Standard Design Idea

[steven yampolsky]

I would like to get community feedback on an idea. I will be making some statements that may get some folks to strongly disagree with the premise. To those of you, I urge you to put the premise aside and take a look at the idea instead. So, here's my train of thought:

Premise/assumptions
Every assumption below is a generalization which supposed to have exceptions. If a generalization covers every case, it's too broad and is useless. If a generalization has too many exceptions, it's too narrow and as useless.

Over the past 50 years of stunt design, there were designs that defined the era. Their "numbers" and powerplant combos were wildly copied and new looks applied to it. The end of each era was arrival of a new powerplant that ushered change in design numbers. In the 60's it was Fox 35, St46 in the 70's, ST60 in the 80's and 40VF in the 90's. Now we are in the era of several different power packages that deliver pretty much the same amount of power. In other words, the change in power delivery over the past 10-15 years has not changed the basic geometry of an airframe.

Construction methods are pretty much the same as 20 years ago. Since the geometry and construction methods have not changed drastically, an assumption can be made that majority of airframes have the same construction methodology as well as geometry.

So what's different? The differences are in the following areas:

• Shape of the top block
• Position and shape of the canopy
• shape of the rudder
• shape of the cowl
• shape of wing and stab tips
• landing gear position

If one were to subtract these parts and make some assumptions of the wing construction(foamie vs built up d-tube), a basic airframe emerges that can be used to generate infinite variations of different looks.


Idea
Create a kit of a basic airframe that does not have any of the above "differentiators" but instead focuses on straight, strong, light and easy to assemble construction methods. The kit would model dimensions of a current crop of top 20 airframes. If such kit existed, how many people would consider buying one?

[Randy Cuberly]

Steve,
Sounds like a good idea to me because I usually Kit Bash anyway.
One thing left out of your list of changes along the way was adjustable controls etc.
That doesn't really change the premise however since most kits don't include adjustable hardware anyway.

Randy Cuberly

[builditright]

John Miller has this option on his website.
While I don't know what exactly you get, he calls it the Designer plans kits.

http://www.cadclassics.net/designer%20plans.html

[john e. holliday]

In my thinking, RSM Dist, Brodak and some indidual people already have kits that meet your criteria.   I have seen the Vector 40 flown by several people and it looks great.  Quite a few examples already exist.   Brodak has instruction books for building his kits and I have never had a problem with them.

[steven yampolsky]

Steve,
Sounds like a good idea to me because I usually Kit Bash anyway.
One thing left out of your list of changes along the way was adjustable controls etc.
That doesn't really change the premise however since most kits don't include adjustable hardware anyway.

Randy Cuberly

I agree, adjustable controls are a given but if by that you mean adjustable lead outs, well, the mechanism is usually inside a wingtip which would not be part of the standard kit. Same goes for the tipweight.

[FLOYD CARTER]

I like the idea of a "standard-basic" kit, ready for customizing.

However, I think what really sells a particular kit is its heritage.  That is, modelers tend to want the "same" plane that Walker, Fancher, Buck, etc. won with (thinking that the same plane will also give them a win!)

For myself, I sometimes buy a kit, but always change it a lot.  Or, more often, I will use plans (like Legacy) and design my own using much the same "numbers".

Floyd

[Randy Cuberly]

I agree, adjustable controls are a given but if by that you mean adjustable lead outs, well, the mechanism is usually inside a wingtip which would not be part of the standard kit. Same goes for the tipweight.

I was actually referring to adjustments between the bellcrank and control surfaces for both neutral position and differential position between the flaps and elevator throws.
However most stunt kits now include a slider adjustment for line rake.

Randy Cuberly