM and much quieter. You'll get more thrust, quiet operation and longer flight duration. Because the thrust like is very close or on the CG you won't have strange thrust effects when you hit the throttle or back off on the throttle. Tractor planes just fly better.

For your first plane, get one with severe survivability characterists and/or one with a complete and readily available parts inventory. Hobby King planes mostly just don't qualify. Yeah, it's tempting to save some money, but there's a prict to pay and by the time you pay it you could have bought a much nicer plane.

It's hard to say anything bad about the Horizon Hobby SAFE equipped planes. They fly great right out of the box, SAFE will save your plane with the flick of a switch and you will fly again immediately instead of after repairs. You can still crash them. But SAFE will save your cookies too.

The other way to go would be with a crashtesthobby.com Albatross. This is a plane buildable pod pusher or tractor that just doesn't care much if you crash it. i'd start out with the 3-channel polyhedral version and strap on the 4-channel wing with you're ready.
Crashtesting the CTH Albatross 11-11 (4 min 17 sec)


Minimum speed half that of a Champ. 75 mph top speed. Great in wind. This is a winner, in spite of what your eyes are telling you.
Rockin Robbins is offline Find More Posts by Rockin Robbins
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2015, 03:29 PM
A man with too many toys
United States
Joined Feb 2001
18,438 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by FaithfulBurger View Post
I want to have a 4 channel plane. One that I will have fun flying even after I learn the basics.

Good choice. I have helped many learn to fly and they do learn much faster with a 4-channel airplane.


.
RC Man is offline Find More Posts by RC Man
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2015, 01:46 PM
Don't trust the milk
Israel, ת"א
Joined Jan 2015
82 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins View Post
Well, pod pushers (there are a few pod pullers out there too with the same characteristics) aim to protect the cheap, easy to replace propeller with the expensive, more difficult to replace, fuselage and contents. Do the math. Not a particularly valid concept.

And they do it at the expense of flying characteristics. Put the center of thrust several inches above the center of gravity and weird things happen. Like the infamous pod pusher pile driver, where you take the advice most given. You launch your plane at shoulder level, pushing it forward at a very slight down angle at full throttle and the pod pusher just forces the nose down into a full throttle, maximum impact collision with a medium sized rocky planet. Who wins, the plane or the planet? My son-in-law sacrificed a Bixler that way.

Of course there is a solution, or pod pushers would be extinct as the dodo bird. Toss the bird overhand way above your head. Do it briskly, like tossing a football. And do it with about a 20 UP angle. Finally do it at half throttle. You could actually do it at no throttle and it would glide to the ground Your plane leaves your hand and you blip down to level. Now it's at 10' or more. Let it fly level to gain speed, throttle up and fly away.

Of course pod pushers only have the distance between the top of the pod and fuselage for the prop so you're going to have to go with one of those small diameter screaming meanie props--inefficient, loud, not friendly sounding.

A tractor plane can use a larger, more efficient prop turning at lower RPM and much quieter. You'll get more thrust, quiet operation and longer flight duration. Because the thrust like is very close or on the CG you won't have strange thrust effects when you hit the throttle or back off on the throttle. Tractor planes just fly better.

For your first plane, get one with severe survivability characterists and/or one with a complete and readily available parts inventory. Hobby King planes mostly just don't qualify. Yeah, it's tempting to save some money, but there's a prict to pay and by the time you pay it you could have bought a much nicer plane.

It's hard to say anything bad about the Horizon Hobby SAFE equipped planes. They fly great right out of the box, SAFE will save your plane with the flick of a switch and you will fly again immediately instead of after repairs. You can still crash them. But SAFE will save your cookies too.

The other way to go would be with a crashtesthobby.com Albatross. This is a plane buildable pod pusher or tractor that just doesn't care much if you crash it. i'd start out with the 3-channel polyhedral version and strap on the 4-channel wing with you're ready.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8n2chNcbmM

Minimum speed half that of a Champ. 75 mph top speed. Great in wind. This is a winner, in spite of what your eyes are telling you.
So you say that I should definitely buy a tractor trainer plane because its more efficient and flies better then a pusher?
FaithfulBurger is offline Find More Posts by FaithfulBurger
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2015, 03:36 PM
Registered User
United States, WA, Woodinville
Joined May 2014
1,307 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by FaithfulBurger View Post
So you say that I should definitely buy a tractor trainer plane because its more efficient and flies better then a pusher?

