Props4ever

If it's not Boeing then i am not going!!...

Bring on B767-200/300ERs or even 400ERs Pence, if you do half decent job and price is right, i'll be one of the first ones to purchase it from you....

fulps

I would appreciate a Airbus...but a bigger one like the A330 or 340. But the A320 is fine too. You make one I buy one.

By the way...a friend of mine is looking for a Canadair Jet CRJ 700 or 900. Is there a kit available???


Best regards

Jochen

penceaviation

Shipping to Germany would be real expensive, but it can be done. I don't have plans to make a Canadair right now but I have looked at it.

BalsaBob

My Feedback: (24)

A320, A319, B757, B767 etc. ..... whatever, ...... I would buy one.

Bob

penceaviation

That man just wants a nice airliner folks!

I'll put you on the list Bob, thanks!

CraigG

My Feedback: (40)

Here's one humble little request for anyone who builds a nice turbine airliner (not talking about those foamy ones). Please fly it like an airliner and avoid the loops and rolls. Nothing ruins the coolness of a scale airliner flight than totally un-scale aerobatics. Just my humble opinion.

Craig

DSTIEBS

I agree 100%. I get turned off when I see a scaled aircraft do unrealistic manuvers. I know we are to have fun flying but I do enjoy it more when it looks so real. Just my 2cents. No ill feelings intended.

Countryboy

My Feedback: (25)

Put a mental block on the prop engines and envision twin turbines. Video of the 757-200 I posted pics of earlier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e92H2VJbJ5s
Yes, he fudged the landing, but I have seen him grease it in also. The landing is a testament that the c/f flex plates on the mains do their job...no damage to the airframe occured although a few passengers did suffer spinal compression.

Also note that the nose has more positive angle of attack right before takeoff than it does on taxi out. The nose retract is height adjustable from the transmitter.

CraigG

My Feedback: (40)

Nice looking 757! Notwithstanding the slightly less than scale sound, it looked good flying around. That's what I'm talking about!

fumus

The big advantage of Norbert Rauch's planes is the lower weight of the fuselages. The foam/balsa center sections with fiberglass noses and tails are much lighter than a full fiberglass fuselage. Also, you can choose (for example) either to build a 117'' long 757-200 or a 134'' 757-300 only by changing the center fuselage's length.
Both turbines or EDFs can be used for his planes. IMHO the weight penalty of a full composite airliner with small wings like a 757 would make the use of EDFs impossible. But also a turbine powered plane flies slower and therefore more scale-like if it has a lower weight.

penceaviation

Those are some interesting points, but the type of foam most guys would use for that is at least 1.5 pounds per square foot, so just ballparking it I'm pretty sure I would come out better than that or close to that. As for making different variants, if I went the Boeing route it would be molded in pieces anyway to help with shipping so it wouldn't be a huge deal to make a few extra pieces to lengthen the bird.

Another option I'm considering is a hybrid method I have been testing using 2 layers of thin, light cloth to mold the part and 1.5 pound pour foam to hold the shape and add strength, poured in after the layup. It's strong, and will be every bit as light as someone else glassing their own foam and painting it. The key benefit is it makes a quicker building, more desirable kit.

Still working on all that though.[8D]

P.S. since I'm a smaller company, electric guys (or anyone else) can always ask me for a lighter layup, changes they want etc, and I'll always be glad to help.

invertmast

My Feedback: (23)

How bout some scale control surfaces as well.. Nothign ruins it (for me) than to see a Great looking scale project w/ un-realistic control surfaces. IE, i mean, lets have some double/trip slotted flaps and tru fowler flaps. Along w/ scale style landing gear "trucks" and spoiler-ons.

penceaviation

I'll probably do a couple things to appeal to the masses and keep the plane priced right. There will be sport flyers that don't care about scale flaps, scale landing gear etc. That kit may be separate and lower priced than a kit with more detail, or I may make a detail add on package with more scale features. So far, with my SR-71 kit I have 2 types of buyers, the guys who just want the semi scale landing gear, and the guys driving me to develop fully scale landing gear with lights, brakes etc. The price difference will be about $500 just on the landing gear and that is not for everyone (since that represents half the price of the kit itself).... So I'll probably make the A320 upgradeable to more detail and more scale features and sell that stuff as a separate or optional package. I have invested tons of time, money and energy in making local contacts with CNC metalworking, show quality painting, and CNC foam cutting capabilities so anything is possible.

I love this stuff.

Props4ever

So Shannon you are still going for A320 and not the Boeings as seems from your last post?

I like thrust to weight ratio on B757s but i can't stand seeing them or didn't liked working on them!.
To me B757 is a half sliced version of beautiful and well designed B767!. I understand your view point as business also....

causeitflies

How about my all time favorite, a nice 727? Single engine would make the price right.

WhoDaMan

My Feedback: (164)

Do the Carevelle,,,,,,,,,,,, one of the nicest airliners ever built,,,( one mans opinion )

WhoDaMan

My Feedback: (164)

Me Like mucho

Props4ever

Make it two men opinion now..hehe
This will be sweet subject also, but won't beat B767 at anytime...
Caravelle is the ONLY plane that has distinctive tri-angular pax windows!!

penceaviation

I have considered a 727 since I work under the last mile of the approach into Indianapolis, and Fed Ex brings in about fifty 727's every afternoon.... and it could be single engine, you are right....hmmmm... I'll sleep on that.

penceaviation

At the rate I'm going I might put a couple on the drawing board over the coming months, still think I'll start with the A320

fumus

For the Caravelle check [link=http://rauch-airliner.com/CaravE.htm]rauch-airliner.com/CaravE.htm[/link]

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

The Sud Caravelle is one of the classiest ones ever! But I'm holding out for a DC-8-21 with a flame thrower and smoke kit, just like the real one

If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going cause I'm on strike anyhow, Douglas doesn't build airplanes, they build character, and Fifi (Airbus) is for button pushers! Have I offended enough people? I'm waiting for a comment accusing me of xenophobia in a minute

BTW, DC-8 and Caravelle pilots look like movie stars

(Yes, the Sud Caravelle was made by SUD, a fore runner to Airbus!!)

CraigG

My Feedback: (40)

I'm dating myself here but I flew the "diesel"-8 way back when, both the flame thrower and the later CFM-56 conversions. It was the Queen of the Skys in its day but a dinosaur by todays standards. Heavy on the controls, no APU, crappy a/c (no packs), and everything was cable operated. Still though, a good looking airplane.

Craig

iiievolution

Hello

Make the A320. Since I have been flying the real one for the past 6 years I wouldnt mind a model one too But please please try and make the cockpit windows accurate to scale, I just cant understand why NO model airliner has accurate cockpit windows. We see model airliners that are so accurate....except for the cockpit windows [:'(] . Surely it can be done, look how accurete our military jets are.

Paul

causeitflies

I agree that the nose and cokpit area should be true to scale. That is the area that is the face of and defines an airliner. After all, the rest of the fuse is just a tube