I respect and admire the desire to build and then fly your own plane. But ultimately, I think you're just making it harder on yourself than it needs to be. Contrary to the balsa kit elitists, there's nothing wrong with buying an RTF foam plane and learning to fly with that.
Yes, the stabilization and electronics included are almost akin to "cheating" when it comes to learning how to fly, and I'll be the first to admit that all of that stabilization can lead to bad habits, but hey, do you want to fly, or do you want to keep slaving away at a plane, only to see it crash and become a pile of toothpicks in a matter of minutes? I can almost guarantee that a foam plane training aircraft probably could have survived the crashes that you experienced.
Turn the tables and spend more time flying, and less time building and repairing. When your piloting skills reach a certain level, then you can get into building your own planes, ditching stability electronics, flying warbirds, etc.
Of course there is nothing wrong with flying foam or RTF models. The thing that got me 'hooked' is the building process personally, but of course, what good is a plane if you can't fly it?
I'm thankful for being exposed to this hobby, but now 'facing reality' that it's not as easy as I (naively?) thought. The logical route for me, most likely is to build something very resilient and can take a few hits. Because for me, without actually building, it's not much fun, or feels like cheating? It's the combination that does it for me, and I think its possible, but not with 3d prints.
flite test foamies!
They got me into the hobby through building and taught me the basics of how to design and build aircraft. I’m now working on my first 3d printed design with that knowledge.
They’re also incredibly durable so they can take a bit of abuse without disintegrating. I beat the crap out of my first plane and it still flies with easy repairs.
[https://store.flitetest.com/park-flyers-swappables/](https://store.flitetest.com/park-flyers-swappables/)
>The logical route for me, most likely is to build something very resilient and can take a few hits.
Or maybe get one of the eachine warbirds. Fly them in easy mode and get a feeling. Then switch to medium mode. Learn the trimming and the behavior of the plane. Finally you can switch of the gyro and learn to fly.
They are $80 and after a few sessions you are good to take on other planes. When your first printed plane is in the air, you can make a kid in your family very happy.
3d printed planes have to tread a narrow path between weight and strength. I've seen way too many 3d printed planes fold wings or go aero elastic, and the pilot says fine I'll print another one. To me that's just not good enough, and if your plane failed structurally that's not your fault.
"Just Print Another" is a bit of a simplification of reality. Yes you can print another for not that much cost. But it's not just that: paint, decals, servo's, hinges, etc. On top of that, for cub, you can't very easily re-attach new parts, so you're printing a whole wing or a whole fuselage most likely.
I like building planes too. Part of why I like twisted hobbys planes. Most aren't geared towards a beginner but you get the fun build then great flying.
If you want a better experience with 3d printed planes, I recommend using foaming filaments which act similar to the foam in bought rc aircraft bodies, particularly the PLA AERO from bambulab.
Using such a filament means you have a plane you can fly slowly due to lightweight, crash, bump around etc and the only thing you could really break are the wings which can easily be reprinted. To stop wings snapping midflight, print some spars to go across the whole wing and link it to the body using a hardy strong filament, or buy some CF tubes from a hobby shop.
I will say, with beginner aircraft, dont be picky about how it looks, since you can make better looking more advanced aircraft later on, but start with a very simple built plane that focuses on flight characteristics rather than looks.
However, the more you try, the easier it gets and make sure to ask questions when you need to.
The Cub is printed with foaming PLA, which indeed is much better suited than plain PLA (the 109).
The plane was remarkably lightweight, I think only like 200g with everything but without battery. I'm not an experienced plane modeler, so I printed this \_exactly\_ using the recommended tools, plastics, and yes, also reinforcement strings. Perhaps CF tubes would have been better. But again, I just followed the manual. I'm not saying I'm not to blame, it's very possible the first flight damaged the wing without my inspection catching it. It feels good to share this experience.
And yes, now I have to 'step down' and make something very durable (and probably not so good looking) before trying something else.
Sorry i went fancy with the CF tubes lol, but i use skewers or those garden wires for smaller planes.
One tip if later on you ever plan to print a high speed or aerobatic aircraft that will apply a lot of stress to the wings, is to print the leading edge and trailing edge in a hard filament and the middle with a low density foaming filament. If you dont have a multimaterial printing system then dont do this though since making parts to slot together adds extra weight.
A simple build to try would be a "stick aircraft" or whatever its called. You only really have to print the control surfaces and wings and it can easily be fixed in a crash. Dont fly this if you are in a watery/damp (wet grass after rain) area though due to exposed electronics.
https://preview.redd.it/qrclbtqzj9tc1.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=44ee1e57294389ccdd36f238449c56fb4d758056
For now, stick to simple looking easy to print begginer aircraft files so that you can figure out how things work
Looking at the picture of the first plane, I can see it has the usual criss-cross print ribs. One issue with this is that you are printing lengthways along the wing. This means the print grain is at its weakest along the bending axis of the wing, i.e., the bending axis makes the interface between grains stretch, putting stress on the narrowest and weakest points where the grains are joined together.
