Airplane to Composite Airplane
10-09-2006, 01:24 PM
#51
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: vantaa, FINLAND
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
i did ailerons pretty simply way. base made from balsa. then i made from litho aileron leading edge panels(with round corners avoiding fabric damage like in real mk1a). then covered it with solartex. on solartex 2mm litho plate ribs with hammered stiches. and finally over every rib and panel edge, solartex stripes. nothing fancy.
i will make molds also from ailerons and all controls. i was studing in our local museum those fabric controls, indeed its very easy to over detail those. mine is not perfect but, tryed my best. in small scale spesially.
i will make molds also from ailerons and all controls. i was studing in our local museum those fabric controls, indeed its very easy to over detail those. mine is not perfect but, tryed my best. in small scale spesially.
10-26-2006, 11:19 PM
#52
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
I think you guys are really on to something. The future of this hobby is going to be similar composite type airframes that are lighter, stronger, more resistant to hangar rash and require less work for the modelers to complete.
You guys should quit your day jobs and perfect this method and make higher quality airframes than are currently available and alot more money too.
What we currently have are airframes made of balsa wrapped in X-mas paper.
You guys should quit your day jobs and perfect this method and make higher quality airframes than are currently available and alot more money too.
What we currently have are airframes made of balsa wrapped in X-mas paper.
10-31-2006, 10:21 AM
#53
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
proulxlaw
If I see strong sales of the Chinese composite arfs, like the "new" Typhoon thats out there, then maybe we will reintroduce our all composite models we used to produce back in 1990-1991. With all the new generation layups and stuff we have fooled around with over the years.
Steve
If I see strong sales of the Chinese composite arfs, like the "new" Typhoon thats out there, then maybe we will reintroduce our all composite models we used to produce back in 1990-1991. With all the new generation layups and stuff we have fooled around with over the years.
Steve
10-31-2006, 11:07 AM
#54
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
Perhaps the market wasn't ready for your product at that time. One of the objections that folks keep raising about all composite planes is the availability of parts. I think part of your focus should be on providing replacement parts at reasonable prices.
A couple of years ago I bought an ABS float plane called "Ready" on ebay. The plane is Italien and I think the company is Modelfly. I bought it for a song and figured I would use the floats anyway. After putting the plane in, I checked out the parts and was able to get the parts cheaply re-build the plane. I still have the plane and it flies great. As a result the company made more money on the plane, had a higher customer satisfaction quotient and kept me as a customer by making the parts available at good prices.
I believe composites and other similar materials are the future of the hobby and will quickly overtake most of the market share of the ARF buyer. The sooner you develop unique composite planes, the more of that market share you will be able to take and hold on to. KMP's new composite warbird releases are causing quite a buzz here on RCU.
A couple of years ago I bought an ABS float plane called "Ready" on ebay. The plane is Italien and I think the company is Modelfly. I bought it for a song and figured I would use the floats anyway. After putting the plane in, I checked out the parts and was able to get the parts cheaply re-build the plane. I still have the plane and it flies great. As a result the company made more money on the plane, had a higher customer satisfaction quotient and kept me as a customer by making the parts available at good prices.
I believe composites and other similar materials are the future of the hobby and will quickly overtake most of the market share of the ARF buyer. The sooner you develop unique composite planes, the more of that market share you will be able to take and hold on to. KMP's new composite warbird releases are causing quite a buzz here on RCU.
11-01-2006, 07:59 PM
#55
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
Proulxlaw
Companies out of China such as EMS, who builds the models for YT int and KMP I think are priced high enough for us to consider producing our composites again.
As long a there are all these "hands" in the pot of EMS and the prices stay up, it may be worth it. However, its only a matter of time before CMP makes copies of the composite models and offers them at the value that the CMPs are known to be. Composite are easy to copy, they will have them at prices that will beat all.
Another thing is, composite models are an awsome comcept, but care must be taken in the layup of these airframes. I want to see how the EMS/KMP/YTint Typhoon does among the arf guys. Durability, vibration tolerance, repairs are different based on the resins used and how the framing and "skin" is attached. My composite airframe partner/founder is ready to introduce our new all composite models, but I am not ready to jump in yet. We all still have day jobs, houses, families,ect...............
