By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Ripmax Wot Trainer

Manufacturer: Ripmax

Find more products by Ripmax

Average Rating
No. of Reviews19
RRPN/A

.. wrote on 04/04/2016:
NOT THE BEST
Strengths: Its solid I suppose
Weaknesses: a horrible plane to fly IMO You have to carve a big chunk out to accommodate the mixture needle on a 2 stroke thats very poor design. Iv'e flown a few and you can do a lot better for your money.
Overall: Buy a Seagull models trainer
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
60%
Flight performance
40%
Value for money
40%
Overall
40%

The Gineral wrote on 05/10/2012:
GOOD STARTER
Strengths: Quick assembly all parts fit
Weaknesses: none obvious
Overall: excellent
Ease of assembly
80%
Build quality
60%
Flight performance
60%
Value for money
80%
Overall
60%

jez1973 wrote on 18/03/2010:
NOT GOOD
Strengths: urmm style
Weaknesses: build
Overall: cheap quality not happy never again.
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
20%
Flight performance
60%
Value for money
20%
Overall
40%

Eck wrote on 10/11/2009:
SOME NIGGLES, ACE RESULT
Strengths: Easy to followinstructions, slow flying speed, stability in the air.
Weaknesses: Wing bolts missing from kit, tight control runs.
Overall: I eletrified mine with an EMax 2832/20 turning a 13x4 prop. It needed 100g of lead in the nose to balance it as shown, but flies beautifully. It's utterly stall proof and stable right down to walking pace. Can't comment on nosewheel woes as I built it as a taildragger to cope with a roughish grass strip.
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
40%
Flight performance
100%
Value for money
100%
Overall
60%

BB wrote on 11/01/2009:
GREAT PLANE, POORLY PRODUCED
Strengths: Flight characteristics, stable
Weaknesses: Production - metal pushrods in plastic snakes - stick
Overall: Great plane. Poor construction design. Go buy an 'Arising Star' instead.
Ease of assembly
40%
Build quality
40%
Flight performance
80%
Value for money
40%
Overall
40%

hamish Finlay wrote on 19/09/2008:
LIKE IT
Strengths: Low wing loading makes it useful camera ship, and it can handle a bigger engine. I have an SC52 it mine.I found it easy to build but made it a tail dragger with steerable tail wheel.
Weaknesses: Alerons stick out past wing tips which can cause violent flutter in a steep dive. Taper back the tips and problem solved.Rolls can be rather untidy, but loops and inverted are OK
Overall: Probably better as a second trainer,because its not cheap, but it is good fun and good in the wind.
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
80%
Flight performance
80%
Value for money
60%
Overall
60%

oldfatbiker wrote on 16/09/2008:
NOT VERY GOOD
Strengths: nicely covered.Easy to put together
Weaknesses: very poor build quality .It is one of the more expensive ARTF and as such is let down by silly faults such as solid aelerons and rudder because of missaligned hinges and excess glue Tail is abit weak causing flutter this was cured by 1/16th sheet on bottom Hardware is another problem area .I dont like the cheap and cheerful wire pushrods and changed them for snakes. Much better
Overall: A bit of a let down .It is a trainer and probbably wont last to long in the hands of my 10 year old grandson
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
40%
Flight performance
60%
Value for money
40%
Overall
40%

spanner wrote on 15/09/2008:
VERY NICE DESIGN AND A GOOD FLYER. SOME CONS!!
Strengths: Very nice looking plane that flies well, great as a first plane or beyond... far beyond. Easy to see the wot roots! A fairly simple build in keeping with the(presumably) intended beginners market. will need just a bit of common sense to overcome a few build issues.
Weaknesses: Kit is let down by the quality control at the factory.. engine and u/c bolt holes need 'easing' some hardware missing and the control pushrods VERY tight in the snakes. i dont like the cut out for the needle adjustment, fitting any other engine than a 2 stroke. and you have a big cut out for no purpose. Chris Foss should buy one off the shelf and build it and then go and kick some backsides at the quality control department! given the limited building involved I would have to call the build quality poor, not the airframe itself, just the bolt ons. Still simple though.
Overall: I am enjoying this plane, I think that it is a great kit let down by a few niggles in the q/c department and would thoroughly recommend it as a first timers model to well beyond the A certificate. But pin the ailerons!! they do come loose.
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
40%
Flight performance
60%
Value for money
60%
Overall
40%