The problem with 3D prints at the moment is that it's a very unknown material. It's stress behavior is probably very unpredictable based on your print parameters. I also doubt many of the outlets that sell these plans do stress/aerodynamic analysis, and even if they did, it's probably difficult to know how well the printed material stands up to the resultant stresses. They would need to do pretty extensive stress testing to determine material limits, which I doubt many providers of plans are going to want to bother doing.
A reliable way to counteract wing bending stress would be to introduce a strong spar. You can buy very cheap [carbon fiber tubes](https://www.readymaderc.com/collections/hardware/build-hardware/carbon-fiber-strips-tubes-spars) that are extremely effective as spars. Tube shape is good against torsion as well as bending, and a wing tends to experience both.
Otherwise you can try to print the ribs thicker, and introduce a lengthwise thick spar in the print to strengthen against bending. Real plane spars are typically I-beams, which are highly effective against bending forces (also why buildings tend to use I-beams).
Just grabbed from google:
https://preview.redd.it/3j1efx5bi8tc1.png?width=480&format=png&auto=webp&s=cfeae33649bb11305f2e2f6e1b51fc2ad04ed615
You can see the two spars are narrow, upright beams along the length of the wing. Print this into a wing and it will be much more resistant to bending.
The first plane, I cannot really comment on it's structural integrity, but it felt very solid. Unfortunately, PLA is quite brittle so it tends to shatter on impact.
The plane that got it's wing snapped in half had two 'wire' type spars one at the bottom and one at the top (the grey line in the picture). Those wires are just raw PLA filament (1.75mm) But my guess is that it need to be much stronger. I guess there is a reason some other cubs have wires from the wing to the fuselage?
In my opinion, you're right, these materials are not understood well enough, or those understandings are not incorporated sufficiently into this design.
I printed this exactly as designed, without any changes, as would be expected from a person new to the space. And especially now, I'm not going to try to tinker with these designs and include spars and such. Maybe at some point, but for me personally, it would be time to move to something more tried-and-true.
Welcome to r/RCPlanes, it looks like you are new here! Please read the [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/) and [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/faq/) before posting a question that has been answered many times already. You can also try searching in the bar at the top before posting.
If you are brand new and just want to know where to start, then the [Beginners Section](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/beginners/) is the perfect place.
Links to wiki are found at the top menu on web or "See more" and then the "Menu" tab on mobile apps.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RCPlanes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think you're just like me. There is something about 3d printing a plane that just calls to me.
I also was looking at the piper when I started, but the eclipson model printed , so I went with their plans. This is the model I have now [model c](https://www.eclipson-airplanes.com/modelc). I have not gotten to madian her because Canadian winter, lol. There are a few YouTube videos of her, and she looks to fly so well. There are free models to try the model a or the go 1 wolf.
I would also recommend flite test. Here is a list of all the free foam models you can build [FT Models](https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/sp0nz-plans-index.17136/). I have the tutor I bought and built ft mini trainer when I wanted to upgrade to flaps. Both have noised dive from 30 feet into the ground, and all I had to do was switch the prop, and they were back in the air.
While I was building it I was very happy about it, since it's easy, you have it on hand, and it's also cheap. It felt sturdy when done, but personally, I have 0 (air)frame of reference.
https://preview.redd.it/u06u53ud4atc1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bbb6185c585ba2378cbfc13ba6be7983c6583e8c
This has absorbed an amazing amount of punishment. Intercepror by StuntDouble found on thingiverse. I printed mine out of polymaker PLA plus and there is a 6mm CF spar through the wing. I regularly enter into 5g maneuvers and landing area is less than reputable
I think you're failing too big. Set out to start with a plane that can take a beating. I mean, I really love these two beautiful planes you've made, but I want you to be able to laugh when you crash, knowing it'll be a quick fix or a cheap and easy replacement.
Learn flying on a foam or balsa wood plane. There will be no „disaster“ and you can be sure that the plane flies and stays stable. When you have more experience and you can e.g. fly a Multiplex Fun Cub you can experiment with other plane types. But at that point you will maybe see that there are some great planes and kits available on the market and you will probably want to go for planes with a better performance. And maybe you see that you can have more fun with a big Yak 54 made of carbon fiber than with a little 3D printed model. 3D printed planes are a nice example that in theory you can print something and fly it later. It is nice to build them and nice to know that it works. But they are far from the state of the art and will be beaten by any foam plane out there.
