A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Short Wings Gliders



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old February 3rd 09, 06:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
John Scott[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

There have been 8 APIS kit imported into the United States.

6 have been complete and were flown by their original owner/builders.
1 of these has subsequently been sold and is flying with a new owner.
1 was lost in a fatal accident

2 are still being actively completed by their original owners.

John Scott


  #182  
Old February 3rd 09, 07:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Martin Gregorie[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 165
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 23:27:48 +0000, Michel Talon wrote:

Bugatti does airplane parts nowadays, similarly Hispano-Suiza, etc.

Hispano-Suiza isn't really a good example of a car company that changed
into an aviation engine company since they have built aero engines since
the start of WW1 and aircraft guns since 1936.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
  #183  
Old February 3rd 09, 09:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Silent[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Short Wings Gliders (RV)

At 16:29 03 February 2009, Bob Kuykendall wrote:

http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/flights.htm

I work on an RV-8 two nights a week, and I've been to Vans factory in
Aurora, Oregon, and it has been an incredible experience to see what
you can do with a rational and balanced approach to a kit airplane.
With the pre-punched and pre-drilled holes, relatively few jigs are
required and the whole thing sort of just falls together in the
correct alignment. It is easy to get started, and easy to keep making
progress.

The comparison to even the fairly complete Schreder kits of the 1960s
and 1970s is like night and day. There's no stress and anxiety around
transferring measurements and doing hole layouts and wondering if
you're about to ruin a part by drilling a hole in the wrong spot. All
the bulkheads and ribs are formed to shape, and almost all the skins
are trimmed to outline.

What's really amazing about the RVs, and is definitely an example to
look to, is the resale value. Any reasonably well-built and flyable RV
will command a price that is substantially greater than the cost of
the kit plus the cost of the engine and avionics and other items that
went into it.

Thanks again, Bob K.


RV is the marvelous example of modern technology!!!
In the open minded high volume USA aviation contest.
Same apply to some Ultralite kits.
I have seen an Ultralight Rotax 912 Landafrica, which is an
exact copy of the Zenair, built in two months.
We'll see soon a kit glider with the same success of the RVs,
in my mind the HP24 will sell like candies, if the price is
right!!!!!

So many para/delta gliders pilots are getting old and are ready to
transition to the comfort of soaring!!!!
They already know how to fly.
They want to fly cheapo and often..............
They are used to go nowhere...........
They will be able to fly into stronger winds.......
They will have more time because of the economy.
etc etc etc
Only a few of them are millionaires.




  #184  
Old February 3rd 09, 09:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Silent[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Short Wings Gliders (RV)

At 16:29 03 February 2009, Bob Kuykendall wrote:

http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/flights.htm

I work on an RV-8 two nights a week, and I've been to Vans factory in
Aurora, Oregon, and it has been an incredible experience to see what
you can do with a rational and balanced approach to a kit airplane.
With the pre-punched and pre-drilled holes, relatively few jigs are
required and the whole thing sort of just falls together in the
correct alignment. It is easy to get started, and easy to keep making
progress.

The comparison to even the fairly complete Schreder kits of the 1960s
and 1970s is like night and day. There's no stress and anxiety around
transferring measurements and doing hole layouts and wondering if
you're about to ruin a part by drilling a hole in the wrong spot. All
the bulkheads and ribs are formed to shape, and almost all the skins
are trimmed to outline.

What's really amazing about the RVs, and is definitely an example to
look to, is the resale value. Any reasonably well-built and flyable RV
will command a price that is substantially greater than the cost of
the kit plus the cost of the engine and avionics and other items that
went into it.

Thanks again, Bob K.


RV is the marvelous example of modern technology!!!
In the open minded high volume USA aviation contest.
Same apply to some Ultralite kits.
I have seen an Ultralight Rotax 912 Landafrica, which is an
exact copy of the Zenair, built in two months.
We'll see soon a kit glider with the same success of the RVs,
in my mind the HP24 will sell like candies, if the price is
right!!!!!

So many para/delta gliders pilots are getting old and are ready to
transition to the comfort of soaring!!!!
They already know how to fly.
They want to fly cheapo and often..............
They are used to go nowhere...........
They will be able to fly into stronger winds.......
They will have more time because of the economy.
etc etc etc
Only a few of them are millionaires.




