I've just seen a few comments about not using balsa as a beginner plane in another thread. I did not want to go off topic in that thread so I figured it would be best to start another.

I'd like to point out that one should not be afraid of balsa built airplanes as a beginner plane. This has been the building material of choice for many, many years and continues to be used to make wonderful flying planes. Simply go to Mountain Models or Stevens Aero web sites and have a look. There is a reason why they are the number 1 & 2 favorite plane builders. Especially in today's climate of ARFs and RTFs. Planes made from balsa are easy to build and easy to repair if necessary. When I first started learning to fly RC, I had a Stevens Aero SQuiRT. I put that plane through it's paces to say the least and did everything a beginner pilot does that isn't good. I'm sure you know what I mean. I even flew it right into my mailbox trying to land on my driveway with no damage to the wing. Not to mention as well as the SQuiRT making over 200 maiden flights and still going strong.

Check out this video here on the SQuiRT: http://www.stevensaero.com/download/...rt400_0002.wmv

So don't be afraid a building/buying/flying a balsa built airplane. Just because it's not made of foam, doesn't make it bad for a beginner's plane.

Frank

EDIT: I really need to add that I would not like to see this thread turn into the same old balsa vs. foam, ARF vs. kit theme as we have experienced so many times here before. I'd like to stick to the topic and discuss the virtues of building with balsa and try to relay to those folks coming into this hobby, even as a beginner, that you can indeed build wonderful planes for your skill level out of balsa. I know that for a fact. I've been there and done that.

Frank,

I understand, and agree, but what most of us who have used extensive Balsa ...we have forgotten...there is a bit of a learning curve...in learning to work with the stuff. In the old days, we learned to work with balsa, because...hey...its balsa...or you don't fly. With Epalor ...or example...you find the broken chunks, put the jig saw back together and shoot in some glue.

With balsa, there is sectioning out the damaged area, constructing replacement parts, sanding, and then heat shrink covering. There is more learning with this technique.

Brand new pilots don't have a clue about this.

I have mixed emotions on this issue...being a guy who built balsa kits and scratch designed planes in the 80's. However, I really like premolded foam planes...or even better...prebuilt Balsa/Ply/Carbon ARFs...like the stuff from 3D hobby shop.

Interesting thread.

The techniques necessary to repair balsa are not hard and are worth learning. Investing in a small iron and a role of sheeting is about all you need. I've found balsa planes to be more durable and far easier to repair than foam. Foam deforms a lot over time and gets harder and harder to work with as epoxy and glue replace the foam. With balsa it's simple to replace whole sections of structure, making it good as new. Crashes that would total a foam plane (well conventional GWS foam anyway) are relatively minor on a balsa plane. Somehow the combination of balsa sticks and the plastic covering make the structure handle shocks far better than just foam. I've had many crashes in my foam GWS days that were very minor but never failed to break the tail off or worse. On the other hand I've had my balsa planes tumble across the runway on a botched landing and survive completely intact.

After mucking about with foam planes (even elapor ones) for several years, I've switched to entirely balsa, retiring all my old foamies. Balsa planes are light, faster, fly better and more realistically, and are more durable. Plus they scale up nicely... the larger planes just fly better.

I have crashed my share of crunchies... and I've had crashes that would have put a foamy into hundreds of chunks, with almost no damage. If you're crashing regularly, foam is a good option, but the flight character of wood planes is so much better, you might even avoid a crash.

Being an old (and I mean old) freeflighter, foam is sill foreign to me. We built models that we KNEW would crash, and survive with just a couple of rubber bands to replace. I still build my models like that for r/c: a cartwheel is just a bad landing, and seldom requires repair. I wish I could say the same for foamies, and the exceptions are well-known.

Mind you, the old adage "build to fly, not to crash" seems to be lost on today's pilots...

Originally Posted by TLyttle

Mind you, the old adage "build to fly, not to crash" seems to be lost on today's pilots...

it's funny you should mention this. there is a fella in my club who over builds all of his planes (all foamies). they are basically flying bricks. in order to get the brick to fly to his liking, a huge motor and battery are required.

i asked why he builds his planes this way. he responded with "i make them crash resistant". he always winds up crashing them anyway and most break just as easy as if he built them light. for some reason he has no concept of "build to fly".