We would not have a mass production, but a small shop for a specialized top quality scale warbird replicas with as many accessories we can make for each airframe. The shop and the guy fabricating the model would be one in the same.
Taking notes
Steve
Companies out of China such as EMS, who builds the models for YT int and KMP I think are priced high enough for us to consider producing our composites again.
As long a there are all these "hands" in the pot of EMS and the prices stay up, it may be worth it. However, its only a matter of time before CMP makes copies of the composite models and offers them at the value that the CMPs are known to be. Composite are easy to copy, they will have them at prices that will beat all.
Another thing is, composite models are an awsome comcept, but care must be taken in the layup of these airframes. I want to see how the EMS/KMP/YTint Typhoon does among the arf guys. Durability, vibration tolerance, repairs are different based on the resins used and how the framing and "skin" is attached. My composite airframe partner/founder is ready to introduce our new all composite models, but I am not ready to jump in yet. We all still have day jobs, houses, families,ect...............
We would not have a mass production, but a small shop for a specialized top quality scale warbird replicas with as many accessories we can make for each airframe. The shop and the guy fabricating the model would be one in the same.
Taking notes
Steve
11-01-2006, 09:35 PM
#56
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
Take a look at this Airworld link: http://www.airworld.online.de/Englis...W190/index.htm
They get a heck of alot of money for this composite ARF. Nice plane for sure but, I know it can be sold for alot less and the manufacturer could still make a great profit.
I suggest sticking with planes that aren't available in an ARF (me 109G-.60 and/or 1.20 size) or if other ARF's are available, they are junk. If possible make planes where other already available kit accessories are available to give the modeler more choices e.g. Skyshark makes kits of cool planes but, you have to build a kit if you want that plane. Century Jet already makes retracts for alot of planes that are currently only offered as kits.
CMP planes and knock-offs might be cheap but, you never hear anybody writing that it's the best flying plane they ever had. I think the key is developing airframes that fly good. If they look good and fly good you will sell a heck of alot of ARF's. People buy H9 warbirds because they look reasonably good and you can count on them to be good flying planes and that's why they will probably get more of my money at some point. If I have a plane that looks good but, flies crappy, I will never fly it or I will sell it. To help accomplish this, the airframes need to be as idiot-proof as possible by controlling things like main wing incidence which could cause the novice builder if he screwed this up to have a plane that flies only once. H9 does things like that and that's why their planes fly good even when beginners build them.
I think your work is interesting and this business could simply focus on a few models at first that noone else is producing. KMP will make a ton of money on the new planes they have and the ones on the drawing board yet to be released because the scale modelers will finally have a great scale looking plane in an ARF that is composite. People will buy them just because they look good even if others say they fly like a turkey.
They get a heck of alot of money for this composite ARF. Nice plane for sure but, I know it can be sold for alot less and the manufacturer could still make a great profit.
I suggest sticking with planes that aren't available in an ARF (me 109G-.60 and/or 1.20 size) or if other ARF's are available, they are junk. If possible make planes where other already available kit accessories are available to give the modeler more choices e.g. Skyshark makes kits of cool planes but, you have to build a kit if you want that plane. Century Jet already makes retracts for alot of planes that are currently only offered as kits.
CMP planes and knock-offs might be cheap but, you never hear anybody writing that it's the best flying plane they ever had. I think the key is developing airframes that fly good. If they look good and fly good you will sell a heck of alot of ARF's. People buy H9 warbirds because they look reasonably good and you can count on them to be good flying planes and that's why they will probably get more of my money at some point. If I have a plane that looks good but, flies crappy, I will never fly it or I will sell it. To help accomplish this, the airframes need to be as idiot-proof as possible by controlling things like main wing incidence which could cause the novice builder if he screwed this up to have a plane that flies only once. H9 does things like that and that's why their planes fly good even when beginners build them.
I think your work is interesting and this business could simply focus on a few models at first that noone else is producing. KMP will make a ton of money on the new planes they have and the ones on the drawing board yet to be released because the scale modelers will finally have a great scale looking plane in an ARF that is composite. People will buy them just because they look good even if others say they fly like a turkey.
