Hey,

Check out this guy, I thought trainers were slow, boring, very stable aircraft ONLY for beginners....definitely proven wrong with this video clip!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI144_GebAM

check it out, it's awesome!

Cheers

Yeah, it's amazing what you can do when you speed up the playback speed of video.

Ken

Nobody that's ever trained another flyer is surprised that a trainer can fly like this. I started flying my trainer like that my first summer of flying. Just a matter of proper instruction.

But you're right, those that think trainers are boring aren't taking advantage of the full range of capabilities.

Brad

Well I was totally surprised, because that thing was really getting thrown hard into steep turns, loops, rolls and high G's. I was impressed to say the least that a trainer can perform like that!

I was impressed by the plane more then the piloit trainers werent really engernnered for the high g i dont know how many more times before the wings lets go, but still impressife

No doubt parts of that video have been sped up.

sped up or not, that thing is still getting thrown around!

Just a question, about how much G forces would the aerobatic and jet planes pull? Is there like a G counter or something like that which people can get to fit to their planes? I think it would be interesting to know how many G's they pull, because when you watch the jets, they turn 90 degrees and just pull right back on the stick and they have an incredibly tight turning circle!

We took an old alpha 40 and made a rudder, Elve airlerons twice the size of the factory ones maxed out the throws and beat it like step child it was blast
never even a hint that the wings couldn't handle it I think trainers are built better then most 3d planes I've seen more 3d wings fold the I've ever seen on trainers
even ones pancaked in so hard it rips the gear clean off

Dale the trainer in the video is a flat bottom wing, some trainers come with a semi symetrical wing giving it even more aerobatic capabilities than the one in the video. I too thought the trainer was slow and boring when I was training on my sig senior with a .46
this is an 81 inch wingspan trainer that weighs alot, but I was still able to do loops rolls and inverted flight. I built a PT40 as a second
plane and reduced the dihederal to 2" increased the control throws and put a .40 on it. it was a night and day difference the plane is much faster with good vertical pull, Not unlimited but reasonable. I love to put my trainer in a full throttle inverted 60 degree dive and pull it into an outside loop, I have done this many times and to my suprise the wings didn't fold.

Actually that is a great video to show beginners that although it is a basic trainer once you learn to fly, the plane can be used to train you to do basic aerobatics.

Here is my world model skyraider doing full throtle snaps
this one & the one before it (retired) have the best hardwood spar that WM could find
at the end i thumb it into the pickle weed no damage was done.



Click here to watch video-74-62

I agree, that the amount of weight and G forces that the wing of a trainer can take is amazing! Trainers are very often set up with video systems, bomb drops, cameras, skis, floats, you name it, and wing reenforcement is usually not needed. These things can really take a beating! I have an LT-40 that weighs 10 lbs. with the floats installed and the wing hasn't failed me yet!

Trainers are awesome!

G'day Kendall
You really need to go to a flying field & have a look, your mind will boggle.
If you think that is good, wait until you see a good pilot, flying a trainer. or a large edge or Yak, & so on.

That was a rather boring video...Better luck next time. Once some of you guys get some flying years under your belts, you'll agree.

I think I saw a spin in there while the cameraman was having his sezure. Might have been a nose-down roll, though. Other than that, Zzzzzzzzzz. Anything with ailerons should do what he did, and more. My RCM 40 Trainer with a .46 would fly inverted and do outside loops. We had to do split esses and full Immelman's before we earned our "wings" at my first club in flight school.

Maybe 3Gs in some of the "quick" maneuvers on that video. By comparison, a snap roll in a sporty model pulls about 10G on the wing roots. One roll in three seconds is lazy. Three rolls a second in something like a .40 Dazzler would black-out a human pilot.

You should watch a Quickie-500 do 10 foot loops about one a second.