  #185  
Old February 4th 09, 02:07 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Uncle Fuzzy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 260
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

On Feb 2, 6:28*pm, Brad wrote:
On Feb 2, 6:15*pm, Nyal Williams wrote:





This comes from EAA, IIRC. In the US, about 5% of the homebuilt aircraft
started up ever get finished. *Of those that do, many pass through three
owner/builders during the course of the completion, and the process
usually takes about eight years. * Of course, gliders are much simpler to
build.


Bill Piper was famous for saying, and I paraphrase, "It costs as much to
build a bad design as a good one. *Tell me the weight of an airplane and I
can tell you how much it costs to build it."


This formula would probably be true for any [X]RP structure in any
particular location and with any particular construction method.


At 01:31 03 February 2009, Bob Kuykendall wrote:


On Feb 2, 3:27=A0pm, (Michel Talon) wrote:


I agree with all you said, but i don't think this model is

sustainable.


Michel, I do agree with you in that as well; in the greater scheme of
things the way sailplane manufacturers have operated cannot continue
indefinitely. However, I don't think that how they are operating is
damaging to the sport of soaring or to the worldwide community of
soaring pilots, so I do think it is my place to tell them how to run
their businesses. I can, of course, think of ways that they could do
more to benfit the sport and its enthusiasts, but only at the cost of
damage to their profitability. But again, it is their business, not
mine.


Getting back to your point, there is one thing that the 19th century
robber barons got right when they used social darwinism to justify
their avarice and greed: natural selection in the business environment
will force businesses to adapt or to evolve, and those that do neither
can be counted upon to wither and die. So I think that if their
current business model is not sustainable, then the manufacturers will
develop one that is, or will leave the business altogether.


Gliding is still living because there has been tens of thousands
of people learning to fly in Germany, Brittany, France, etc. for

*small
cost*, thanks to the dedication of instructors doing that for free,

over
all those years...


If only we could get those tens of thousands of people to spend a few
days each building gliders. If, for example, 10000 people spent three
workdays (24 hours) building gliders, that'd be enough labor to
produce 120 training gliders or about 180 single-seaters.


Of course, you can't do that with a glider factory, the logistics of
transporting and accommodating that many temporary workers at a single
facility would be a nightmare. But if you look closely at the world of
homebuilt aircraft that is very nearly what you see, with thousands of
distributed "manufacturing centers" in tiny workshops all across the
world. Of course, instead of thousands of people spending a few hours
each what we have is hundreds of people spending a thousand hours
each, but I think it can work the other way as well.


Thanks again, Bob K.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


imagine then, being the one who designes the craft, builds the plugs,
tools, parts, systems and then assembles the whole
thing...............then spends about the same amount of time it took
to build the craft painting and polishing it.

Brad- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Brad,
That comment brought a mental chuckle... The last Control Line
Precision Stunt plane I built was over 35 years ago. It took 42 hours
to build the airframe, and over 120 hours for the covering and
finish. This was a plane of around 500 square INCH wing area.
  #186  
Old February 4th 09, 02:08 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default Short Wings Gliders (RV)

On Feb 3, 12:45*pm, Dan Silent wrote:

RV is the marvelous example of modern technology!!!
In the open minded high volume USA aviation contest.
Same apply to some Ultralite kits.
I have seen an Ultralight Rotax 912 Landafrica, which is an
exact copy of the Zenair, built in two months.
We'll see soon a kit glider with the same success of the RVs,
in my mind the HP24 will sell like candies, if the price is
right!!!!!

So many para/delta gliders pilots are getting old and are ready to
transition to the comfort of soaring!!!!
They already know how to fly.
They want to fly cheapo and often..............
They are used to go nowhere...........
They will be able to fly into stronger winds.......
They will have more time because of the economy.
etc etc etc
Only a few of them are millionaires.


Thanks, I do appreciate your enthusiasm and encouragement!

