On Sep 19, 4:50*pm, Andreas Maurer > wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:25:19 -0700 (PDT), AK >
> wrote:
>
> >It is not possible if you don't think outside the box.
>
> >I am not saying build an old technology old design glider. I am saying
> >design an easy to build glider with a 40:1 performance at good speed
> >and build in large numbers.
>
> Prove it - and sell 150 units per year over the next decade.
> Then I'll believe you. ;)
>
> There have been quite a few attempts to build a cheap glider (and I'm
> sure some out-of-the-box thinking took place) - none was ever
> successful.
>
> Andreas

Over 100 Russia AC-4 and -5 variants were manufactured, sold &
delivered (including a few kits). IIRC, 90+ were to North America,
with a handful to the UK and one, two, or three to the EU. Had the
manufacturer not suffered terminal hubris and jerked around Bill Ard,
but continued to listen and respond appropriately to his input, I
think production and sale may have continued through the present. It
may even have led to higher-performance variants.

IMO, the presence of a market for a reasonably-priced, reasonable-
performance (>30:1, <36:1) sailplane is indisputable. Production may
need to be in Eastern Europe or other lower-cost labor market, but
build it and it will sell. Ah, yes: the PW-5. That design sank for
various reasons which need not be enumerated here. That it went away
while the Russia continued to sell proves my point.

LM

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 08:36:17 -0700 (PDT), GliderDriver
> wrote:


>Over 100 Russia AC-4 and -5 variants were manufactured, sold &
>delivered (including a few kits). IIRC, 90+ were to North America,
>with a handful to the UK and one, two, or three to the EU.

Well... success is something different, isn't it?


>IMO, the presence of a market for a reasonably-priced, reasonable-
>performance (>30:1, <36:1) sailplane is indisputable.

Well.... to repeat myself:
If there was a market (and if it was possible top get down production
costs), someone would have been able to sell a couple of gliders.
There have been many attempts.

We had the gliders you describe a-decade-and-a-half ago: ASK-23,
Mistral-C, Astir. "Good enough" performance, about 20-25 percent
cheaper than the latest state-of-the-art standard class ships (DG-300,
Discus, LS-4). Yet people (especially clubs) were buying the more
expensive standard class ships.
None was ever able to bring down production costs sufficiently to make
lower-perfomance-gliders interesting.

>Production may
>need to be in Eastern Europe or other lower-cost labor market, but
>build it and it will sell.

Looking at the prices of gliders from Eastern Europe (Lak, HPH) I am
getting the impression that the lower-cost labor market doesn't exist
anymore. They are not much cheaper than somehting from Poppenhausen or
Kirchheim-Teck.

Maybe the Cessna way is the answer: Production in China...


Cheers
Andreas

GliderDriver schrieb:
> IMO, the presence of a market for a reasonably-priced, reasonable-
> performance (>30:1, <36:1) sailplane is indisputable. Production may
> need to be in Eastern Europe

You mean like the SZD-51 Junior?