Anyone who thinks balsa planes are fragile has never had a Mountain Models SmoothE! it is one tough plane!
Easy to build and flies great!
Wes

I personally have experience in both areas, having built a few kits, some small ones, a couple larger ones (not flying yet), and then I've also repaired a few balsa models, mostly the wing, and a couple fuse repairs. I find them fairly easy to build and rebuild once you get past that learning curve that comes with building/flying them. The one thing I find most difficult is getting alignments all perfect, and making the cuts nice and smooth without tearing the edges.

With foam however, I find it easier to repair, as you normally don't have to be as cautious, and generally, when it does break, it's a fairly clean break, so all you have to do is break out the glue and do a field repair. Balsa models usually are more extensive, and require care to rebuild successfully

I've also got experience with both types of planes... and I prefer balsa failures. So I guess we have ancidotal evidence on both sides of the debate

I admittingly am a balsa lover over foam, right now I'm building a GWS DC-3/C-47 and I find it incredibly annoying to work with. You just cannot get the level of fit-accuracy with foam that you can with balsa, subsequently I've ditched a few foam bits on the DC3 and installed balsa replacements.

As for build-complexity, I think people should all have a shot at the likes of the Mountain Models EZ series or SA Diddlebug/rod's before they decide to shun balsa.

Let's not forget now with laser cutting that balsa is also a lot faster to put together and needs less finishing than ever before, long gone are the days of using the Xacto No.11 and trying to carefully cut out stringer-notches printed with ink on the top-deck for a biplane without breaking the balsa along the grain.

Paul

^Ahh, words from the 'master' of balsa

I agree, the Diddlebug (http://www.stevensaero.com/DiddleBugs-p-1-c-16.html) is an awesome beginners plane that is made of balsa.

Just some reasons why I love balsa because:
1. lots of designs to choose from
2. easy to learn to scratch build/engineer with balsa... very flexible and easily worked material
3. good for the environment, non-toxic, renewable resource, degrades in landfill (unlike foam, fiberglass, etc.)
4. balsa kits are easy to customize (e.g. I get to pick my own color scheme, etc.)
5. built right they are very rigid and therefore fly very true
6. the end result plane looks good (vs. foamies)
7. a long history of tradition (e.g. I can build an old timer and replicate the look and feel of the hobby decades ago)

I have found balsa very easy to work with. I recall bending, pinning and glueing balsa with Elmer's glue as an eight year old when we flew our models powered by rubber bands. I know if I could successfully do that at 8 years old, anyone smart enough to fly an RC airplane can easily do the same with today's LASER cut kits. And they should have no problem repairing them if you do hapen to fly into your neighbors tree which requires a 20 foot piece of PVC pipe to get it down.

Frank

I'll second Steven's Aero. Anyone who learned to fly on foamies (specifically the Slow Stick) would do well to upgrade to a SA Slow Stick wing. I found it to be a great introduction to "stick" building, and it also helped me get over my fear of crunchies. That wing kit is super strong!

...

Originally Posted by NoFlyZone

A balsa kit from places like Mountain Models or StevensAero make absolutely wonderful 4th or 5th planes for anyone interested in working with balsa.

Well, if you want to really push it, then 2nd plane would be it. Something like the Mountain Models Dandy is incredibly hard to mess up (if you read the instructions... people do that still don't they? ). Don't forget also that we now have the big advantage of having simulators that give us the orientation training that more often than not is the initial killer of most planes (the dreaded turn towards yourself and go into the spiral of death syndrome).

What -some- foamies give you is nearly instant gratification (not this DC-3 mind you!) and the Multiplex range is good for that, a lot of others are not. Too many foamies have such woefully fitting/matching parts that it's amazing they last beyond the takeoff or teach the pilots anything at all because the plane reacts unpredictably due to the sloppiness of things.

Paul.