RSM P40K Tiger

LAST EDITED ON Apr-30-04 AT 01:50 AM (CDT)
 
Greetings, fellow control line guys.

I'm starting a new aeroplane. I scored a second ST46 (NIB) and settled on a kit. Anyone here ever built this one? It looks to be quite nice with regard to the laser cutting and wood selection. It does seem a little lacking in the plans/instructions. As in, they aren't all version 1.0. I know that somewhere along the line RSM went laser, and there are several discrepancies between the plans/minimal instructions, and the beautiful cut pieces of the puzzle. Nice thick wing. And about the right size for the ST46, me thinks.

The plans call for a sandwiched outer outline (about 1/2 in by 3/8) for the tips, yet the instructions speak of hollowing the block tips once carved to shape. And the photo on the box shows some ribbing/webbing under the covering. Any idea what the web pattern ought to look like?

The cowl, while accurately cut (them lasers must be sharp!), isn't exactly shown from 27 different angles so's I know how to remove everything that isn't supposed to look like a genuine WWII P40K as supplied to China before they became our enemy and began supplying me with hundreds if not thousands of cheap toys for my little boy. Can anyone recommend a reasonable book with some good three views (not to mention some of the other 24 views I was hoping for)?

And speaking of cowls - the fuse is vented on the top, presumably to cool the crankcase. Is this really necessary? It looks like overkill to me. Then again, I fly with braided lines, cheap Tower Hobbies glow plugs in a ten year old Tower 40 on a profile Cardinal that is completely covered with MonoKote and looks best at a distance of eighteen feet during a thunderstorm on your fourth beer with your eyes all full of tears from laughing at really rude jokes of a bawdy nature. If somebody tells me my crankcase needs cooling, then I'll cool it. I do know it gets hot enough after a run that massaging it with your flying hand is always a mistake. One has to wonder why I'd do that anyway, I suppose.

And now on to tapered trailing edges. The kit includes 'lucky boxes', which I've never used before (I did have a lucky box of condoms on the dresser at all times when I was in college, but that's for another discussion). I'm assuming there must be some slide slop built into these things that will allow me to use a straight flap horn, rigidly affixed to the trailing edge of the wing with bearings. Is this how it's done? I've never built a tapered trailing edged wing with flaps.

Any advice on this would be appreciated. Not greatly, though. That hasn't happened since Tom Hampshire turned me on to APC 10.5 / 4.5 propellers and took two of those foul smelling OK Cub diesels off my hands. That was greatly appreciated.

My best to all of thems that deserve it,

PSSST, Clayton,...hey Clayton?

I gots a little sumptin on dat dare Tigger Shank dat's would be rights up you's alley. Send mail to afbagley@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@.ebtech.net. (You's nose about dumpin' sum a dem @@@@ right?..soze I don't getts spammed outada family ya see?)

Tony "Macaroni" Bagleyony (tough guy-NOT!)

LAST EDITED ON Apr-30-04 AT 06:48 AM (CDT)
 
Clayton,
I think you have the part on the lucky boxes right. hahaha
wing tips, etc., I haven't seen one of those kits or built so i can't tell ya much there. Don't think any of the other questions should pose a problem, though.
Bill <><

If you type "P-40" or "Curtis Warhawk" into Google, you'll probably find a bunch of sites with pictures of Warhawks. Pat Johnston designed the RSM kit, and I've seen the original fly on several occasions...truly excellent with an OS .40FP. The ST .46 should do a good job with it. Steve

The Lucky boxes work for a tapered trailing edge. Matt built that system into his Rabe Mustang.

On the cooling on the top, yes, do it. It is one of those things of, "it can't hurt, it may very well help." We never think much of the case end of the engine, thinking that all we need to do is pass a little air over the fins--maybe the head. The bottom end of the case, too, gets hot, and this can affect combustion. Not only that, but when the plane is sitting on the ground after a flight, the heat seems to build up in the top end of the engine compartment, and if the case wasn't hot before, it will be now. With some kind of vent up there the air flows through, not only in the air, but on the ground as well.

Most of these vents are made to vent towards the rear, the feeling being that the air is scooped in from the bottom at the cooling intake and some can then exit at the top. Matt has been doing it the other way around on his latest Stukas which is the way the P-40 is designed. There is a scoop at the top that allows air to enter here as well as around the fins, and this air then flows over the engine, actually serving to cool the case rather than merely the engine compartment. Once on the ground, the heat that rises in the engine compartment still has a way to escape, and some convection flow continues. So, use the scoop. Oh, and Matt put his filler tube, which also serves as the vent for the tank in that scoop. It keeps it protected from the wind and it is right behind the air blast of the propeller. We had several people say it wouldn't work, but it works very well from that location. In fact, it seems to work better in that location since air flow is constant and wind from that location does not seem to affect it. Anyway, go for it.

Hi Clayton. When you do Google, make sure you hit Google Images, not just the text portion. But do both, certainly.

Isn't this RSM kit inspired by the old Berkeley offering from the 50s?

WELL....I built one with the ST-46. Plane is light 44 oz. Plane has a drag issue. It stunts, it glides, However, somewhere somethings not right. Me thinks it's the tail moment is to short. I had to replace 50% of the kit wood also. SO I'm not saying anything BAD about RSM or the plane. It's just the facts with the one I built.

Scott(Stg Friday)Riese

I didn't care much for the two rearward facing holes, and I like the idea of a functional scoop forcing air across the engine and out the normal exit.

I think I'm gonna like using the lucky boxes. I usually fabricate my own version with plywood, and while I like to think I fuel proof it all, my airplanes always gain weight as I fly 'em.

I saw below where Scott Reise said he replaced half of the wood. I had an early RSM Tucker Special that had some diving board and deck building materials in it, as well as ribs that looked like they belonged to three different kits. And the plans were literally blueprints.

