RCU Forums - View Single Post - CMP Kits – Problems and Solutions
View Single Post
Old 12-09-2005, 06:06 PM
  #6  
Volfy
Senior Member
My Feedback: (23)
 
Volfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: CMP Kits – Problems and Solutions

Alex, my hats off to you. You are one brave man taking on the legacy left by GSP!

I have long maintained that the principal problem with CMP airplanes in the US lies with the distribitor - GSP. They have done so much to malign the brand image of these airplanes that it will be a monumental task to win back the overwhelmingly negative popular opinion. I have had many of the airplanes GSP distributes (not all of them were produced by CMP) and have sold them to friends as well. I have experience first hand just how ingrained the sour attitude people have towards anything associated with GSP.

CMP ARFs are mostly excellent products. Now there are minor annoynces from kit to kit that could be easily fixed. A good distributor would have:

1. Discovered them when testing samples and prototypes, then instruct the factory to correct them before initial shipment, or...
2. Responded quickly to customer feedback/complaint, then instruct the factory to correct them on next batch.

A good example is the canopy mounting method of the 72" Extra. It really needs to be redesigned so that the plastic canopy gets attached to a detachable canopy frame.

Another good example is the 72" Yak. Great flying machine and exquisite worksmanship. The landing gear & spats, however, is too scale and not at all rugged enough, espeically flying off grass. Changing to a conventional aluminum bracket (maybe angle forward to maintain the scale appearance) would be a much better compromize. The canopy hatch design is better than the 72" Extra, but it too can be improved by redesigning the mounting method. Maybe some preshaped woodblock that fit into the fiberglass rim would make it easier to sink mounting screws into. The canopy mounting base is unecessarily complex, which makes it heavy. Simplify/lighten it will shave quite a few Oz. of the plane with very little impact on scale realism.

Either 72" ARF should ditch the rubberband between eyehook method of securing the wing panels. Go with thumbscrews or flanged capscrews instead.

I am very glad to see you actively seeking feedback. It will be a uphill battle and at time frustrating, but if you persist, you will eventually prevail. Good luck.