Bob K.
  #187  
Old February 4th 09, 02:44 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Brad[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 722
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

On Feb 3, 5:07*pm, Uncle Fuzzy wrote:
On Feb 2, 6:28*pm, Brad wrote:





On Feb 2, 6:15*pm, Nyal Williams wrote:


This comes from EAA, IIRC. In the US, about 5% of the homebuilt aircraft
started up ever get finished. *Of those that do, many pass through three
owner/builders during the course of the completion, and the process
usually takes about eight years. * Of course, gliders are much simpler to
build.


Bill Piper was famous for saying, and I paraphrase, "It costs as much to
build a bad design as a good one. *Tell me the weight of an airplane and I
can tell you how much it costs to build it."


This formula would probably be true for any [X]RP structure in any
particular location and with any particular construction method.


At 01:31 03 February 2009, Bob Kuykendall wrote:


On Feb 2, 3:27=A0pm, (Michel Talon) wrote:


I agree with all you said, but i don't think this model is
sustainable.


Michel, I do agree with you in that as well; in the greater scheme of
things the way sailplane manufacturers have operated cannot continue
indefinitely. However, I don't think that how they are operating is
damaging to the sport of soaring or to the worldwide community of
soaring pilots, so I do think it is my place to tell them how to run
their businesses. I can, of course, think of ways that they could do
more to benfit the sport and its enthusiasts, but only at the cost of
damage to their profitability. But again, it is their business, not
mine.


Getting back to your point, there is one thing that the 19th century
robber barons got right when they used social darwinism to justify
their avarice and greed: natural selection in the business environment
will force businesses to adapt or to evolve, and those that do neither
can be counted upon to wither and die. So I think that if their
current business model is not sustainable, then the manufacturers will
develop one that is, or will leave the business altogether.


Gliding is still living because there has been tens of thousands
of people learning to fly in Germany, Brittany, France, etc. for
*small
cost*, thanks to the dedication of instructors doing that for free,
over
all those years...


If only we could get those tens of thousands of people to spend a few
days each building gliders. If, for example, 10000 people spent three
workdays (24 hours) building gliders, that'd be enough labor to
produce 120 training gliders or about 180 single-seaters.


Of course, you can't do that with a glider factory, the logistics of
transporting and accommodating that many temporary workers at a single
facility would be a nightmare. But if you look closely at the world of
homebuilt aircraft that is very nearly what you see, with thousands of
distributed "manufacturing centers" in tiny workshops all across the
world. Of course, instead of thousands of people spending a few hours
each what we have is hundreds of people spending a thousand hours
each, but I think it can work the other way as well.


Thanks again, Bob K.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


imagine then, being the one who designes the craft, builds the plugs,
tools, parts, systems and then assembles the whole
thing...............then spends about the same amount of time it took
to build the craft painting and polishing it.


Brad- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Brad,
* That comment brought a mental chuckle... The last Control Line
Precision Stunt plane I built was over 35 years ago. *It took 42 hours
to build the airframe, and over 120 hours for the covering and
finish. *This was a plane of around 500 square INCH wing area.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


ah, I remember those days too. mine never lasted long enough to
justify spending too much time with covering/painting. we used to
build voodoo's and nemisis' and smash em up pretty regularly. it was a
lot of fun making the pressure tanks out of pudding cans and
pacifiers! nothing like the sound of a 36XBB at full speed!

Brad
  #188  
Old February 4th 09, 08:00 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Craig[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 144
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

On Feb 3, 5:44*pm, Brad wrote:
On Feb 3, 5:07*pm, Uncle Fuzzy wrote:



On Feb 2, 6:28*pm, Brad wrote:


On Feb 2, 6:15*pm, Nyal Williams wrote:


This comes from EAA, IIRC. In the US, about 5% of the homebuilt aircraft
started up ever get finished. *Of those that do, many pass through three
owner/builders during the course of the completion, and the process
usually takes about eight years. * Of course, gliders are much simpler to
build.


Bill Piper was famous for saying, and I paraphrase, "It costs as much to
build a bad design as a good one. *Tell me the weight of an airplane and I
can tell you how much it costs to build it."


This formula would probably be true for any [X]RP structure in any
particular location and with any particular construction method.


At 01:31 03 February 2009, Bob Kuykendall wrote:


On Feb 2, 3:27=A0pm, (Michel Talon) wrote:


I agree with all you said, but i don't think this model is
sustainable.


