Originally Posted by
cmp3cantrj
For me it is about having something new and different. Frankly the big stuff may fly well - but in a way that makes it too easy. It is more challenging to make something small that performs well. Martin Lambert's "10" size turbine prototype
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4DeRX7q1w4 is more exciting to me than any 1/3 scale yawnmaker.
All thngs being equal a smaller model is a bigger technical challenge, going big is a copout.
Well, as for me, I definitely do not want to make flying an expensive 160mph+ turbine jet more challenging and as Midas said above, larger manufacturers do not want to make building jets "a bigger technical challenge" for new pilots looking to get into jets or for themselves. The jet trend is heading towards "Plug and play" atleast here in in the USA and that is the opposite of airframes that are more technically challenging. That would make the majority of the market a copout market.
BVM, Skymaster and other manufacturers want to make jets as easy as possible for the end user to assemble, program, and fly. Even the radio manufacturers are making it less technical and cumbersome by having radios that talk to you, easier to program, and have less wires in the setups. Gyro's now are in almost every jet, even sports jets that don't need them. I just don't see the need to want something that is more challenging to make fly well. As the thread states at the beginning, every manufacturer is going larger, I don't think that's because the vast majority of jet pilots want smaller aircraft. The demand for larger aircraft is overwhelming and if you are right, well hey, most of us are copout's and loving it!