Blogs

3D Robotics

Skywalker: foam or fiberglass?

Posted by Chris Anderson on January 31, 2011 at 10:00pm

3689387706?profile=originalI've now had a chance to compare the original foam Skywalker ($83) with the new HobbyKing fiberglass Skywalker clone ($97).  They are both magificent birds, and it's just incredible how China can produce high-quality fiberglass and ply planes for about the same price as foam these days. 

 

The two have exactly the same dimensions and are otherwise essentially identical in overall shape and size. Although I've only flown the foam one, if the fiberglass and ply one flies the same, you should expect it to be equally smooth and stable in the air, able to handle wind well and carry a huge payload. They're both excellent UAV/FPV airframes and can stay in the air for 40 minutes or more with big enough batteries.

 

Choosing between them is really a matter of whether you prefer the somewhat more ding-resistant (but harder to repair) fiberglass and ply or whether you prefer foam for its easy-to-hack nature and crash-handling. Normally the choice between fiberglass-and-ply vs. foam would also take into consideration the interior room (fiberglass has much thinner walls so more room inside) but in the case of these two birds, they both have so much room that it's not an issue. You can pack all your electronics, 8,000mah of batteries and your lunch in both, with loads of space to spare.

 

In the end, I slightly prefer the foam version for a few reasons:

  • Wing comes apart into two pieces for easy transport (the fiberglass version has a single-piece wing)
  • Easier to build and modify, as is usually the case for foam. Between an exacto knife and Gorilla Glue, there's not much I can't do with a foam plane.
  • Better crash resistance? The foam one's wing attaches with a big bungee cord, while the fiberglass one bolts on, which feels like a likely point of crash failure to me.
  • It's so plain-looking I won't mind dinging it up!

That said, if you care about looks, don't mind the longer build time, and don't crash your planes as much as I do, I think you'd be very happy with the HobbyKing fiberglass version. It really is beautifully made.

 

Here's some shots of the nose and underwing space:

 

3689387785?profile=original3689387731?profile=original

 

E-mail me when people leave their comments –
Follow

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Comments

  • T3
    Rory Paul February 2, 2011 at 5:37am
    Just ordered one from HobbyKing. I have enough spare parts to make it fly. I think I will put an AttoPilot in it...oh and paint it orange.. ; )
  • Moderator
    Brian February 1, 2011 at 9:16pm

    With the right spar and covering, couldn't you use the foam wing on the fg body? You'd get the bennys of both.

  • DaveyWaveyBunsenBurner February 1, 2011 at 7:37pm
    Foam skywalker = foam wing
    Fiberglass = built up sheeted wood wing covered with iron on material.
  • sid February 1, 2011 at 7:33pm

    how about the wing in fiberglass model ? Is it a buitup hollow wing or fiberglass skinned one over the foam  ?

  • DaveyWaveyBunsenBurner February 1, 2011 at 6:28pm
    Built up and sheeted balsa.

    Regards

    D
  • Greg Fletcher February 1, 2011 at 5:55pm

    Thanks, Chris

    I should of just ask before. Is the wing foam core or built up and sheeted balsa?

  • 3D Robotics
    Chris Anderson February 1, 2011 at 4:09pm
    Greg, it's shipped in three pieces, but there is no carbon fiber spar to connect them. Just little six-inch plywood spars that have to be epoxied in. It would require a significant modification to make it detachable--you'd need to create proper rod channels and rods, and some sort of latching apparatus. It would require stripping the wing, rebuilding it and recovering it, I think.
  • Greg Fletcher February 1, 2011 at 2:19pm
    Could the fiberglass wing be modified into a 3 piece wing. Is it shipped in 3 sections or all ready together?
  • 3D Robotics
    Chris Anderson February 1, 2011 at 9:13am
    Mauro: I didn't put a motor and electronics on the fiberglass one, so I can't compare them directly, but they feel like the weigh about the same. The fiberglass one certainly isn't heavier.
  • 3D Robotics
    Chris Anderson February 1, 2011 at 9:12am
    brakar: the foam Skywalker flies better than the EasyStar, in the sense that it's larger, heavier and less affected by wind. It pretty much just goes where you point it and travels in a reassuringly straight line. None of problems with heading into the wind that you see with the EZ, and when it's trimmed right, it doesn't "propoise" and stall, the way the EZ does in windy condition.  That said, I'd still recommend the EZ for beginners because it can be flown in a smaller area and is probably more crash-resistant.
This reply was deleted.