Michel, I do agree with you in that as well; in the greater scheme of
things the way sailplane manufacturers have operated cannot continue
indefinitely. However, I don't think that how they are operating is
damaging to the sport of soaring or to the worldwide community of
soaring pilots, so I do think it is my place to tell them how to run
their businesses. I can, of course, think of ways that they could do
more to benfit the sport and its enthusiasts, but only at the cost of
damage to their profitability. But again, it is their business, not
mine.


Getting back to your point, there is one thing that the 19th century
robber barons got right when they used social darwinism to justify
their avarice and greed: natural selection in the business environment
will force businesses to adapt or to evolve, and those that do neither
can be counted upon to wither and die. So I think that if their
current business model is not sustainable, then the manufacturers will
develop one that is, or will leave the business altogether.


Gliding is still living because there has been tens of thousands
of people learning to fly in Germany, Brittany, France, etc. for
*small
cost*, thanks to the dedication of instructors doing that for free,
over
all those years...


If only we could get those tens of thousands of people to spend a few
days each building gliders. If, for example, 10000 people spent three
workdays (24 hours) building gliders, that'd be enough labor to
produce 120 training gliders or about 180 single-seaters.


Of course, you can't do that with a glider factory, the logistics of
transporting and accommodating that many temporary workers at a single
facility would be a nightmare. But if you look closely at the world of
homebuilt aircraft that is very nearly what you see, with thousands of
distributed "manufacturing centers" in tiny workshops all across the
world. Of course, instead of thousands of people spending a few hours
each what we have is hundreds of people spending a thousand hours
each, but I think it can work the other way as well.


Thanks again, Bob K.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


imagine then, being the one who designes the craft, builds the plugs,
tools, parts, systems and then assembles the whole
thing...............then spends about the same amount of time it took
to build the craft painting and polishing it.


Brad- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Brad,
* That comment brought a mental chuckle... The last Control Line
Precision Stunt plane I built was over 35 years ago. *It took 42 hours
to build the airframe, and over 120 hours for the covering and
finish. *This was a plane of around 500 square INCH wing area.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


ah, I remember those days too. mine never lasted long enough to
justify spending too much time with covering/painting. we used to
build voodoo's and nemisis' and smash em up pretty regularly. it was a
lot of fun making the pressure tanks out of pudding cans and
pacifiers! nothing like the sound of a 36XBB at full speed!

Brad


Fun stuff, Kinda like having a freight train at the end of the lines.

Craig
  #189  
Old February 4th 09, 08:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Alan[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 163
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

In article Bob Kuykendall writes:
On Feb 2, 3:27=A0pm, (Michel Talon) wrote:

Gliding is still living because there has been tens of thousands
of people learning to fly in Germany, Brittany, France, etc. for *small
cost*, thanks to the dedication of instructors doing that for free, over
all those years...


If only we could get those tens of thousands of people to spend a few
days each building gliders. If, for example, 10000 people spent three
workdays (24 hours) building gliders, that'd be enough labor to
produce 120 training gliders or about 180 single-seaters.

Of course, you can't do that with a glider factory, the logistics of
transporting and accommodating that many temporary workers at a single
facility would be a nightmare. But if you look closely at the world of
homebuilt aircraft that is very nearly what you see, with thousands of
distributed "manufacturing centers" in tiny workshops all across the
world. Of course, instead of thousands of people spending a few hours
each what we have is hundreds of people spending a thousand hours
each, but I think it can work the other way as well.


I suspect that there would be difficulty moving the aircraft and all
the manufacturing parts and tools around between the 10,000 individual
workers.

Alan
  #190  
Old February 4th 09, 04:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

On Feb 3, 11:40*pm, (Alan) wrote:

* I suspect that there would be difficulty moving the aircraft and all
the manufacturing parts and tools around between the 10,000 individual
workers.


Could be. But it doesn't seem to have been a huge issue among the
folks who have built and flown 6069 RVs. I can't see why modest-span
gliders would be much different.

Thanks, Bob K.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
X-Wings and Canard Rotor Wings. Charles Gray Rotorcraft 1 March 22nd 05 01:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.