You shouldn't "definitely buy" either one. Pusher and tractor planes fly similarly and you could learn on either one. More important is to buy a plane that is appropriate as a trainer. Something that is relatively slow and docile, has at least a bit of dihedral so it tends to self level. Something that is capable of landing on the surfaces you have available. Something tough enough to take a few of the inevitable beginner mishaps and simple enough that you can patch it up and toss it back in the air. I would suggest either a largish pusher such as the Bixler series or a micro like the supercub. Myself I primarily learned on a HK Breeze which is a 1.4M pusher and I still fly it occasionally. It's a good sized plane that comes apart easily for transport. It's tough, it's a pusher so I've never broken the prop, and with the wheels off it belly lands on grass very easily.
James_S is offline Find More Posts by James_S
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2015, 04:21 PM
Don't trust the milk
Israel, ת"א
Joined Jan 2015
82 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by James_S View Post
You shouldn't "definitely buy" either one. Pusher and tractor planes fly similarly and you could learn on either one. More important is to buy a plane that is appropriate as a trainer. Something that is relatively slow and docile, has at least a bit of dihedral so it tends to self level. Something that is capable of landing on the surfaces you have available. Something tough enough to take a few of the inevitable beginner mishaps and simple enough that you can patch it up and toss it back in the air. I would suggest either a largish pusher such as the Bixler series or a micro like the supercub. Myself I primarily learned on a HK Breeze which is a 1.4M pusher and I still fly it occasionally. It's a good sized plane that comes apart easily for transport. It's tough, it's a pusher so I've never broken the prop, and with the wheels off it belly lands on grass very easily.
Ok thank you for the comment.
After a visit in a local hobby store, I think that I am going to with a tractor and get the Wing Tiger V2.
What do you say? a good plane to start with?
FaithfulBurger is offline Find More Posts by FaithfulBurger
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2015, 03:12 PM
buyer of the farm
United States, FL, DeLand
Joined Mar 2009
5,114 Posts
Lots of people like the Wing Tiger. But are spare parts available? Can you buy more receivers for the radio for future use as you expand your fleet? If so, what's the price?

Looks like there are some spare parts available, the radio is a no-name 2.4 gig and I can't find receivers, etc.

Looks like a doable learner plane but at $200 a bit expensive for what you get. Lots of people like it and you'll most likely be happy with it.
Rockin Robbins is offline Find More Posts by Rockin Robbins
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2015, 04:14 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2007
265 Posts
Whilst I agree a pod mounted pusher motor above the wing has some disadvantages there are (were) designs that largely over come the problem. The pod and boom with both the wing and motor pylon mounted. This configuration allows a bigger more efficient prop but it can be noisy if the prop is mounted close to the wing trailing edge.
The venerable Wing Dragon is one example.
Name: ARTF1.jpg
Views: 7
Size: 24.7 KB
Description:
I am sure you can break its fuselage but you have to try very hard.

A pusher not only protects the prop but the motor (no bent shafts) and its mounting (no pulled out bulkheads) as well.
If you fly from a rough surface hand launching and belly landing a good pusher has a lot going for it.
Quorneng is offline Find More Posts by Quorneng
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2015, 04:30 PM
buyer of the farm
United States, FL, DeLand
Joined Mar 2009
5,114 Posts
But a more efficient system with a folding prop will outfly it every time. Pushers are great for FPV and water landings. I'm sure there are other circumstances where they're good too, but for nearly all circumstances the tractor setup works better. I say this, owning a 55" flying wing with a pusher design.

You can't bend a shaft if the prop is mounted to the motor can with a proper prop adapter. I augered in my Slow Stick from 50 feet and suffered not even a broken prop. Actually I lawn darted because my wing was separated from the fuselage.

Turn the motor around so the shaft sticks out the back or cut it off, bolt a prop adapter to the back of the motor and you're nearly indestructible.

You hardly see any pod pusher sailplanes any more because the tractor motor/folding prop combo is so utterly superior.
Rockin Robbins is offline Find More Posts by Rockin Robbins
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question UMX Sbach 3D as a first 3D plane Rclover23549 3D Flying 2 Dec 30, 2014 10:42 PM
Question Precision Aerobatics Addiction as First 3D Plane? Adam592 3D Flying 10 Nov 03, 2014 08:25 PM
For Sale GWS FW190 Tough as Nails MaladroitFL Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 0 Oct 09, 2014 09:29 PM
Discussion As a Electric RC Plane Flyer which tools are a must for you? Harry Hartwell Electric Plane Talk 48 Sep 30, 2014 03:56 PM
Discussion possible to have 3rd or 4th plane as EDF/Pusher jet? beginner4life Beginner Training Area (Aircraft-Electric) 15 Nov 21, 2008 04:52 PM