Bob Kuykendall wrote:

Earlier, Eric Greenwell


Having the exterior wing shape defined
would save very little in design costs
because they would all require substantial
aerodynamic design and the complete
structural design, which is even more
expensive than the aerodynamic design...


Eric, you know I disagree that these are huge expenses.

I wasn't suggesting the design expenses were huge so much as pointing
out defining the wing shape would not yield a one-design class OR cost
savings. Each potential manufacturer would have to bear these expenses
plus the costs of molds, jigs, and so forth to build the glider. Each
manufacturer would have to certificate his design, since it would be
different, and split the market with the other manufacturers.

A _real_ one-design class would avoid the redundant design and
certification costs, and could offer the glider at a lower cost.

I continue to
believe that with modern softwares, and using modern
commercially-available composite products, that sailplane development
is within the grasp of a conscientious amateur.

I agree with you, but I don't see the connection with a FAI class
defined by the wing shape.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA