RSM P40

[James Holford]

Probably was a silly move but just ordered a RSM P40. It's probably way too advanced for me.at the moment but I like to plan ahead.

 What's yall input on this kit. It came with 8   1/2" blocks which I am assuming is for the forward trailing edge tips.

I hear an OS.40 is ideal for it...


Thoughts cares or concerns?

I won't be starting.to build this bird for a good while as I would like to give it a great finish and I need some more kits under my.belt belt I tackle such a feat.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[tom brightbill]

James, is your P40 the Eric Rule designed profile version, or the Pat Johnson full fuselage version?

[James Holford]

James, is your P40 the Eric Rule designed profile version, or the Pat Johnson full fuselage version?

Profile

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[tom brightbill]

Hmm, I just looked in one of those kits, made in 2012, and the only 1/2" balsa wood is one 1/2 x 1/2 balsa for the leading edge (one piece, full length of the box),  and another 18" piece that I am assuming is for extending the main LE piece in order to build the longer wingspan version as noted on the plans. Other than that the only other wood that is 1/2" are the maple motor mounts (1/2 x 3/8).  I suggest  contacting Eric directly. He's a good guy and will make sure that you have what you need.

[James Holford]

Oh wait.... I just realized.those blocks I mentioned are for the Shark 402 kit I got today lol.

 Wow massive brain fart there lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[Randy Cuberly]

Hi James,
I'm not completely familiar with that kit because I've never built one but I am somewhat familiar with the airplane as I've flow a couple of different ones built by other people.  Both flew fairly well even though one was not in a good state of trim.  Actually the other one, I believe was built by Eric the proprietor of RSM and the designer of the airplane.  I flew a complete pattern with it and it showed no bad habits and was easy to fly.  I'm not sure I would call it a beginners airplane because it was very responsive and flew like a full stunt plane would be expected to do!  I say this of course because I don't know your skill level but if you are a beginner you might be better served by a simpler profile for a trainer, such as a Ringmaster or something of that ilk, at first!

RSM kits are very good and well designed with wood that is selected for the job it has to do.   Eric is a real gentleman and a good modeler himself, and stands behind his products.   He's very easy to deal with and a good source of information about everything he sells.

I hope this helps a little.

Randy Cuberly

[James Holford]

Thanks Randy.

 I am definitely a beginner but do own a.couple Ringmaster and several other kits. I'm looking at holding onto the P40 until I feel.confident enough to be able to fly it without worry.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[Mike Griffin]

James if you look on RSM's webpage under the CL Profile kits, the red and black electric P40 profile is mine.  Eric had me do the test build on the kit when he first came out with it and it is a great flying model.  I did not build a glow version of it but there is no reason it will not fly as good as my electric when you get it trimmed out.  It is basically the same kit with the modifications for the electric power system.  Mine is a pure joy to fly and it will fly the pattern as any full bodied stunt plane will.  I have high praise for the model.

Mike

[James Holford]

James if you look on RSM's webpage under the CL Profile kits, the red and black electric P40 profile is mine.  Eric had me do the test build on the kit when he first came out with it and it is a great flying model.  I did not build a glow version of it but there is no reason it will not fly as good as my electric when you get it trimmed out.  It is basically the same kit with the modifications for the electric power system.  Mine is a pure joy to fly and it will fly the pattern as any full bodied stunt plane will.  I have high praise for the model.

Mike

That's what I like to hear

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[Perry Rose]

I have Brodak's P-40B kit built and the ARF electric. Both are exceptional flyers. I fly at South Park in Denham Springs almost every morning.

[john e. holliday]

James, you say you are a beginner.  In my years of model planes and competition I have seen many levels of beginners.  One in particular had never built a CL plane until after he came to the circle one day to see what was making the sound as the airplane flew.  He asked a few questions and watched as the different type planes flew.  Would see him at the circle when we were flying.   About a couple of months he shows up with a plane that he built from one of the SIG kits.   He followed the instructions in the kit and asked questions of our resident guru about finish.  The plane was gorgeous and light as well as straight.   The plane was test flown by one of our better known pilots and given an A+.  He was put on the trainer for a few flights until he didn't get dizzy.   In the mean time he built a profile and modified it for up right engine mount.   Found out later he was a retired machinest.   

