Olympic II - DXF Laser cut Files

About this Plan

Olympic II (RCM Olympic II, Airtronics Olympic II). Radio control sailplane model.

Published in RCM June 1976, the Olympic II was also later kitted by Airtronics. The RCM and Airtronics plans are essentially the same, only the title block is different.

Although designed as a trainer, the long list of contest wins proved that the design has been very competitive in Standard Class contests. Many sailplane fliers learned to fly with an Olympic, then went on to become contest threats.

The basic design has been proven and flown under all weather conditions, and refined to the final configuration presented in this article. The result is a brand new airplane which shares no parts from the original, and which flies and handles even better than the Olympic.

The Aquila (oz5136) sailplane, was published in the May 1975 issue of RCM. The Olympic II is a more functional ship, designed for easy building for the less experienced modeler. It's not as pretty as the Aquila, but flies just as well, if not better in weak lift.

The original Olympic sailplane was designed in 1967 and first flown early in 1969. The design evolved from Frank Zaic's original Thermic 100 (oz1573), which dates back to 1940! In fact, the Olympic uses the center panels from the 100 with a straight tapered tip design replacing the original 'Wolf' outline. The long tail moment, large stab with restricted elevator, and polyhedral wings were incorporated to provide a very stable design, which would be forgiving and easy to fly.

Primary design goals were to achieve a low sink rate with good penetration for gusty conditions, with a simple quick-building airframe. To provide the maximum opportunity to search for thermals, the design must gain maximum launch height and circle tightly in weak lift. Positive control response with hands-off stability was a must to allow the inexperienced flier to ride marginal lift. In addition, the structure should be rugged enough to survive poor landings and easily repairable in the event of poorer landings. Finally, and most important in our opinion, was that the design must be tolerant of errors in building and trimming and could be duplicated by the 'average' modeler. A skilled pilot can achieve excellent results with an average design; the average pilot needs an excellent design.