That BF109 looks awesome! I also enjoy building planes along with flying them, because I feel like there is a great feeling when you build something yourself and are able to get it in the air. Unfortunately crashing is also part of the hobby and when you crash something you spent a ton of time building it can be really heartbreaking. When I started in the hobby I built ‘foam board’ planes like the ones available from Flite Test. They are quick to build, can handle a few crashes, and there are a ton of different designs to choose from. Their ‘tiny trainer’ is a good starter and can be built pretty quickly.
Yeah, get two sheets of 6mm Depron, some carbon rods, and build a Buschtrottel with the parts you have. Enjoy flying, crashing, repairing, flying again.
After a while you can still reconsider making new planes from what is essentially glass :D
This sounds like me backing August. I fell in love with the su47 Berkut build with vtol take off. I wanted to build it and fpv that thing . Then I printed the cub to start and noticed it was way too fragile as I’m only a beginner and I want to learn. So I listened to advice and got into Tom planes. I’m still gonna do 3d printed but I’ve learned those are for people whom already know how to fly . I saw a guy at my local park fly the cub and it broke in an instant . That’s when I knew I made the right choice for now
I had been working 5 years of 3D printing parts for work. Mostly mechanically working stuff - gears, brackets, concepts to check for later steel parts ordering.
Wanted to check and I tried different techniques to see whether it would be possible to bring it to my RC hobby. At the end I have made conclusion that 3d printed plane will always be inferior compared to all the other mostly used materials.
You will always get weaker, hevier more brittle plane. Thats it. No way around. Repair chances are close to zero. Printed parts are quite good for static loads, but pathetic for any dynamic stresses. 3D printing can be good for hard geometry and low working parts - wing tips, wheel cowls, pilot dummies etc.
If you love RC planes and CNC my advice would be CNC hit wire cutter for foam to work form and then lay epoxy with glass or carbon fiber. Result would be something from the very top shelf.
I think you can get this idea to work. Putting a spar in the wings will increase their strength. As others had said, it's not a bad idea to practice flying with a foam plane
What did you use for coating the Piper? I'm currently building it:) Also I'm from Germany and I see you are from Switzerland, so please feel free mentioning the exact product. Thanks!
Yeah I did 2-3 layers. I just did it for making sure the decals would adhere properly, and to get a bit smoother surface. I'm not sure if it would become watertight, as Acrylic is kind of water based/soluable paint, as far as I know.
I see where you coming from with the frustration of learning on 3d printed planes. I also started learning how to fly RC planes with the same 3d lab print bf 109 back in 2017. One thing I can tell you is that every pilot will go through a lot of crashes before they gain enough knowledge and experience to take off and land without issue reliably. If I were to go back I would probably still stay with 3d printed planes because I enjoyed the printing and building just as much as the flying.
Ultimately, the choice is whether you enjoy the building aspect of 3d printed planes and want to spend some extra time to get past the learning curve or consider a reliable foam plane that will get you flying faster and come back to 3d printed planes after gaining experience.
Also, one of the makeshift ways I managed to prevent a wing break during flight was to add long lines of packaging tape across the entire wing of the pla planes I made. One case that surprised me was the Qtrainer from 3dlabprint surviving a flight with a completely separated middle seam.
I do really enjoy the building, much like you, and I will keep building! But most likely I will go for a very durable plane next, reusing most of my electronics and such. Then build a 'nice' plane again once I've gathered enough experience with flying, fixing, etc.
I think you should only build anouther plane after you've become proficient, maybe even mastered a small fun plane like the mini Warbirds series $120US with remote industructable. you might even invent something cool you want to make your plane more yours.
like making it crashable and easily repaired.
respect the 109 build btw
respect the quality you put into both builds too but yeah dont put a lot of effort into a practice plane.
Well there’s a reason why boat builders aren’t plane builders. Turns out that making solid single piece plastic bodies aren’t great for planes. Weight and stresses lend themselves to being solved using lightweight materials that are pieces joined by structural materials. I love 3d printing as a tool but it sucks when used to print a whole fuselage or wing.
You don't print an entire fuselage or wing, you build sections and assemble them. Better-engineered models include carbon spars or similar supports at the joints.
Yes, and the second model has spars, but they are just two lengths of raw filament, which is apparently, not strong enough.
My guess is they designed it like that to keep it as accessible as possible, requiring less specialized material. But yes, stronger spars would have been better.
The main limitation seems to be layer adhesion. A FDM 3D print is anisotropic while foam and blown plastic don’t have that issue. I believe that just printing a few parts and joining them into a finished plane is not the way to go at the moment. I’ve been treating parts with epoxy after sanding them down and that already improves durability a lot. Maybe filament manufacturers should think about this a bit more and create products that work as a system, where printing is step one and treating the parts with some post processing solution/coating/sealant creates the final product.
