Are smaller models getting left behind?
 

Just a pointless rant as I check out all the sweet new eye candy from JP.
I notice though that the trend for a while has been to go bigger and bigger, which is awesome and I can certainly appreciate it. Yet it feels like there is not much innovation or investment in your 80-170 size market.
While the big stuff is beautiful it is out of reach financially for a lot of people, myself included. I'm sure there will be some backlash on here and that's cool. Must obviously be the profit margins of the larger models driving this....Discuss??

Yea i have noticed the same, the smaller models have died out. My guess is the smaller all composite models are to expensive for most and those who want to build semi composites isnt a big enough group to keep companies in business long enough to have the desire to come out with newer models.

That said, Ive got the plugs ready for final sanding for a small 60-80N turbine. I just need to get my current commitments done so i can get to sanding on them.

with age, comes bigger models

I was just flying this weekend for the first time in 2 years (jets) and I have to say, the bigger stuff is great, but I flew my old Bobcat XL with a P70. It's not a pain to carry, it's not a pain to pack, it uses very little fuel compared to say my Olympus in the Firebird, it's inexpensive all the way around. I can't afford to go bigger, it's not just the jets, it's upgrading the vehicle and trailer too.

Seems to me that the smaller planes are being left to the foam makers.

I think its the corvette syndrome........big plane.......lil digital servoes or you know what I mean. sure they fly better but not everyone can or wants to spend the cash for a 40lb turbine. its amazing what pride will make us do.....

Check out the new small Excalibur for 20-35 sized units available in the next few months.

I totally agree... It was very interesting to watch the crowds round the stands especially when there were smaller models on show. It is not just the cost of these huge planes but also the storage problem at home and getting them to and fro to the field. Also the time it takes to assemble a large plane that has been broken down to many components. If we go flying at a local club the main size is 80-120 turbines with some smaller P20 and 44 size. If we are flying for just a morning a one piece model that does not need assembling is a bonus. for me the mini Avanti and the mini excalibur look very interesting and I would buy one or both when available. The real problem is that the manufacturers make a much greater profit in making the large models. The incentive is therefore to make ever larger more expensive planes.

Some of the planes flying were powered by 400N engines... that is getting on for 90 lbs thrust. This is crazy, and getting to UAV size. Many were flying over 200N engines which I believe is not permitted in the USA under AMA regs.



John

John

I guess that smaller models will make a comeback... They are easier to transport and far more practical to handle.. and if properly set with 3axis giros, they fly realistically, something that was only possible in the past scaling up the planes.

Something around 2,5 meter in size is ideal in my opinion...

We are coming up with a certain number of 120-160 size super scale planes.

The 1/7 scale PNP Rafale, which is already available.
The 1/7 scale PNP F-16 ( my baby that I designed from 1998 to 2000 ) which is arguably one one the most scale F-16 on the market and one of the best flying. I am working on a super scale electric gear for this plane.

and a few more original design that have never been seen on the market yet.

hopefully when the baby excalibur sells well more people will jump on the band wagon, I have bigish jets and transport is a bit of a pain and it means I can only take one at at time which is ok until I needs a spare to fly on the day

Though I agree that transportation and logistics of a large model sucks, prices are completely disproportional to the advantage for those who are cash strapped (don't like that term, how about cash committed instead).

You can, today, buy a very reliable 35-40lb low time engine for the same price or lower than a 19-21 lb engine.

To all of this, add that a LOT of small models today are already equipped (unnecessarily) with high torque servos, high capacity batteries, power expanders, electronic valves.......well you may already have half of the necessary equipment needed for a large scale model in your garage.

That being said, today you could trade your small size engine for a much powerful one, and just buy a large airframe and a few electronics if you wanted to. You can get a 1/6 F-16 airframe new for around $3K, or a slightly used one for much less. Compare that to the price of a new Bandit ARF, a Jetlegend small F-16, and such.......

Plus, the amount of new releases is so overwhelming that a lot of folks are selling their bigger stuff for pennies on the dollar. And, there are still plenty of smaller options out there. (I'm specifically after the new DerJets F-35).

So, if you can manage the logistics.......the time to upgrade is now (if you want).

David

Deleted. I've run into a few douchebags and need to quit posting it at the community.
Sorry. the "my jet is bigger" guys just have issues and not everyone thinks that way :)

Ahh so true! A 45lb model is no longer a big airframe. 200N engines are the new P-80s. And 1/6th scale are the new 1/8th.