11-02-2006, 10:30 AM
#57
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
Proulxlaw
Great points on the availability of hardware. My only concern is CMP. If you take a look at the CMP Moquito or the At6 by CMP, they offer those models with glass fuses, cowls, and more importantly, glass center sections of the wing. All CMP has to do is make the outer wing panels glass and the tail section out of glass also for all composite models.
I paid $180 for the moquito and $220 for the AT6, delivered. How can you beat that. Why should I build, or fabricate, less money to crash. Just bought the 71" span P-51D, $199 from Nitromodels. Again, I can mold the whole model in composite, but why??
I have both of the CMP models mentioned here, I can make the molds in a weekend for the glass "conversion" for these parts and have an "all composite model".
But, since CMP is more of a direct seller and when they do this (not if) they will have great prices. Especially when they also offer epoxy resin models. They will kill our sales.
I've inspected the EMS?KMP?YTint 109 and aside from the retracts that no one uses, the model could just as well be in a CMP box, Same poly resin, same cheap covering, super thin glass colw. So why is it $300 more than CMPs 71" span models. I guess its marketing and the high income taxes the english have to pay?? Remember the pet rock, people paid for that even.l
Need to see where equilibrium prices will land.
Thanks for your input, food for thought.
Steve
Great points on the availability of hardware. My only concern is CMP. If you take a look at the CMP Moquito or the At6 by CMP, they offer those models with glass fuses, cowls, and more importantly, glass center sections of the wing. All CMP has to do is make the outer wing panels glass and the tail section out of glass also for all composite models.
I paid $180 for the moquito and $220 for the AT6, delivered. How can you beat that. Why should I build, or fabricate, less money to crash. Just bought the 71" span P-51D, $199 from Nitromodels. Again, I can mold the whole model in composite, but why??
I have both of the CMP models mentioned here, I can make the molds in a weekend for the glass "conversion" for these parts and have an "all composite model".
But, since CMP is more of a direct seller and when they do this (not if) they will have great prices. Especially when they also offer epoxy resin models. They will kill our sales.
I've inspected the EMS?KMP?YTint 109 and aside from the retracts that no one uses, the model could just as well be in a CMP box, Same poly resin, same cheap covering, super thin glass colw. So why is it $300 more than CMPs 71" span models. I guess its marketing and the high income taxes the english have to pay?? Remember the pet rock, people paid for that even.l
Need to see where equilibrium prices will land.
Thanks for your input, food for thought.
Steve
11-02-2006, 11:17 AM
#59
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
I agree in part and disagree in part. I think for it to be worth your while, you have to construct models that noone else makes like a 109G or FW 190D9. I have 2 KMP ME 109E's and I agree. They could almost be mistaken for CMP as I have had a few CMP planes. People pay that because it's a 109 and noone else makes one that size or quality and scale builders/flyers just have to have a 109. Also, they have to fly good and be easy to build. Find another way to eliminate the wooden dowels holding the main wing in place and replace it with something that the casual modeler can't screw up so that the incidence is correct no matter who builds it. Small differences like that will set your product apart from the rest and will justify a higher price for your product than the others.
I would spend more on a plane that I was confident would fly good than a cheaper plane that had mixed reports from modelers. I like scale stuff but, like I said if it flies like *****, I will hate it no matter what it looks like.
I would spend more on a plane that I was confident would fly good than a cheaper plane that had mixed reports from modelers. I like scale stuff but, like I said if it flies like *****, I will hate it no matter what it looks like.
11-02-2006, 10:14 PM
#60
RE: Airplane to Composite Airplane
I'll print your points out to use as a guide line the event we do start to offer composite models. The ease of construction ideas and correct settings are designed and tested in each of our model since 1990. All the bugs have been driven out of our designs.
Even on the harder to take off, fly and land scale 48-50" span warbirds we like personally. My personal favorite, our all composite 48" span BF109F/G version I am flying currently.
Hope a bussiness doesn't take the fun out of it again..
steve
Even on the harder to take off, fly and land scale 48-50" span warbirds we like personally. My personal favorite, our all composite 48" span BF109F/G version I am flying currently.
Hope a bussiness doesn't take the fun out of it again..
steve