I traded that kit to Scott Richlen (he'll build anything) for a favor I owed him, and he asked for and received (at no cost) a new set of the laser cut ones.

My kit (P40) actually came with no plans or silkspan. A quick email, and Eric Rule of RSM sent me both, as well as a complimentary set of decals. They're printed from a PC (the decals), but we shall see. Will be using dope.

So, so far, my dealings with RSM have been fine. I still think the instructions and plans are a bit weak, but many of my airplanes had neither anyway. I just wanted to build something from a kit, as my time is a bit limited these days (I have a two year old).

Any ST46 experts want to tell me which tank to use? As in, how big? It's been years since I ran my ST, and I don't recall the volume. Crashed that baby (an original) at Norfolk in 97 with Steve Fitton, Jimmy Paul, Mike Garmon, them Carolina boys... Boomba!

Clayton,

You need to be practicing too. I'll be back in town about May 24th and I also need to get some flying done. See you around then.

The RSM P40K is the scaled down Pat Johnston P40 that Pat did for Eric Rule. Pat still has the prototype and I've flown it several times. Man, that is one nice flying plane. He put a reworked OS40FP in it and it was a killer. A lot of fun to fly. I think he has since converted it to use a Saito 40, but I'm not sure. He was talking about. ST 46 would be OK.

If you have questions about it, contact Pat Johnston. He's in the PAMPA directory.

Ron B.
F4Fguy

I hate being the one to state the obvious,but have you called Eric?He's one of the good guys.and always willing to help.

WHY?

Scott,

Why what?

Call Eric Rule for WHAT? Is what I was getting at.
Bad Wood, ST-46, WHAT??? That's all.

scott(just needed a kick in the head)Riese

The P-40 is my favorite plane. But the newer kits like the RSM build up just doesn't grab my enthusiasm as it's made for stunt not scale. I had a Flying Tiger about 35 years ago that was. But I don't remember the make. Might of been Top Flight or Sterling, not sure. I know a stunter needs a good wing. But will a scale p-40 wing do the job. Would like to find a P-40 kit that was scale. Anyone know of such a ship?

>The P-40 is my favorite plane. But the newer kits like the
>RSM build up just doesn't grab my enthusiasm as it's made
>for stunt not scale. I had a Flying Tiger about 35 years ago
>that was. But I don't remember the make. Might of been Top
>Flight or Sterling, not sure. I know a stunter needs a good
>wing. But will a scale p-40 wing do the job. Would like to
>find a P-40 kit that was scale. Anyone know of such a
>ship?:o

Ron B.
F4Fguy

Gregg:

The P-40 is one of my favorites also,but as often as I've looked at it I always hit the same wall,the wing shape.Not only is it highly tapered,but nearly all the taper is on the trailing edge.While you can "cheat it" some,I don't think you can do it to the extent needed without losing the distinctive form.Add to this the fact that you end up with very small tips,and you really have a design challenge to make a stunter that "looks" right.The only one I've ever seen which comes even close to meeting my "scale stunt" criteria is the P-40 Q. Kieth Trostle did one of these which was really nice.Of the other marks,the later ones(L,M,N) had a longer tail moment which should make for more nearly scale tail surfaces.

LAST EDITED ON May-01-04 AT 12:19 PM (CDT)
 
Ron B.
F4Fguy

Scott:

You asked for it.Here's your kick in the head: Read the header.I was replying to Clayton,not to you,but the "why" is the same.If you have problems with a kit,call the guy who made it and give them a chance to make it right.If you have problems with the design,by all means talk to the designer,but still talk to the supplier so that,where possible,later editions can be improved.All too often products and suppliers are badmouthed without an opportunity to make things right.Most suppliers in our little world are ethical people who want you to be satisfied with their products.Give them a chance to make it so.

I know Pat recently redesigned this plan. Changes included a "more scale like fuselage" and a change to the wing planform layout. Pat originally build a "60" sized P-40K that while not all that scale, certainly gave the impression of a P-40. He then designed the "40" sized plane that RSM kitted. Afterward, he redesigned the larger version with a much more scale-like fuselage and changed the wing to have a greater degree of TE sweep giving a much stronger impression of a P-40. This plane really flew very well and I had a chance to fly it a bit last summer. He has now given the smaller plane the same treatment. I suspect if you ask Pat, he'd be glad to send you off a copy of the updated plans. I'm told that a little modification to the kit using these new plans will produce a much more scale-like product.

Depends on what you want. The original plane certainly flew nicely.

>Ron B.
>F4Fguy
>
>Scott:
>
>You asked for it.Here's your kick in the head: Read the
>header.I was replying to Clayton,not to you,but the "why" is
>the same.If you have problems with a kit,call the guy who
>made it and give them a chance to make it right.If you have
>problems with the design,by all means talk to the
>designer,but still talk to the supplier so that,where
>possible,later editions can be improved.All too often
>products and suppliers are badmouthed without an opportunity
>to make things right.Most suppliers in our little world are
>ethical people who want you to be satisfied with their
>products.Give them a chance to make it so.
>
>Ron B.

Ron...The Kit Problems I agree with your statement. And Yes THERE IS NO BAD MOUTHING HERE. I will not BAD MOUTH ANYONE!!! If a person buy's a kit and then finds out “OH” it and BAD DESIGN It's two late. I built the P-40K and have flown it. IMHO it's a plane that needs some help. I don't have the time to find out what is wrong with it. I've been face to face with Pat Johnson on the problem. We've come up with some changes. HOWEVER, this is ERIC RULE’S baby and I must (for Personal Reasons) keep the pie hole shut. So with that said the kick JUST missed and I still can pursue my child hood dream………

scott(wanta be like paul)riese