There is no point in competing for size. Someone else, with probably less modeling experience and skills than you but more cash, will always beat you. :-)
Just embrace it................let it go..................let it go................cant hold it back anymore.....................

I dunno, its odd 20N goes from small to "big" :)

Actually 200N engines are relatively rare from my experience. Most I have seen are 100-170N.
I've only seen 1 P300 and it was custom ordered. The guy who has it was not a "my jet is bigger guy". That's the "180 is small 200 is large guy" :)

I have some sort of quality that makes certain guys want to compete with me for some reason. Probably because I go fly and knife edge a few feet up, which is just what I do for fun, not to show off.

My stuff is cheap and Id be a fool to spend lots of $$ on a model when I have 3 kids. Plus my wife isn't a doctor.

I am getting a new kingkat locally, I plan to put it away for several years. Not my type of jet but I am sure I will appreciate its trainer quality some day.

To me, an excellent wayto reduce cost and increase the fun is building from plans. Personally I wouldlike to see more plans and short kits for jets on the market. But of course Irealize that there is even less money for the company’s in that than in small compositekits.
Anyway, I would like tosee more jet plans from people like Nick Zirolli and Bruce Tharpe.

Jannica In Sweden

To each his own. I have a 100 size jet. Putting together a 45 size plane. I have an ultra Flash that will be assembled over the winter. I have done bigger prop planes. I have had a few 35% and 40% planes. I got sick and tired of hauling and storing big planes. With family commitments I rarely get a whole day to fly. 4 hours is the norm. I love having a plane that fits in the vehicle assembled. It seems like the 80-100 size jets would become a sweet spot. Resonably priced turbines, can pick them up used pretty cheap, and a good size plane. Seems like it should become the jet version of the 50cc prop plane that so many people fly now.

Any chance for a smaller Diamond? I LOVE that plane but it is just too big for me. 60-100 size Diamond would make me go nuts trying to scrounge up the money to be first in line.

I was just looking at the Ultimate Jets website and didn't see the F-16 you referred to. Is this actually in production or is it just in testing?

All of us have seen this with IMAC before. When I started, a Goldberg Sukhoi was competitive but by the time I quit flying competitively, some basic fliers were using 40% planes! I think it's settled down now with competition planes being in the 150-170 sized engine and knock around planes being 70-100. Maybe jets will settle down the same way over time. There's a sweet spot in the flight characteristics vs lugging the plane around. It should balance out.

I remember that Sukhoi. Man a YS 1.20 seemed big in that thing!

Here are the view points from different sides. Size does matter

1. factory side
Bigger is easier to build, more sales revenue.

Labor cost of builiding smaller one is actually equal or even higher because the margin for errors is also smaller and requires more skillful workers who are harder to find or to keep in places like China.

Economy of scale is small. the facotries have to build limited quanity and there is no way that they can keep running if they can only a few hundred a year while the foamies can be sold for several thousands per year. The unit cost is high, so they will lean toward whatever size that can command higher revenue.

2. pilot side

Bigger is easier to see, easier to fly, and looks cooler and higher value. Now the foamies are approaching the size 60-100N turbine jets and they cost around 200-500 bucks. It would be hard to tell your wife that your composite jet is 10 times more than that same size foamie jet sitting in your garage.

I think the optimal size is about 120-160s. It's the medium size now. It's like our body size. Our ancestors average smaller than we are now. It's just a progression through evolutions.

My every day jet is Viper 1.9M because it's small but easy to fly and maintain.

My Wren 44 size A7 has been sitting in the garagee for 5 years and I won't even want to fly it because my reflect and eye sights are going downhill every year. It costed me $6000 RTF, while I can get a big 120-160 size jet for the same price or less.
Mike

Great points, Mike.

My guess is that the future of small jets will look like this: Foam 1/8 F-16 RTF for $780. Add a 60 size turbine if you desire.
http://www.dragonhobbyusa.com/hsd-10...birds-264.html

I agree Mike, in my opening post I mentioned 80-170 size models. 100-180 is the new medium and I personally feel like it is an ideal size for
flight qualities, ease of MX, and transportation.

Oli Keep us up to date on your 1/7 F16 I have been wanting that size 16 for a while. To bad the skymaster had its issues and i was never crazy for the avonds. While PNP is nice I hope you consider offering it in an ARF version as well.

While that F16 is cool, I would hate to think of the amount of re engineering that would have to go into it to make it a safe and dependable turbine model. As it is now I feel like the amount of re engineering the end user has to do with the majority of models available to us is unacceptable.
Not all of them are like that, but a large majority are.