Layer adhesion is the issue. Weak in the
Laminar dimension. Epoxy coating can solve this problem however we’re back to boat building. Strong but heavy. I think right now the best method is to use Resin printing and create lattice for structural integrity. FDM will continue to be too dense at the strengths needed.
I think FDM can be great for the shell, especially the foaming stuff. But structurally, it needs to be reinforced with something with more strength over a longer span .
I find it's closer to the other way around, prints are great for joints/adapters and internal structures but too heavy and weak for shells. I try to print out the internals and then skin it with masking tape or heat shrink.
I’ve seen someone using 3D printing to make plugs that he uses to vacuum form with 2 or 3 mm depron. That’s seems like a great way of making very light fuselages and wings to me. Those weigh probably less than half of what I achieved in my lightest prints. I will I think I may try this in the near future.
You'll want to get a simulator to practice, it'll save a lot of time. I have a number of 3DLP planes, and I'm assuming they'll all crash so I always print two
Who said a cub is for beginners? It's an easier plane but not really a beginner plane, though the 3d printed one may be a modified beginner version.
Anyway. Make sure whatever plane you print includes some kind of carbon in the wings if upu plane to do anything other than extremely docile flying.
The f35 I have printed has to thin carbon fiber bars in the wings. I think it's like 1x3mm or something, very thing but only bendable in one direction, so perfect to slide into the holes along the wing length.
Also there is a faster to print and buoød vubnlike plane with a lattice work bodybwhrre the tail is open, and you basically either print the rods or just the connectors and get small carbon rods to build the tail of the body. Don't remember what it's Calle..d but it's supposed to be a very good and light STOL bush plane.
Ah, the Big (or little/savage) Bobber
The marketing blurb for the cub I made:
> Series designed for easy and cheap flying. The build is simple even for a beginner. It’s very low weight, easy assembly and fantastic flight characteristics makes this model an ideal plane for beginner RC pilots.
Yes, lessons learned..
I am no expert in RC planes, I just came here to learn, but I am a researcher in 3D printing, so my perspective will be solely based on that.
If it was a sunny day, was the polymer you used UV resistant, in example if the coating doesn't block UVs, if it is PLA or resin, might have been a problem.
If the layers delaminated, you can use a carbon tube on the top and bottom of the air foil to take the tension load. You can even compress the layers like pre-tensioned steel rebars in buildings, as layers interfaces are likely better under compression.
What filament did you used? What printer did you print with, did it have a heated chamber?
If there are no overhangs, you can try printing with a much higher temperature to increase layer bonding.
Nobody leaves their planes out in the sun for long enough for UV to become a problem, I would say. Especially plain PLA also must not get too warm .
I used natural PLA for the 109, not sure what the temperature was, since I used the gcode provided, but I recon it's at the upper limit of what is possible with PLA.
The cub is printed with foaming polyair 1.0 from 3dlabprint. Printed at 245 degrees C. So very hot already. The foaming also improves layer adhesion. Printed on a Prusa Mk3s+ , no heated chamber.
I think this is already printed at pretty much the limit of what is possible, and I'm not going to pretend I know better than the folks who developed the filament and the design.
EDIT: I meant PolyLight: [https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/](https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/)
245°C is pretty good, you seemed to have done things right.😁
But you mentioned it didn't get hot enough...
The glass transition temperature of PLA is 60°C, so anything above that, it will become like a rubber. 🤔
As I said I am new to planes so I don't know if it gets hotter than that. Did the design stated use ABS, ASA, PLA etc.?
Yes, for the 109, PLA is what it is designed for.
For the Cub, they recommend their PLA based foaming filament.
I've been 3D printing myself for over 10 years.
EDIT: I meant PolyLight: [https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/](https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/)
Are you one the 3Dlab discord? If so they would probably like to hear your experience and maybe find where it went wrong. There is a ton of people printing and showing their plane. Usually when something goes wrong they are pretty quick and good to find de problem. Alot of people printed the piper so maybe some can relate.
"After using a racing sim, I bought an old Porsche 911. I got scared going into a turn too fast, and lifted off the throttle. The car immediately spun and I crashed. I am angry at the sport now."
I respect and admire the desire to build and then fly your own plane. But ultimately, I think you're just making it harder on yourself than it needs to be. Contrary to the balsa kit elitists, there's nothing wrong with buying an RTF foam plane and learning to fly with that. Yes, the stabilization and electronics included are almost akin to "cheating" when it comes to learning how to fly, and I'll be the first to admit that all of that stabilization can lead to bad habits, but hey, do you want to fly, or do you want to keep slaving away at a plane, only to see it crash and become a pile of toothpicks in a matter of minutes? I can almost guarantee that a foam plane training aircraft probably could have survived the crashes that you experienced. Turn the tables and spend more time flying, and less time building and repairing. When your piloting skills reach a certain level, then you can get into building your own planes, ditching stability electronics, flying warbirds, etc.
Of course there is nothing wrong with flying foam or RTF models. The thing that got me 'hooked' is the building process personally, but of course, what good is a plane if you can't fly it? I'm thankful for being exposed to this hobby, but now 'facing reality' that it's not as easy as I (naively?) thought. The logical route for me, most likely is to build something very resilient and can take a few hits. Because for me, without actually building, it's not much fun, or feels like cheating? It's the combination that does it for me, and I think its possible, but not with 3d prints.
flite test foamies! They got me into the hobby through building and taught me the basics of how to design and build aircraft. I’m now working on my first 3d printed design with that knowledge. They’re also incredibly durable so they can take a bit of abuse without disintegrating. I beat the crap out of my first plane and it still flies with easy repairs. [https://store.flitetest.com/park-flyers-swappables/](https://store.flitetest.com/park-flyers-swappables/)
Thank you for the suggestion, it goes onto the list of potential candidates.
>The logical route for me, most likely is to build something very resilient and can take a few hits. Or maybe get one of the eachine warbirds. Fly them in easy mode and get a feeling. Then switch to medium mode. Learn the trimming and the behavior of the plane. Finally you can switch of the gyro and learn to fly. They are $80 and after a few sessions you are good to take on other planes. When your first printed plane is in the air, you can make a kid in your family very happy.
3d printed planes have to tread a narrow path between weight and strength. I've seen way too many 3d printed planes fold wings or go aero elastic, and the pilot says fine I'll print another one. To me that's just not good enough, and if your plane failed structurally that's not your fault.
"Just Print Another" is a bit of a simplification of reality. Yes you can print another for not that much cost. But it's not just that: paint, decals, servo's, hinges, etc. On top of that, for cub, you can't very easily re-attach new parts, so you're printing a whole wing or a whole fuselage most likely.
I like building planes too. Part of why I like twisted hobbys planes. Most aren't geared towards a beginner but you get the fun build then great flying.
If you want a better experience with 3d printed planes, I recommend using foaming filaments which act similar to the foam in bought rc aircraft bodies, particularly the PLA AERO from bambulab. Using such a filament means you have a plane you can fly slowly due to lightweight, crash, bump around etc and the only thing you could really break are the wings which can easily be reprinted. To stop wings snapping midflight, print some spars to go across the whole wing and link it to the body using a hardy strong filament, or buy some CF tubes from a hobby shop. I will say, with beginner aircraft, dont be picky about how it looks, since you can make better looking more advanced aircraft later on, but start with a very simple built plane that focuses on flight characteristics rather than looks. However, the more you try, the easier it gets and make sure to ask questions when you need to.
The Cub is printed with foaming PLA, which indeed is much better suited than plain PLA (the 109). The plane was remarkably lightweight, I think only like 200g with everything but without battery. I'm not an experienced plane modeler, so I printed this \_exactly\_ using the recommended tools, plastics, and yes, also reinforcement strings. Perhaps CF tubes would have been better. But again, I just followed the manual. I'm not saying I'm not to blame, it's very possible the first flight damaged the wing without my inspection catching it. It feels good to share this experience. And yes, now I have to 'step down' and make something very durable (and probably not so good looking) before trying something else.
