mmattockx

Are there any diferences between the original RCM Advanced Trainer:

http://www.rcmmagazine.com/store/sto...PJNMd0Rgw34430

And the updated one:

http://www.rcmmagazine.com/store/sto...PJNMd0Rgw6H4w4

I want to build one and use a ST45 for power, is that enough? Is there a 40 sized variant I couldn't find on the RCM listings? Or should I simply clip one rib bay off each end to make it 45 worthy?

Also, how did the Great Plane Trainer 40 and 60 designs vary from the original Joe Bridi design? Does anybody have a copy of the GP Trainer 40 plans they are willing to copy or scan and email? PM me with details if you want to keep it quiet.


Mark

Ram-bro

My Feedback: (101)

aLL i CAN TEL YOU ABOUT THIS PLANE IS THAT IT IS A GREAT PLAN. wITH ITS FULLY SYMMETRIAL AIRFOIL. Sorry about the caps.I have flown both the forty size and the 60 size versions. Of course the 60 size flies better. I would recommend going with the size asked for. Knocking a wing rib off I believe wont help. were talking weight and drag here. You would have to make up the weight of a 60 as comared to a 40 and therefore the plane beomes heavier....which isnt always bad but can make it more unforgiven. SO to recap, if the wing is still fully symmetrical, I would call it the same plan. Go with the 60 size motor or get the 40 size plans and start from scratch there. Hopefully this helps.

Jim_Purcha

My Feedback: (8)

Hi Mark, I have a copy of the Avanced Trainer article. The plane design was updated for a bolt on wing section and newer rc equipment. I have a Kraft Kit 40 Seasons 40 designed by Joe Bridi which is pretty close to this design. I have a super tigre 40 in it for power. I haven't flown it yet, but it's similar in size to the Hobbico Avistar in which I flown.

Jim

Broken Wings

My Feedback: (20)

Mark, I've got both plans and the MKII is set-up with bolt-on wing and a couple extra ply spars (one main and a thin trailing edge spar) The plans show a K&B .61, We used to use HB .61 PDP's and they would really haul the mail. You're ST45 would fly it no problem.

The Bridi designs used a full length elevator while the GP version was re-designed with a split-elevator and full length rudder. Some say the latter worked better. I always used the full length "Bridi" elevator.

I've got the plans in Tif and PDF as well as the construction article. I had the guy at work that runs the wire EDM machine to cut out stainless steel templates for all the ribs/bulk-heads,etc. It builds pretty quick and is a solid airframe that will last many years.

Go for it! you'll like it.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_69..._1/key_/tm.htm

mmattockx

Has anyone built one of these as a taildragger? I much prefer that to a trike arrangement and I don't see why not, but I am just wondering if there is a reason not to?

Edit - I see the plans show a fair amount of dihedral. I have found almost every high wing plane flies better with a flat wing, is there any reason not to build it flat?


Mark

abufletcher

The RCM Trainer was my first model. While I was being trained (on a buddy box) it had the trike gear. But as soon as I solo'ed, I got rid of that nasty nose gear than needed to be adjusted almost every time I flew. It took me about two hours to do a "guerilla retrofit" of a tail wheel and main gear. Do it, you'll love it.