Re: Re: what is difficult in building indoor duration

From: Chris and Josette Borland <candjborland_at_surewest.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 16:23:55 -0700

Hey Jake. You can always put a radio tracker on your "$350" model
like the outdoor guys do on their really expensive bought models.
This way you shouldn't lose it inside a hanger! Ha-ha.

Anyway, if I can build a VP hub, anyone can. My only problem is the
word "Heavy" is printed on my efforts, but they do work as
advertised. I feel bought models would kill F1D, and as pointed out,
you will have a lot of money tied up in very fragile models that can
destruck for a total loss at any instant. At least outdoor guys
usually only crash or lose models which is probably the flyers fault.
One of the great things about indoor models is that the expense
involved (after a winder and rubber striper) is very minimal with
only a time factor in building to consider. This can be minimal or a
lot depending on the class involved and how really successful you
would like to be. My two cents worth.

Chris Borland - Sacramento


On Oct 17, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Jake Palmer wrote:

> Here's a hypothetical. What if the BOM rule went away and some of
> the top competitors began selling components? Treger sells his hub
> for about $100. Let's say Schramm started selling wings for $150,
> and prop blades for $100 a pair. Now you need to spend $350 to
> build one plane. You need several backup models to compete. That
> means I need to invest $1400 in models to be competitive. Is that
> going to spur interest in the hobby or will it just scare away the
> average guy like myself that can't afford to risk a $350 model on
> every flight?
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Yuan Kang Lee <ykleetx_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Don,
>
> Please don't agree with me !!!! LOL ...
>
>
>
> --- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Don DeLoach
> <ddeloach_at_...> wrote:
> >
> > I agree Kang.
> >
> > Don DeLoach
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Oct 17, 2012, at 2:59 PM, "Yuan Kang Lee" <ykleetx_at_...> wrote:
> >
> > > So if there's no advantage in Treger's hub, why not allow it to
> be purchased and used?
> > >
> > > --- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Jake Palmer
> <82.jake_at_> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I tend to agree with Mike. While I certainly appreciate the
> elegance of
> > > > Treger's hub, I don't think it offers any performance
> advantages over an
> > > > older style hub.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:29 PM, mkirda_at_
> > > > <mkirda_at_>wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I would have to disagree on composites being out of reach,
> Nick.
> > > > > A foot of carbon could make a lifetime of hubs and costs ~
> $5. Add
> > > > > laminating epoxy and balsa rather than Rohacell and you
> have an easy carbon
> > > > > yoke in just two layup steps. All you need is a Food Saver.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not convinced that the Treger design is any better
> though- There are
> > > > > some torsional stresses that might be better dealt with
> using Lutz
> > > > > Schramm's design for example.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards.
> > > > > Mike Kirda
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Nick Ray
> <lasray_at_> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think the ease of construction has a great deal to do
> with the
> > > > > materials
> > > > > > involved. A Brown / Kagan style hub is well within the
> range of average
> > > > > > indoorist. Most of the materials can ordered from A2Zcorp
> or even
> > > > > scavenged
> > > > > > locally. However, composite hubs like Treger, Tyson and
> Sandborn have
> > > > > built
> > > > > > require substantially more involved manufacturing processes.
> > > > > > All three use formed fiberglass tubes and carbon layup
> screw holders. The
> > > > > > vacuum bagging process alone is cost prohibitive for many
> people. One has
> > > > > > to make 6 or 7 composite hubs to break even when compared
> to the cost of
> > > > > > buying them from Treger. Maybe someone would like to
> produce V/P kits
> > > > > where
> > > > > > the base components are formed and then sent out with
> assembly
> > > > > > instructions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If F1D keeps moving in the direction of using more and
> more composite
> > > > > > technology we are going to be in the same situation as
> F1B within the
> > > > > next
> > > > > > ten years. I am for not placing materials restrictions on
> the models, but
> > > > > > at the same time I think that for many competitors,
> particularly juniors
> > > > > we
> > > > > > may have to decide how we would like to go forward with
> regard to the BOM
> > > > > > as the models become more intricate.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nick
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Oct 17 2012 - 16:25:30 CEST