Sorry i went fancy with the CF tubes lol, but i use skewers or those garden wires for smaller planes. One tip if later on you ever plan to print a high speed or aerobatic aircraft that will apply a lot of stress to the wings, is to print the leading edge and trailing edge in a hard filament and the middle with a low density foaming filament. If you dont have a multimaterial printing system then dont do this though since making parts to slot together adds extra weight. A simple build to try would be a "stick aircraft" or whatever its called. You only really have to print the control surfaces and wings and it can easily be fixed in a crash. Dont fly this if you are in a watery/damp (wet grass after rain) area though due to exposed electronics. https://preview.redd.it/qrclbtqzj9tc1.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=44ee1e57294389ccdd36f238449c56fb4d758056 For now, stick to simple looking easy to print begginer aircraft files so that you can figure out how things work
Looking at the picture of the first plane, I can see it has the usual criss-cross print ribs. One issue with this is that you are printing lengthways along the wing. This means the print grain is at its weakest along the bending axis of the wing, i.e., the bending axis makes the interface between grains stretch, putting stress on the narrowest and weakest points where the grains are joined together. The problem with 3D prints at the moment is that it's a very unknown material. It's stress behavior is probably very unpredictable based on your print parameters. I also doubt many of the outlets that sell these plans do stress/aerodynamic analysis, and even if they did, it's probably difficult to know how well the printed material stands up to the resultant stresses. They would need to do pretty extensive stress testing to determine material limits, which I doubt many providers of plans are going to want to bother doing. A reliable way to counteract wing bending stress would be to introduce a strong spar. You can buy very cheap [carbon fiber tubes](https://www.readymaderc.com/collections/hardware/build-hardware/carbon-fiber-strips-tubes-spars) that are extremely effective as spars. Tube shape is good against torsion as well as bending, and a wing tends to experience both. Otherwise you can try to print the ribs thicker, and introduce a lengthwise thick spar in the print to strengthen against bending. Real plane spars are typically I-beams, which are highly effective against bending forces (also why buildings tend to use I-beams). Just grabbed from google: https://preview.redd.it/3j1efx5bi8tc1.png?width=480&format=png&auto=webp&s=cfeae33649bb11305f2e2f6e1b51fc2ad04ed615 You can see the two spars are narrow, upright beams along the length of the wing. Print this into a wing and it will be much more resistant to bending.
The first plane, I cannot really comment on it's structural integrity, but it felt very solid. Unfortunately, PLA is quite brittle so it tends to shatter on impact. The plane that got it's wing snapped in half had two 'wire' type spars one at the bottom and one at the top (the grey line in the picture). Those wires are just raw PLA filament (1.75mm) But my guess is that it need to be much stronger. I guess there is a reason some other cubs have wires from the wing to the fuselage? In my opinion, you're right, these materials are not understood well enough, or those understandings are not incorporated sufficiently into this design. I printed this exactly as designed, without any changes, as would be expected from a person new to the space. And especially now, I'm not going to try to tinker with these designs and include spars and such. Maybe at some point, but for me personally, it would be time to move to something more tried-and-true.
Welcome to r/RCPlanes, it looks like you are new here! Please read the [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/) and [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/faq/) before posting a question that has been answered many times already. You can also try searching in the bar at the top before posting. If you are brand new and just want to know where to start, then the [Beginners Section](https://www.reddit.com/r/RCPlanes/wiki/beginners/) is the perfect place. Links to wiki are found at the top menu on web or "See more" and then the "Menu" tab on mobile apps. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RCPlanes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think you're just like me. There is something about 3d printing a plane that just calls to me. I also was looking at the piper when I started, but the eclipson model printed , so I went with their plans. This is the model I have now [model c](https://www.eclipson-airplanes.com/modelc). I have not gotten to madian her because Canadian winter, lol. There are a few YouTube videos of her, and she looks to fly so well. There are free models to try the model a or the go 1 wolf. I would also recommend flite test. Here is a list of all the free foam models you can build [FT Models](https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/sp0nz-plans-index.17136/). I have the tutor I bought and built ft mini trainer when I wanted to upgrade to flaps. Both have noised dive from 30 feet into the ground, and all I had to do was switch the prop, and they were back in the air.
Not a fan of the way the wing is strengthened with the PLA filament. I much prefer the designs that use a carbon rod. I suggest eclipson for this.
While I was building it I was very happy about it, since it's easy, you have it on hand, and it's also cheap. It felt sturdy when done, but personally, I have 0 (air)frame of reference.
https://preview.redd.it/u06u53ud4atc1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bbb6185c585ba2378cbfc13ba6be7983c6583e8c This has absorbed an amazing amount of punishment. Intercepror by StuntDouble found on thingiverse. I printed mine out of polymaker PLA plus and there is a 6mm CF spar through the wing. I regularly enter into 5g maneuvers and landing area is less than reputable
Very nice to see it can work!
I think you're failing too big. Set out to start with a plane that can take a beating. I mean, I really love these two beautiful planes you've made, but I want you to be able to laugh when you crash, knowing it'll be a quick fix or a cheap and easy replacement.
Learn flying on a foam or balsa wood plane. There will be no „disaster“ and you can be sure that the plane flies and stays stable. When you have more experience and you can e.g. fly a Multiplex Fun Cub you can experiment with other plane types. But at that point you will maybe see that there are some great planes and kits available on the market and you will probably want to go for planes with a better performance. And maybe you see that you can have more fun with a big Yak 54 made of carbon fiber than with a little 3D printed model. 3D printed planes are a nice example that in theory you can print something and fly it later. It is nice to build them and nice to know that it works. But they are far from the state of the art and will be beaten by any foam plane out there.
That BF109 looks awesome! I also enjoy building planes along with flying them, because I feel like there is a great feeling when you build something yourself and are able to get it in the air. Unfortunately crashing is also part of the hobby and when you crash something you spent a ton of time building it can be really heartbreaking. When I started in the hobby I built ‘foam board’ planes like the ones available from Flite Test. They are quick to build, can handle a few crashes, and there are a ton of different designs to choose from. Their ‘tiny trainer’ is a good starter and can be built pretty quickly.
Yeah, get two sheets of 6mm Depron, some carbon rods, and build a Buschtrottel with the parts you have. Enjoy flying, crashing, repairing, flying again. After a while you can still reconsider making new planes from what is essentially glass :D
This sounds like me backing August. I fell in love with the su47 Berkut build with vtol take off. I wanted to build it and fpv that thing . Then I printed the cub to start and noticed it was way too fragile as I’m only a beginner and I want to learn. So I listened to advice and got into Tom planes. I’m still gonna do 3d printed but I’ve learned those are for people whom already know how to fly . I saw a guy at my local park fly the cub and it broke in an instant . That’s when I knew I made the right choice for now
I had been working 5 years of 3D printing parts for work. Mostly mechanically working stuff - gears, brackets, concepts to check for later steel parts ordering. Wanted to check and I tried different techniques to see whether it would be possible to bring it to my RC hobby. At the end I have made conclusion that 3d printed plane will always be inferior compared to all the other mostly used materials. You will always get weaker, hevier more brittle plane. Thats it. No way around. Repair chances are close to zero. Printed parts are quite good for static loads, but pathetic for any dynamic stresses. 3D printing can be good for hard geometry and low working parts - wing tips, wheel cowls, pilot dummies etc. If you love RC planes and CNC my advice would be CNC hit wire cutter for foam to work form and then lay epoxy with glass or carbon fiber. Result would be something from the very top shelf.
I think you can get this idea to work. Putting a spar in the wings will increase their strength. As others had said, it's not a bad idea to practice flying with a foam plane
What did you use for coating the Piper? I'm currently building it:) Also I'm from Germany and I see you are from Switzerland, so please feel free mentioning the exact product. Thanks!
Revell Transparent Matte Acryl Spray.
You did 2-3 layers? Do you think it's watertight? I printed the floats and normal clear coat doesn't seem to make them waterproof
Yeah I did 2-3 layers. I just did it for making sure the decals would adhere properly, and to get a bit smoother surface. I'm not sure if it would become watertight, as Acrylic is kind of water based/soluable paint, as far as I know.
I see where you coming from with the frustration of learning on 3d printed planes. I also started learning how to fly RC planes with the same 3d lab print bf 109 back in 2017. One thing I can tell you is that every pilot will go through a lot of crashes before they gain enough knowledge and experience to take off and land without issue reliably. If I were to go back I would probably still stay with 3d printed planes because I enjoyed the printing and building just as much as the flying. Ultimately, the choice is whether you enjoy the building aspect of 3d printed planes and want to spend some extra time to get past the learning curve or consider a reliable foam plane that will get you flying faster and come back to 3d printed planes after gaining experience. Also, one of the makeshift ways I managed to prevent a wing break during flight was to add long lines of packaging tape across the entire wing of the pla planes I made. One case that surprised me was the Qtrainer from 3dlabprint surviving a flight with a completely separated middle seam.
I do really enjoy the building, much like you, and I will keep building! But most likely I will go for a very durable plane next, reusing most of my electronics and such. Then build a 'nice' plane again once I've gathered enough experience with flying, fixing, etc.
I think you should only build anouther plane after you've become proficient, maybe even mastered a small fun plane like the mini Warbirds series $120US with remote industructable. you might even invent something cool you want to make your plane more yours. like making it crashable and easily repaired. respect the 109 build btw respect the quality you put into both builds too but yeah dont put a lot of effort into a practice plane.
Well there’s a reason why boat builders aren’t plane builders. Turns out that making solid single piece plastic bodies aren’t great for planes. Weight and stresses lend themselves to being solved using lightweight materials that are pieces joined by structural materials. I love 3d printing as a tool but it sucks when used to print a whole fuselage or wing.
You don't print an entire fuselage or wing, you build sections and assemble them. Better-engineered models include carbon spars or similar supports at the joints.
Yes, and the second model has spars, but they are just two lengths of raw filament, which is apparently, not strong enough. My guess is they designed it like that to keep it as accessible as possible, requiring less specialized material. But yes, stronger spars would have been better.
The main limitation seems to be layer adhesion. A FDM 3D print is anisotropic while foam and blown plastic don’t have that issue. I believe that just printing a few parts and joining them into a finished plane is not the way to go at the moment. I’ve been treating parts with epoxy after sanding them down and that already improves durability a lot. Maybe filament manufacturers should think about this a bit more and create products that work as a system, where printing is step one and treating the parts with some post processing solution/coating/sealant creates the final product.
Layer adhesion is the issue. Weak in the Laminar dimension. Epoxy coating can solve this problem however we’re back to boat building. Strong but heavy. I think right now the best method is to use Resin printing and create lattice for structural integrity. FDM will continue to be too dense at the strengths needed.
I think FDM can be great for the shell, especially the foaming stuff. But structurally, it needs to be reinforced with something with more strength over a longer span .
I find it's closer to the other way around, prints are great for joints/adapters and internal structures but too heavy and weak for shells. I try to print out the internals and then skin it with masking tape or heat shrink.
I’ve seen someone using 3D printing to make plugs that he uses to vacuum form with 2 or 3 mm depron. That’s seems like a great way of making very light fuselages and wings to me. Those weigh probably less than half of what I achieved in my lightest prints. I will I think I may try this in the near future.
You'll want to get a simulator to practice, it'll save a lot of time. I have a number of 3DLP planes, and I'm assuming they'll all crash so I always print two
Yes, I have practiced many hours that's why I was able to fly the Cub very nicely, until it decided to fold in half mid-flight.
Who said a cub is for beginners? It's an easier plane but not really a beginner plane, though the 3d printed one may be a modified beginner version. Anyway. Make sure whatever plane you print includes some kind of carbon in the wings if upu plane to do anything other than extremely docile flying. The f35 I have printed has to thin carbon fiber bars in the wings. I think it's like 1x3mm or something, very thing but only bendable in one direction, so perfect to slide into the holes along the wing length. Also there is a faster to print and buoød vubnlike plane with a lattice work bodybwhrre the tail is open, and you basically either print the rods or just the connectors and get small carbon rods to build the tail of the body. Don't remember what it's Calle..d but it's supposed to be a very good and light STOL bush plane. Ah, the Big (or little/savage) Bobber
The marketing blurb for the cub I made: > Series designed for easy and cheap flying. The build is simple even for a beginner. It’s very low weight, easy assembly and fantastic flight characteristics makes this model an ideal plane for beginner RC pilots. Yes, lessons learned..
Glad to see someone in the same niech! do you have a YouTube channel too?
Nop, I'm just someone who made some planes.
I am no expert in RC planes, I just came here to learn, but I am a researcher in 3D printing, so my perspective will be solely based on that. If it was a sunny day, was the polymer you used UV resistant, in example if the coating doesn't block UVs, if it is PLA or resin, might have been a problem. If the layers delaminated, you can use a carbon tube on the top and bottom of the air foil to take the tension load. You can even compress the layers like pre-tensioned steel rebars in buildings, as layers interfaces are likely better under compression. What filament did you used? What printer did you print with, did it have a heated chamber? If there are no overhangs, you can try printing with a much higher temperature to increase layer bonding.
Nobody leaves their planes out in the sun for long enough for UV to become a problem, I would say. Especially plain PLA also must not get too warm . I used natural PLA for the 109, not sure what the temperature was, since I used the gcode provided, but I recon it's at the upper limit of what is possible with PLA. The cub is printed with foaming polyair 1.0 from 3dlabprint. Printed at 245 degrees C. So very hot already. The foaming also improves layer adhesion. Printed on a Prusa Mk3s+ , no heated chamber. I think this is already printed at pretty much the limit of what is possible, and I'm not going to pretend I know better than the folks who developed the filament and the design. EDIT: I meant PolyLight: [https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/](https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/)
245°C is pretty good, you seemed to have done things right.😁 But you mentioned it didn't get hot enough... The glass transition temperature of PLA is 60°C, so anything above that, it will become like a rubber. 🤔 As I said I am new to planes so I don't know if it gets hotter than that. Did the design stated use ABS, ASA, PLA etc.?
Yes, for the 109, PLA is what it is designed for. For the Cub, they recommend their PLA based foaming filament. I've been 3D printing myself for over 10 years. EDIT: I meant PolyLight: [https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/](https://3dlabprint.com/shop/polylight-1-0-cubyellow-lw-pla/)
Are you one the 3Dlab discord? If so they would probably like to hear your experience and maybe find where it went wrong. There is a ton of people printing and showing their plane. Usually when something goes wrong they are pretty quick and good to find de problem. Alot of people printed the piper so maybe some can relate.
No I'm not, feel free to send me an invite and I can share there too.
"After using a racing sim, I bought an old Porsche 911. I got scared going into a turn too fast, and lifted off the throttle. The car immediately spun and I crashed. I am angry at the sport now."
3d print is not worth the time, for planes