![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Eric Greenwell maintains, and I am sure he is right,
that increased performance adds cost and smaller size reduces cost, and that many potential owners would be 'happy' with LS-4 performance in a smaller and more modern design. What about a modern 1-26 ? Could it be made affordable and attractive enough to sell 800-1000 copies ? Would the reduction in performance goal from 40:1 to 23:1 really reduce the selling price a lot ? Or are we at a point in the performance/cost curve where a reduction in L/D [for any size of glider] does not save a bunch of cost but an increase [whether by refinement of an existing design or a clean-sheet new design] costs a whole bundle ? I suspect that the economics of sailplane production are not driven by material costs or design sophistication, but by issues of labor costs, marketing costs, certification and insurance - and above all, the achieved market share. Anyone know some real-world figures to argue from ? Ian |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The modern 1-26 already exists. It's called a PW-5. Unfortunately it
hasn't taken off because it's not as sleek looking as the original. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Heck you can buy an Apis 13 kit for $17.5K USD (OK, it's probably gone up a
little lately) and get 38:1 in a ship that weighs 302lbs. Seems pretty tough to beat if you're in a 1-26 frame of mind. Wad --- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Waduino wrote:
Heck you can buy an Apis 13 kit for $17.5K USD (OK, it's probably gone up a little lately) and get 38:1 in a ship that weighs 302lbs. Seems pretty tough to beat if you're in a 1-26 frame of mind. Wad Paint it in polyurethane and you can probably leave tied out about as well, too. Brad can tell us how it takes to build one. -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paint it in polyurethane and you can probably leave tied out about as
well, too. Brad can tell us how it takes to build one. Hi Eric, Building the Apis was actually a lot of fun, with good instructions, and advice from Robert Mudd I was able to complete the build process in under 150 hours. The gel-coat (prestec) took considerably longer! The latest project on my 13m Apis is putting an engine in it. After building 2 Russias and an Apis I'd like to tackle a design of my own based on these 2 ships. Any one interested????...... ![]() Cheers, Brad |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Heck you can buy an Apis 13 kit for $17.5K USD (OK, it's probably gone up a
little lately) and get 38:1 in a ship that weighs 302lbs. Seems pretty tough to beat if you're in a 1-26 frame of mind. Wad --- Thanks for the nice comment. Yes, the cost has gone up because of the weakness of the dollar. Current price of an Apis 13 kit is 16,100 euros or about $21,000. More costly than a 1-26 to be sure but also a lot more fun to fly. Robert Mudd |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't think that performance is a big cost driver.
The major cost drivers a * development costs * certification costs * labour (for production) * raw material costs I suspect that all of these drivers will have a similar value irrespective of whether the glider is a APIS, 1-26 or LS-4. OK ... maybe the material cost will vary a little but the difference is not going to result in a glider that is 1/3 or 1/2 cheaper. The biggest issue with the cost of airplanes is quite simply VOLUME. They are generally built by hand using relatively crude production techniques and basic tooling. A modern small automobile is arguably far more complex than any glider but is costs a LOT less because of the level of automation in the mass production process and the large number of units sold. If we want cheaper gliders then we need to find a way to increase the volume of sales. Certification and design costs would be amortised over more units and production costs would dramatically reduce (bigger buying power for raw materials and better tooling / automated production will reduce labour cost). This is a chicken and egg thing ... you are not going to increase volume until the price is reduced and you cannot reduce price (which requires a new business model and significant investment) without the evidence of the larger sales potential. In essence we are stuck with expensive gliders unless we can attract some very wealthy individuals to the sport who share the vision of cheap gliders and are willing to gamble some of their money, against conventional business wisdom, simply to see if this vision can be realised without any guarantee of a return. "Robertmudd1u" wrote in message ... Heck you can buy an Apis 13 kit for $17.5K USD (OK, it's probably gone up a little lately) and get 38:1 in a ship that weighs 302lbs. Seems pretty tough to beat if you're in a 1-26 frame of mind. Wad --- Thanks for the nice comment. Yes, the cost has gone up because of the weakness of the dollar. Current price of an Apis 13 kit is 16,100 euros or about $21,000. More costly than a 1-26 to be sure but also a lot more fun to fly. Robert Mudd |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
smjmitchell wrote:
I suspect that all of these drivers will have a similar value irrespective of whether the glider is a APIS, 1-26 or LS-4. OK ... maybe the material cost will vary a little but the difference is not going to result in a glider that is 1/3 or 1/2 cheaper. YES The biggest issue with the cost of airplanes is quite simply VOLUME. They are generally built by hand using relatively crude production techniques and basic tooling. A modern small automobile is arguably far more complex than any glider but is costs a LOT less because of the level of automation in the mass production process and the large number of units sold. If we want cheaper gliders then we need to find a way to increase the volume of sales. YES Certification and design costs would be amortised over more units and production costs would dramatically reduce (bigger buying power for raw materials and better tooling / automated production will reduce labour cost). This is a chicken and egg thing ... you are not going to increase volume until the price is reduced and you cannot reduce price (which requires a new business model and significant investment) without the evidence of the larger sales potential. In essence we are stuck with expensive gliders unless we can attract some very wealthy individuals to the sport who share the vision of cheap gliders and are willing to gamble some of their money, against conventional business wisdom, simply to see if this vision can be realised without any guarantee of a return. Which means, more than anything else, that one has to concentrate on one model and only one, because there is no room for high volume production of several models. As a consequence, any discussion wether 13m gliders are better than 15m gliders, wether DG gliders are better than the LS4, or any such futility may have only one consequence, distract people from the aim. -- Michel TALON |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Which means, more than anything else, that one has to concentrate on one model and only one, because there is no room for high volume production of several models. As a consequence, any discussion wether 13m gliders are better than 15m gliders, wether DG gliders are better than the LS4, or any such futility may have only one consequence, distract people from the aim. Obsolutely ... in essence what you are saying is the same as Henry Ford 100 years ago when he said 'you can have any colour so long as it is black'. If the price was a lot lower and there was only one choice I don't think people would have anything to debate. They would just buy the thing. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't know if production methods have changed much. Last I knew,
composite 15m was 1000 hours labor, by far the largest cost component. (for comparison C-172 was something like 372 hours 30 years ago). There was no certification requirement for the world class. It was conformal, that is, could be built to specified size and shape by anyone from any material as part of the rules. One of the ideals. If memory serves, development was done by volunteers and university staff if memory serves, so there was only a modest license cost per unit. Development and certification costs are fully amortized in some existing models. If the soaring world adopted the LS-4b (which it has no rights to presently) as the world class, there would be no development nor certification costs. Sell a few molds to allow international construction and sell them. Sell control kits. Charge a license/plans fee for each. And build them commercially also. Wouldn't take long before the numbers increased and the world class would percolate to the top of the competition venues. Doesn't have to be the LS-4b either. The 304 is another very worthy candidate. Continuing the PW-5 as a sub-class might also have some benefit. Frank Whiteley "smjmitchell" wrote in message u... I don't think that performance is a big cost driver. The major cost drivers a * development costs * certification costs * labour (for production) * raw material costs I suspect that all of these drivers will have a similar value irrespective of whether the glider is a APIS, 1-26 or LS-4. OK ... maybe the material cost will vary a little but the difference is not going to result in a glider that is 1/3 or 1/2 cheaper. The biggest issue with the cost of airplanes is quite simply VOLUME. They are generally built by hand using relatively crude production techniques and basic tooling. A modern small automobile is arguably far more complex than any glider but is costs a LOT less because of the level of automation in the mass production process and the large number of units sold. If we want cheaper gliders then we need to find a way to increase the volume of sales. Certification and design costs would be amortised over more units and production costs would dramatically reduce (bigger buying power for raw materials and better tooling / automated production will reduce labour cost). This is a chicken and egg thing ... you are not going to increase volume until the price is reduced and you cannot reduce price (which requires a new business model and significant investment) without the evidence of the larger sales potential. In essence we are stuck with expensive gliders unless we can attract some very wealthy individuals to the sport who share the vision of cheap gliders and are willing to gamble some of their money, against conventional business wisdom, simply to see if this vision can be realised without any guarantee of a return. "Robertmudd1u" wrote in message ... Heck you can buy an Apis 13 kit for $17.5K USD (OK, it's probably gone up a little lately) and get 38:1 in a ship that weighs 302lbs. Seems pretty tough to beat if you're in a 1-26 frame of mind. Wad --- Thanks for the nice comment. Yes, the cost has gone up because of the weakness of the dollar. Current price of an Apis 13 kit is 16,100 euros or about $21,000. More costly than a 1-26 to be sure but also a lot more fun to fly. Robert Mudd |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|