Mac or Malc wrote on 23/07/2008:
NOT FOR THE RAW BEGINNER
Strengths: As a advanced trainer it handles very smooth, loops, rolls, inverted as good as any 'First' basic low winger.
Weaknesses: On opening the box for the first time it looks very impressive, as you look in more detail there are several 'Silly' mistake, eg, If you opt to use the set up with steerable nose leg the push rod is on the wrong side to the rudder pushrod.
Overall: If the mistakes are sorted out so as a out and out novice is able to complete it, instruction by a good tutor then they have a model which will take them through to basic aerobatics
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
60%
Flight performance
80%
Value for money
60%
Overall
60%

Leonard Hunt wrote on 17/07/2008:
EXCELLENT VALUE
Strengths: ease of build
Weaknesses: u/c should have 6mm nylon bolts noe very small metal ones
Overall: very good flyer, and good value
Ease of assembly
80%
Build quality
80%
Flight performance
100%
Value for money
100%
Overall
80%

Derek Haywood wrote on 19/06/2008:
KIT REQUIRES MORE WORK BUT A GOOD FRIENDLY FLYER
Strengths: Short take-off, flies all the aerobatics a trainee could manage, and more, very responsive,light and well finished. Bit of a floater on landing giving the novice no nasty surprises.
Weaknesses: Could not build the model as a stearable trike, the rudder and elevator snakes are reversed, had to follow the tail-dragger route. Fuel tank is too small, there is room for a larger SLEC tank.
Overall: Nice big box containing almost all the bits necessary to complete the model, just a few nuts missing. Changed the engine mounting screws for bolts with nyloc nuts and fitted larger wheels to assist with take-off on a grass strip. Fitted larger tank. Easy build with no glue needed if you keep the wings as the designer intended.I glued the wings together as I wear belt, braces nad a piece of string First flight on a blustery day and she was airborne within 10 yards but was a bit lively on high rates. When the rates were adjusted the aircraft flew much better for a beginner and, apart from a little orientation problem, was a joy to fly. Everything seems to be holding together well, the larger wheels help with take-off from grass and she landed cross-wind dead-stick without too much trouble just tipping nose down before finally coming to rest. Short take-offs and gently landings help beginners as long as rates are on low. Full rates bode well for future aerobatics if I don't break it. Needed to brighten the under-side of the wings with chequered reflective covering as I was having trouble with orientation. Against a grey sky the Wot Trainer quickly became a silhouette being dark red on the wing underside. I am looking foreward to many more flights. Would make a good club trainer.
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
80%
Flight performance
100%
Value for money
60%
Overall
60%

John Gallard wrote on 06/06/2008:
FLIES WELL, ONCE YOU HAVE MANAGED TO PUT IT TOGETHER!
Strengths: For me ease of storage and transport e.g split wing. Looks good
Weaknesses: Push rods too tight in snakes. Adjustable push rod plate stuck to the bulkhead ie NOT adjustable. All control surface hinges stiff. Fuel tank, was this an after thought and the only one they had to hand? Rudder and aileron servos transposed, this made it impossible to fit nosewheel option. Four ft from ground on landing two hinges detached on left aileron and plane cartwheeled into ground. Wing bolts snapped ok but so did forward locating tongue Ground handling poor as tail dragger, not helped by uneven throw of rudder and lack of tail wheel
Overall: Despite all of the above the plane flew well and slows up nicely on landing approach (too slow if you are not careful)Shows promising acrobatic ability. Even if the build had gone to plan I would have still been dissapointed with the tank and tail dragger performance without either a pivoting or steerable tail wheel. Ripmax have advised me that a batch were made with the rudder/aileron/the push rod problem and I should return it for replacement as I still need the trike option rather than tail dragger.Ripmax are now out of stock so cannot replace it at this time!
Ease of assembly
40%
Build quality
60%
Flight performance
80%
Value for money
60%
Overall
60%

paul howell wrote on 04/06/2008:
FLYS WELL AFTER BAD START
Strengths: flies well
Weaknesses: instructions lacking information for first time modeller, no spinner as advertised on box. could have been built with more care, lack of glue in places, talplane neeeded some work to get it true with rudder and wing
Overall: expected higher quality from a model bearing the wot 4 name. saying that after changing fuel tank for a larger slec model and pining all the hinges (after losing an aileron first flight) i have to say it flies very well
Ease of assembly
60%
Build quality
40%
Flight performance
60%
Value for money
60%
Overall
40%

Douglas Coulton wrote on 04/06/2008:
GOOD, BUT NOT A FIRST TRAINER
Strengths: Overall design and speed of build
Weaknesses: Fuel tank hatch. Two peice wing
Overall: Very good. It's a floater and needs care on landing. Fuel tank hatch needs surgery for tank to fit. On one landing the aircraft healed over and front wing lugs broke. I shall glue wing panels together.
Ease of assembly
100%
Build quality
80%
Flight performance
80%
Value for money
60%
Overall
80%

Anthony Aylwin wrote on 20/05/2008:
VERY GOOD PLANE
Weaknesses: none
Overall: cannot fault it in any way
Ease of assembly
100%
Build quality
100%
Flight performance
100%
Value for money
100%
Overall
100%

John Joy wrote on 20/05/2008:
VALUE FOR MONEY
Strengths: eaze of build
Weaknesses: none i can think of
Overall: could pass B easily
Ease of assembly
80%
Build quality
80%
Flight performance
100%
Value for money
100%
Overall
80%

Bill Brownlie wrote on 09/05/2008:
OK IF YOU KEEP IT SLOW
Strengths: Quick and easy to Build. Flys great at slow speed
Weaknesses: Really bad aileron flutter when pulling out a Loop
Overall: Flown it on two occasions one very windy and it just floats in with a bit of head wind. Second day pulling out of a loop it sounded like a 50cc motorbike, diagnosed as aileron flutter. Thinking of altering the wing design to enclose the ends of the ailerons
Ease of assembly
80%
Build quality
60%
Flight performance
60%
Value for money
60%
Overall
60%

john gardiner wrote on 08/05/2008:
VERY DISAPPOINTED BY THE KIT
Strengths: looks good, flys nicely
Weaknesses: wing design floored re the fix to fuse, wire too thick for snakes,fuel cover wont fit over the fuel tank Ailerons came lose off wing on 1st flight, kit missing various nuts etc. Coverings coming away after 1st flight
Overall: Lovely kit, lousy quality control
Ease of assembly
40%
Build quality
40%
Flight performance
80%
Value for money
40%
Overall
40%

Victor Saliba wrote on 01/05/2008:
GO FOR IT BLINDLY, IT'S A CHRIS FOSS DESIGN.
Strengths: It's bigger than other trainers, can be configured tail dragger or tricycle, very aerobatic, responds to commands at once, short take-offs, well built, easy to finish, no glue required, easy to transport,light wing loading, accessories up to the job, no lead was requried for balancing, removable front hatch makes it easy to access the tank (just 1 screw), easy to see, great fun to fly.
Weaknesses: If I call them weaknesses, small fuel tank (only 200ml)and fixed skid (no steerable tail-wheel).
Overall: I bought the model last Wednesday and I took not more than 8 hrs to finish it completely. I took it yesterday to the flying field powered by an old, well used, fuel leaking, Super Tigre 46 with Master Air screw 11 X 6 prop and aluminium spinner and taking care of the controls are four Futaba 3001 servos. Wind was SE4, that is, across the runway. The Wot took off in less than 20 feet but after 6 mins the engine quit and I was caught too far from the runway. I landed the Wot in our neighbouring off-road track. Luckily no 4x4 were there. I richened the engine, fueled up and took off again, this time after 8 mins the engine had consumed all the juice and quit again but this time I was prepared and landed nicely on the runway. Even in gusty conditions , the model handles very well. During the 2nd flight I flew it inverted for long time, stall turns up and down the runway, inside and outside loops, knife-edge, spins and other crazy fun fly manouvers. But this is supposed to be a trainer whereupon I tried slow flying. The Wot doesn't stall, slows down up to walking pace and it's easy to fly like many other trainers. In landings it tends to keep floating therefore kill the speed as it keeps coming. When I got home I changed the engine with a Thunder Tigre 40 PRO ABC, APC 10X6 and 2 1/4 inch aluminium spinner. This one doesn't leak fuel and performs flawlessly. Today wind was ESE5 but with the TT40 at full swing it took off in 10 feet, climbed vertically, cut the throttle and full left rudder for a stall turn. Now remember that this is a 67inch span model, quite big for a 40 but it's more than enough for the Wot. I flew it 3 times and I enjoyed as much as my WOT 4's. Other members are going to buy this model after my demonstration flights. One last thing, I epoxied the wings together since I had the intention to fun fly the WOT trainer. Thanks Chris for such a great model.
Ease of assembly
80%
Build quality
100%
Flight performance
100%
Value for money
80%
Overall
80%

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E! 

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
CML
electricwingman 2017
Wings & Wheels 2019
Cambridge Gliding Club
Slec
Pepe Aircraft
Gliders Distribution
Sarik
Advertise With Us
Do you use a throttle kill switch?
Q: This refers to electric-powered models but do you use a throttle kill switch?

 Yes
 No
 Sometimes
 Rarely

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us