![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "nimbusgb" wrote in message ... The basic list raised by Gary is good. But there's nothing wrong with parellelogram sticks. If its less than 1:40 I'm not interested. It should be 'expandable' so an optional upgrade to 18m wings perhaps? The World class was based on price and it flopped heavily so sorry price is way down the list. I dont see why a 1:40 ship cant be built for low cost. Surely its the airfoil and materials technology that have come on. An 1:40 libelle must be possible with a modern aifoil or a 1:45 LS4 Exactly. There is no reason that a 'medium performance' glider should cost much less than a 40 - 45:1 glider. They'll weight about the same and have about the same parts count. The difference is almost entirely in the shape and finish. If the manufacturer skimps on those, it won't sell at any price so he might as well go for performance. The main cost factor is production rate. Start on the demand side of the economic equation. Re-jigger handicaps and competition classes to favor the design. 'Seed' 2 - 3 gliders a year at large discounts into clubs that foster X/C and competition as judged by their performance in the OLC and their support for younger pilots in the Junior Class. The opportunity to win an option to buy a new high performance glider glider at half price would really drive the popularity of the OLC - AND the new glider. On the supply side, once the manufacturer sees the demand, it's more likely that investments will be made in cost saving production methods and tooling. When the production rate ramps up, the unit cost will fall. For this to work, the price has to fall far enough that used gliders don't 'suck the air' out of the market - that's the incentive for the maker to keep the price low. It seems IMHO that picking a popular glider design that is now out of production and tuning it up for mass production is a low risk way to go. An LS-4 fits the bill nicely although there are probably others. Even though some clubs will fear retractable gear I'd say keep it. As a compromise, add threadded hard points on the belly allowing for a sacrificial lightweight UHMWPE plastic skid to protect the belly in the event of a gear-up. The hard points themselves would add little drag, weight or cost. Bill Daniels |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Glider art | Mal | Soaring | 2 | December 13th 06 06:54 PM |
Glider Model - Blaue Maus- 1922 Wasserkuppe Glider | [email protected] | Soaring | 5 | November 19th 06 11:08 PM |
shipping glider to NZ-advice on securing glider in trailer | November Bravo | Soaring | 6 | November 1st 06 02:05 PM |
Sea Glider | OscarCVox | Soaring | 8 | July 12th 04 12:08 AM |
Calculating CL for various wing shapes | ian .at.bendigo | Home Built | 0 | August 28th 03 12:47 PM |