I don't know if production methods have changed much. Last I knew,
composite 15m was 1000 hours labor, by far the largest cost component. (for
comparison C-172 was something like 372 hours 30 years ago).

There was no certification requirement for the world class. It was
conformal, that is, could be built to specified size and shape by anyone
from any material as part of the rules. One of the ideals.

If memory serves, development was done by volunteers and university staff if
memory serves, so there was only a modest license cost per unit.

Development and certification costs are fully amortized in some existing
models. If the soaring world adopted the LS-4b (which it has no rights to
presently) as the world class, there would be no development nor
certification costs. Sell a few molds to allow international construction
and sell them. Sell control kits. Charge a license/plans fee for each.
And build them commercially also. Wouldn't take long before the numbers
increased and the world class would percolate to the top of the competition
venues.

Doesn't have to be the LS-4b either. The 304 is another very worthy
candidate. Continuing the PW-5 as a sub-class might also have some benefit.

Frank Whiteley

"smjmitchell" wrote in message
u...
I don't think that performance is a big cost driver.

The major cost drivers a
* development costs
* certification costs
* labour (for production)
* raw material costs

I suspect that all of these drivers will have a similar value irrespective
of whether the glider is a APIS, 1-26 or LS-4. OK ... maybe the material
cost will vary a little but the difference is not going to result in a
glider that is 1/3 or 1/2 cheaper.

The biggest issue with the cost of airplanes is quite simply VOLUME. They
are generally built by hand using relatively crude production techniques
and
basic tooling. A modern small automobile is arguably far more complex than
any glider but is costs a LOT less because of the level of automation in
the
mass production process and the large number of units sold. If we want
cheaper gliders then we need to find a way to increase the volume of
sales.
Certification and design costs would be amortised over more units and
production costs would dramatically reduce (bigger buying power for raw
materials and better tooling / automated production will reduce labour
cost). This is a chicken and egg thing ... you are not going to increase
volume until the price is reduced and you cannot reduce price (which
requires a new business model and significant investment) without the
evidence of the larger sales potential. In essence we are stuck with
expensive gliders unless we can attract some very wealthy individuals to
the
sport who share the vision of cheap gliders and are willing to gamble some
of their money, against conventional business wisdom, simply to see if
this
vision can be realised without any guarantee of a return.


"Robertmudd1u" wrote in message
...
Heck you can buy an Apis 13 kit for $17.5K USD (OK, it's probably gone
up
a
little lately) and get 38:1 in a ship that weighs 302lbs.
Seems pretty tough to beat if you're in a 1-26 frame of mind.
Wad
---

Thanks for the nice comment. Yes, the cost has gone up because of the
weakness
of the dollar. Current price of an Apis 13 kit is 16,100 euros or about
$21,000. More costly than a 1-26 to be sure but also a lot more fun to
fly.

Robert Mudd