Ready to Fly Planes

[john e. holliday]

Tried to read through all the typing/texting of the past FAI World Championship.   I would like to know is the Yatsenko Shark that dependable to go compete with right out of the box?  I know Joe Gilbert tried with one of Kaz's planes.   Of all the prebuilt planes flown at the worlds or any FAI type contest are flown with out a lot of trimming flights and getting power options working.   Yes, I try to build/finish my own planes for competition.    I was for the ARF's when they first came out for those that have no place to build.   Even they had their draw backs.   If we want to compete on the world/FAI level we need to follow their rules just like when some one outside of the USA comes to compete at our nationals needs to follow our/AMA rules.

[Dave_Trible]

Doc the Yatsenko airplanes, the Shark and a couple others are another breed away from any other RTF or ARF. 
Firstly,  they are factory test flown and trimmed ready to compete.  The buyer needs to really know nothing about how to do that.  They are take-apart so transporting is easy- they even come in a travel case.  They are made from aterials and methods very hard to duplicate in your shop to build one airplane; all mold- built with high consistency and very light materials so the end result is lighter than most could build such an airplane.  A scratch built version in take-apart form could easy weight 6-10 ounces more.  In the case of the electric versions that is mostly all worked out too and so you don’t need to know much about power systems.  It’s very close to just plug and play.  It’s a very good flying airplane but it has no voodoo magic aerodynamics.  It’s special mostly in how it’s built and that anyone willing to drop the coin to buy one can have a world class airplane even if they haven’t a clue how to build one.

Dave

[jose modesto]

Dave the Sharks that finished 1-2-4-5 are all set up differently
Not cookie cutter
The control system,motor,batteries,timers and ESC were all different
The CG on All the models above are different
I was there
No two were set up alike
Shark # 1-2-4 were the new elliptical shark #5 is first generation
Just additional info
BTW there is a new version of the shark Andre was flying at the practice circle.
Jose modesto

[Dave_Trible]

Thanks Jose.  See ya at the TT.

Dave

[Paul Walker]

It gives the term "Shark Week" a whole new meaning...

Bob Hunt

Get back to work Bob!



😂😂😂😂😂😂

[Jim Kraft]

I don't think Ted would ever fly a Shark. I saw the video where Jaws ate his Nobler. Hat over heart.

[Chris Cox]

It gives the term "Shark Week" a whole new meaning...

Bob Hunt

Really Bob?  You had to do it, didn’t you...

[Joe Yau]

How much are they?

around 2400Euro + power package (either IC or Electrics) and shipping.

[John Rist]

around 2400Euro + power package (either IC or Electrics) and shipping.

That's $2794.81 US$ + power package and shipping.  Probably not going to happen.      (AT least for me)

[john e. holliday]

Well stated Bob.

[Ted Fancher]

I don't think Ted would ever fly a Shark. I saw the video where Jaws ate his Nobler. Hat over heart.

NOW, THAT WAS FUNNY!  well, not so much at the time.  But STILL:

Ted "Shark Food" Fancher

[Ted Fancher]

I'm not a huge advocate of RTF models in this event, but in FAI they are allowed, so it's okay by me there.

Now for the real medicine: The reason that CL Stunt (and CL in general) is not taken seriously by our hobby industry is the fact that CL fliers don't spend much money. Sorry to put it so bluntly, but this is a major contributing factor. Our sport is about the least expensive motor sport on the planet, and we still complain about the cost of stuff. To make a very technical product that will perform well in our event requires a commitment by the manufacturer. He/she cannot turn out junk and expect to survive. He/she has to work for less per hour than a "real world" entrepreneur because this is a "what the market will bear" industry/sport. Why should someone turning out quality merchandise have to accept less per hour than, say, a banker, or an engineer, etc? I'm in the hobby industry (have been for 50 years...), and I think I turn out a pretty good product. I put a lot of hours into each item that leaves my shop, but I cannot command a salary commensurate with all that work. But, hey, no one is holding a gun to my head telling me I have to do this. I choose to because I love the hobby/sport and enjoy making products for it.

Taking this to an industry outside our hobby/sport I can tell you that a really good quality acoustic guitar costs anywhere from $2,000 to $10,000 dollars (and sometimes even much more...). I play Taylor guitars, and the two that I own are each in the $4,000 price range. In looking at them I can tell you for certain that there is about the same amount of work in them as there is in one of the Yatsenko's models. So why do many think that their models are overpriced? Why do they even think they are "expensive?" They are reasonably priced for the work that is involved.

The Yatsenkos have decided to ask a real-world price for their work, and I applaud them. If you don't want to spend that kind of money, fine; but don't think that they are charging too much; they are charging for their products as if they were in the real world of commerce. From what I can tell, there are many who understand that such models cost a significant amount and are willing to pay the cost to get them.

Until we accept that quality products are worth a quality price and start supporting the hobby industry to a greater degree, we will not be taken seriously by it. But, I don't think that's going to happen...

Bob Hunt

(Sorry, I mis-posted the below on that otherYatsenko related thread but meant it to be here. I've deleted it from that thread)

Thanks, Bob.  As usual, very valid observations from a man who knows whereof he speaks.  There is no question, the Yatsenkos produce a marvelous product for which would be consumers must be willing to foot the bill.  That's how commerce works.  Their products are worth it in terms of both quality and performance.

However...   isn't there always a "however"....

Re RTF and CLPA; the biggest issue I find dismaying is that I would have a hard time posing for pictures of me with "my" airplane if my involvement in its creation consisted of writing a check or checking a box at Amazon; something I very much enjoyed doing over the years with my own airplanes.  This is in no way a disparagement of the quality of the Yatsenkos' product.  It is a reflection of at least 50% of the reason I spent a good part of my life immersed in the passion of stunt.  Alas, that passion wanes when the creativity no longer matters; when recognition of the value of that creativity vis a vis excellence at the Precision Aerobatics task becomes a debatable subject and no longer a requirement for success.

Ted

[RandySmith]

Quote from: Jim Kraft on July 24, 2018, 04:21:59 PM
I don't think Ted would ever fly a Shark. I saw the video where Jaws ate his Nobler. Hat over heart.

NOW, THAT WAS FUNNY!  well, not so much at the time.  But STILL:

Ted "Shark Food" Fancher
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

That  was  one  of  the funniest goofs  , I have ever seen !    Ted  and  Uncle Jimby  did a  marvelous  job on it !!
My sides  still hurt, I saw it first time  with Bear at the  VSC, I have never seen  Bob  laugh so much

Randy

[Ted Fancher]

Quote from: Jim Kraft on July 24, 2018, 04:21:59 PM
I don't think Ted would ever fly a Shark. I saw the video where Jaws ate his Nobler. Hat over heart.

NOW, THAT WAS FUNNY!  well, not so much at the time.  But STILL:

Ted "Shark Food" Fancher
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

snip

I have never seen  Bob  laugh so much

Randy

Randy,

Those eight words from the Bear made my day.  The whole production was worth the effort to hear that.

thanx

Ted