Hi Charlie P.
You mentioned that a snap roll on a sporty model pulls about 10Gs. Is that a guess on your part or is that a good figure? I insist that all of my planes do snap rolls, and I reinforce them accordingly. Frequently the snap rolls are very violent. I am only guessing on what reinforcement is needed. I do not recall ever having a failure from a violent snap roll. I have wondered what kinds of stresses are involved in my snap rolls. Without some strain guages here and there the only way to know if a wing is strong enough is to have one snap off. I recently saw an ARF J3-Cub break a wing in a snap roll. I have a 72 inch wing span SPAD J3-Cub with a .46OS engine, that I designed, built and snap roll. I have not made violent snaps with it yet. I need to work up my nerve. I'm still a little afraid of it since I have had 3-4 bad crashes with it. It will soon do a violent snap roll or come down in pieces. I would appreciate learning anything else technical from you on stresses during manuevers. Does the average full speed loop pull more than 10Gs? Thanks for your help.

Not the average. The G load can be lower if you have enough power to make the loop bigger.

Consider the Blue Angels F-18's with all their power. They have the option of pulling back slightly on the stick and using the power to make a huge low-G loop over a mile high or they can pull on the stick as hard as they can and let the onboard computers limit the perforamce to the max programmed into it and do a tight loop. That max would be what the engineers feel the plane and pilot can withstand without one of them suffering catastrophic structural failure. That amount changes at different speeds. Back in WW-II it wan't all that uncommon for a pilot to bring a plane back bent up so bad that it had to be scrapped due to structural overloads. My father, who flew P-38's out of England, destroyed 3 planes that way. But he evaded the Germans trying to kill him. He couldn't kill them because he was flying a recon bird - no guns.

The 10G figure is one I found on a site describing Aresti maneuvers for full-size aircraft. It may even have to do with the outward pull from the centripital forces on the wings(?)

http://www.bruceair.com/Aerobatic_Intro.htm

Here's the definitive FAA report on g-force effects to the human body and what maneuvers cause how many.

http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/m...ia/AM72-28.pdf

The FAA report lists 3 G's for a 2.9 second snap roll. In a model the snap roll takes less than a second, but I haven't found my "10G" source yet so I can't confirm that.

Interesting to note that a loop itself is a 1G maneuver. Entering and exiting the loop are where the G's are experienced.

http://www.scootworks.com/rdrc/aerobatics/snap.html

Found it!

When you think about it - you're doing an instant spin along the direction of travel. Normally a spin is entered by slowing the plane and stalling it deliberately. Here, you're whipping it around while at speed.

That's why you see those cool videos on the Crash forum of the wing tubes ripped out of sheeted foam wings on the 33% planes. Just 'cause it can do it don't mean it can do it without risk.

And just because you can do it once doesn't mean you can continue to do it forever. Remember, every time you do a high stress maneuver you are stressing the airframe. Do it enough and the airframe will give eventually.

Ken

First they bend, then they crack and then they flutter back to earth.[:@]

Trainers can be very acrobatic, but they need to be setup for it. So the first thing to do is move the balance point back about 1/4" at a time. As you do this, the airplane will become much more sensitive to elevator, as well as the rudder. At the same time, you want to crank up the throw on both the rudder and ailerons. More power also helps, but often trainers can get better performance with just a propeller change. Usually increasing the diameter and lowering the pitch, or just lowering the pitch on the same diameter helps. Experiment with a half dozen sizes and pick the one that works best.

In my opinion, the LT-40 is one of the best trainers. Set-up for acro, it will do inside and outside loops, spins, snap-rolls, and inverted flying until the tank runs dry. Everything else is just a combination of these basic elements.

I have found the best trainer to buy is the phoenix classic trainer, with a 46ax, currently im able to hover, flat spin, and do full throttle blenders with it, and its still alive, apart from last week when the nose dropped out of a hover and didnt have enough airspeed to pull up before terra firma... only broke part of the firewall so easy repair, but these trainer can take a beating, another member of our club stands the model on its tail, (elevator and rudder) balancing with nose pointed vertical, and takes off verticle into a torque roll, even the best pilots in our club now are buying these to just use as a muck around plane, you would see probably 5-10 each time you go to the field on a weekend now :P

You don't mean [link=http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXEDN6&P=7]this one[/link] do you?

Charlie P.
Thanks for the information.

Some of the debris may flutter back to Earth, but the part with the engine always comes back like a missile, then you Dig it out of the Earth!