But like starting out in any adventure it takes patience and asking questions like you are doing  to get accomplished what a person wants to do.   Myself after all these years I still do do good finishes as get impatient and want to get flying.   Anyway to sum up,  build a plane to learn the ropes with and maybe start the winner you want to build.   A profile like the Primary Force,  Skyray or any profile with the engine you want to use will get you there. 
Brodak Mfg., RSM Dist and SIG have profiles to fit engine you plan on using.   For .25 size you can't beat the LA .25 and 40 size the LA 46.   Learn how to run them and set them up for your area.  What works here in Kansas sometimes doesn't work on either coast.   That is where experience comes into play once you are convinced this is the pastime for you. 

By the way if you decide to go electric there a few people on here that know how their set ups work.  Have to go to electric section and read.   

[James Holford]

Building a Twister. Akromaster. JR Lightning Streak at the moment. Have 1 Ringmaster ready to fly. Have another Ringmaster ARF in the works.

I just need to get out and start flying that Ringmaster graciously donated to me by Big Ron. Told me to fly the hell out of it. Gona have fun with it

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[john e. holliday]

Well better get to flying while the weather is nice.   I would be flying now but our circle is such a mess.  Last night I almost caught as I was leaving the field.  He was back in the park on the just harvested crop field driving all over the place.  I parked across the road and called the police.   Of course they were all busy.  Any way if I'm lucky the brainless turd forgot there is a lake along the railroad tracks and he bury it up to the axles.   I know that once you get a 4 wheeler stuck you need a tow vehicle to get unstuck or a winch.   Closest trees are on the other side of the tracks a ways.  I waited about a 1/2 hour for him to reappear before I left.  Do have a description of the vehicle,  a Hummer light color paint and covered with lights like a party vehicle.

[James Holford]

Damn John  that's no good..  luckily I have a ballpark couple miles from my house where another local flies but hardly ever have the same time off to fly. Gona build a stooge so I can go solo whenever. Just sticking til the basics til the nerves go away lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[FLOYD CARTER]

I have two P-51 stunters built from the RSM kit.  Not difficult to build.  The 1/4" blocks are intended to be glued together for things like wingtips, flap fillets, etc.  This is less expensive than providing large blocks in the kit.

Although fairly easy to fly, it is an advanced stunter.  Not recommended unless you are confident in your ability to keep from crashing.  OK to build, but practice on something else first.

The fine print on the plan shows wing dihedral.  It's easy to miss this.  The plane flies much better with wing dihedral, due to the low wing position.

Floyd

[Larry Wilks]

Eric at RSM kits 2 different P-40 Profile Airplanes.
P-40 Tiger for Glow Engines, Wing span 46", Length 36", Area 490 sq. in.
P-40 for Electric Power, Wing Span 52", Length 39", Area 624 sq. in.

The Best Flying, Easiest to Trim, Beginner Plane (No FLaps), is the RSM "Mark One"
It has taken me from Beginner into Intermediate flying with a Fox .35.
I have outscored flapped models and electric models.
The Mark One has a thick airfoil, is difficult to stall, very forgiving, corners very smooth.

The kit is very easy to build, no more difficult than the Shark 402 kit you have.
It also builds very light.
I think this would fly with an FP40 glow engine, however I would check with Eric Rule on that.

Hope some of this helps.
Larry

[James Holford]

Its the P40 Tiger.

 This kit wont be touched for a long while til I get a few more kits built under me. Definately wont fly it til Im fully confident in my ability to handle the plane without much worry.

Thankfully I have a Sig Twister and a Ringmaster to learn on

[Leester]

James, I've built several of those P-40 profiles from Eric. They are very nice kits and are not to difficult to build. I have the old building guides that use to come with them ( if they don't come with them now) and built mine with the 52" wing option ( just rib spacing was farther apart )  I had a Tower 40 and then a Brodak 40 in the ones I built. They flew better than I could pilot !! They are sweet planes !!  see if this brings it up www.stunthanger.com/smf/open-forum/rsm-profile-p-40-2/

[tom creasey]

I have two P-51 stunters built from the RSM kit.  Not difficult to build.  The 1/4" blocks are intended to be glued together for things like wingtips, flap fillets, etc.  This is less expensive than providing large blocks in the kit.

Although fairly easy to fly, it is an advanced stunter.  Not recommended unless you are confident in your ability to keep from crashing.  OK to build, but practice on something else first.

The fine print on the plan shows wing dihedral.  It's easy to miss this.  The plane flies much better with wing dihedral, due to the low wing position.

Floyd

What degree did you do your Dihedral.....I am building my first one and I haven't started yet, after Christmas I will start.....mean time I will get the plans out and read and figure out the degrees and compare. I am very busy, so I am not on here much right now.....You have any other tricks and hints give me a jingle....I thank you

[FLOYD CARTER]

Tom.  The plans indicate propping up each tip by XX inches.  You don't have to use trig to figure it out.

Floyd

[tom creasey]

Just got off the phone with RSM and talked to the designer Eric Rule and said this kit we have he moved the wing up to mid-wing on the fuselage which eliminates putting dihedral......barnstromer type airfoil requires the wing to be straight and true. Floyd Carter yo have a different kit than ours

[James Holford]

Can someone also tell or show me what the Jig with this kit is suppose to look like? It appears mine didn't come with one..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[Leester]

I don't believe the kit comes with a jig. The ribs are laser cut for 5/32 " rods (I think it's 5/32") The old Adjusto-Jig is what I used as there rod size is the correct one. I believe the instructions called for blocks of wood of equal size put under the leading and trailing edge of the wing between the ribs. Maybe 5 or six on each side and individual blocks for the leading edge with individual blocks for the traing edges pinned to you plans and building board. You could build a jig for the rods similiar to mine.

[James Holford]

I do need to get a jig for all around builds.  I only asked about this one because the box says  Custom Wing Jig included... I looked in he box and was like....Oh Well lol

[Leester]

OK, call Eric at RSM and ask him. They must have changed over the years. He'll be happy to help you out.

[eric rule]

The RSM Distribution web site shows two P40 profile kits. What can I say, I love the look of the P40!

The first profile kit was designed in 1990. At the time I was driving a Le Baron convertible. The back seat of that car was only 47" wide so that left me with a 46" wing span. I wanted to have somewhere around 500 sq. in. of wing area so had to go with a "barn door" wing instead of a dual taper in order to get the area required. The airfoil I chose was the one Tom Warden had in his Crusader. I went with the airfoil because that model continued to glide when the engine shut down plus it flew great.

If you ever observed at a profile from the outside of the circle you too saw the stab tilted. I concluded that the circular pattern exerted a of stresses causing the  fuselage to twist behind the wing. Since built up models did not do this it explained why built ups models flew better than profiles. I thought that if I could stiffen the fuselage I could reduce or eliminate the twisting. That is how the laminated fuselage came about. It worked so well on the P40 Warhawk that I have used this idea on every profile RSM kits.

The combination of the large efficient wing with the laminated fuselage made the 1990 P40 a good flyer with a Fox .35. I used it in numerous contests in Intermediate and my early years in Advanced.

Around 2014 I decided to revisit the P40. I had sold the Le Baron years before and now had a large enough car to allow me to transport a model that incorporated many of the design concepts I had wanted to put into the 1990 model. I used the same Warden airfoil and laminated fuselage because it worked so well. The wing became the dual taper I had wanted to use and grew to 629 sq. in with a larger span. Landing gear went into the wing.

Since I was heavily into laser cutting I decided to make the wing my new "MIT" construction (you have to ask Larry Renger why I call this construction technique the "MIT Wing"- LOL) which incorporates small notches in the ribs at the leading and trailing edges. These notches slide into laser cut slots in the leading and trailing edges and lock the ribs into place. This results in an easy to build wing that is absolutely straight. Stab became a bit larger with more modern numbers and used a 1 degree incidence for solid tracking. The fuselage became three laminations with the center hollowed out for lightness. Hinges became full span and gapless for better efficiency. The power for the new P40 became either a glow .46 or my new RSM 46 electric system.

The newest P40 was designed for top aerobatic performance aimed at the Advanced and Expert flyer.

Neither the original 1990 or the newer 2015 P40 had dihedral as the thrust lines were 0-0-0.

Some folks who mentioned dihedral are confusing the P40’s with the P51-D model that Pat Johnston and I designed. The original design featured a wing located at the bottom of the fuselage for a semi-scale look. This low wing made the early P51-D turn tighter outside than inside. When Pat published the P51-D in Stunt News he decided to put some dihedral in the wing in order to move the tips up to the vertical C/G. This worked out well and the modified design turned equally. Rather than make the kit wing more difficult to build by adding dihedral I decided to move it higher in the fuselage.. This upward wing placement accomplished the same thing as the dihedral since it placed the wing tips at the vertical C/G with the result that the inside and outside turn rates were now equal. This modification was made to all of the kits after the first couple of production runs and has stayed that way for the past 14 years.

I hope this history of the two P40 profile models help to clarify the differences in the models.

[James Holford]

The RSM Distribution web site shows two P40 profile kits. What can I say, I love the look of the P40!

The first profile kit was designed in 1990. At the time I was driving a Le Baron convertible. The back seat of that car was only 47" wide so that left me with a 46" wing span. I wanted to have somewhere around 500 sq. in. of wing area so had to go with a "barn door" wing instead of a dual taper in order to get the area required. The airfoil I chose was the one Tom Warden had in his Crusader. I went with the airfoil because that model continued to glide when the engine shut down plus it flew great.

If you ever observed at a profile from the outside of the circle you too saw the stab tilted. I concluded that the circular pattern exerted a of stresses causing the  fuselage to twist behind the wing. Since built up models did not do this it explained why built ups models flew better than profiles. I thought that if I could stiffen the fuselage I could reduce or eliminate the twisting. That is how the laminated fuselage came about. It worked so well on the P40 Warhawk that I have used this idea on every profile RSM kits.

The combination of the large efficient wing with the laminated fuselage made the 1990 P40 a good flyer with a Fox .35. I used it in numerous contests in Intermediate and my early years in Advanced.

Around 2014 I decided to revisit the P40. I had sold the Le Baron years before and now had a large enough car to allow me to transport a model that incorporated many of the design concepts I had wanted to put into the 1990 model. I used the same Warden airfoil and laminated fuselage because it worked so well. The wing became the dual taper I had wanted to use and grew to 629 sq. in with a larger span. Landing gear went into the wing.

Since I was heavily into laser cutting I decided to make the wing my new "MIT" construction (you have to ask Larry Renger why I call this construction technique the "MIT Wing"- LOL) which incorporates small notches in the ribs at the leading and trailing edges. These notches slide into laser cut slots in the leading and trailing edges and lock the ribs into place. This results in an easy to build wing that is absolutely straight. Stab became a bit larger with more modern numbers and used a 1 degree incidence for solid tracking. The fuselage became three laminations with the center hollowed out for lightness. Hinges became full span and gapless for better efficiency. The power for the new P40 became either a glow .46 or my new RSM 46 electric system.

The newest P40 was designed for top aerobatic performance aimed at the Advanced and Expert flyer.

Neither the original 1990 or the newer 2015 P40 had dihedral as the thrust lines were 0-0-0.

Some folks who mentioned dihedral are confusing the P40’s with the P51-D model that Pat Johnston and I designed. The original design featured a wing located at the bottom of the fuselage for a semi-scale look. This low wing made the early P51-D turn tighter outside than inside. When Pat published the P51-D in Stunt News he decided to put some dihedral in the wing in order to move the tips up to the vertical C/G. This worked out well and the modified design turned equally. Rather than make the kit wing more difficult to build by adding dihedral I decided to move it higher in the fuselage.. This upward wing placement accomplished the same thing as the dihedral since it placed the wing tips at the vertical C/G with the result that the inside and outside turn rates were now equal. This modification was made to all of the kits after the first couple of production runs and has stayed that way for the past 14 years.

I hope this history of the two P40 profile models help to clarify the differences in the models.

Appreciate the history on it

Sent you a pm earlier about the Jig.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk