What's next from Motion RC?

[Capt. Crunch]

Since we are talking about a prop plane next does that mean that im getting my 164 Ag Cat now?:)

I'd jump on that one!

[Evoman]

Stunning job on the albatross. With the fan and retract systems of the Avanti this will likely be a great performer. Thanks to all who have worked to develop it, it's not on my list but I'm sure it will bring allot of smiles to flying fields everywhere. Saving spare room in my hanger reserved for my must have wish list

Even though I have no interest in the L-39 I do recognize that it would make a great first 80mm EDF trainer for those that want something bigger than a 70mm.

I am also waiting for some planes on my wish list to take up the limited space in my hanger. But there might be a plane or two that could take a spot that is not on the list if its apealing enough such as an OV-10 Bronco. I don't have a twin prop yet and I could use something I can easily fly off grass when I need to.

[Woodcock]

Ya know I like both props and jets. When I brought up doing a C-130, I was quickly laughed off this forum. Basically why would anybody want one of those, lol. So with that considered, and please feel free to laugh away. I think a nice Freewing Boeing 737 would be awesome. Now before you dismiss me again, why couldn't you do loops and rolls in a nice Boeing 737, I personally think it would be great. What's the point of making a cool plane if you can't fly it how you want. Realize this, it really wouldn't be easy to make one of these that fly's great. But that is keeping with the Motion RC philosophy. Imagine the possible liveries. Getting company's to think outside of the box is a really hard thing. But let me tell ya, I think it would be a big winner. Not one that takes a year to assemble. But one that looks and fly's great, you have ready in a couple of days.

The bottom line, is the MRC folks are some of my favorite people. But some time they may need a well swung boat ore up side of the head to get them out of there rut.

HSD is making a Boeing 747, but I think they're missing the mark. Yea I'd like to have a 747, but we all know it's going to be too d..m big, and cost a small fortune. Kinda the HSD way, they have many, many planes that will cost in excess of 2K to get flying. I wont invest that kind of scratch to buy something that can ultimately pancake. I wouldn't be able to sleep for a week.

So let the laughing and scoffing begin. I would buy a nice 737, would you?

Best Regards
Woody

PS, HK has a Grumman Albatross on the way, most of us know this. Imagine if Flightline made one with retracts. It would blow the HK plane right out of the water. What if Flightline make a Catalina that had retracts. Think!

[Evoman]

I support the idea an C-130, it would be a very unique and versatile aircraft. I also think there is a need for some sort of airliner but I think it would have to be a good model that has different variants for it to have a wide appeal for it to be successful.
The 747 would be good candidate since there could also be the Air force one and Space Shuttle carrier variants.
However I think there would be a big interest if they did an Airliner that can also spin off production of the tanker variants such as:


McDonnell Douglas DC-10 / KC-10 Tanker
Boeing 767 / KC-46 Pegasus tanker
Boeing 707 / KC-135 Stratotanker

By the way there was a good thread going on for a while about airliners. Maybe you can revive it.

https://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/rc-airplanes/jets-and-edfs/114995-how-about-an-airliner

[xviper]

Ya know I like both props and jets. When I brought up doing a C-130, I was quickly laughed off this forum. Basically why would anybody want one of those, lol. So with that considered, and please feel free to laugh away. I think a nice Freewing Boeing 737 would be awesome. Now before you dismiss me again, why couldn't you do loops and rolls in a nice Boeing 737, I personally think it would be great. What's the point of making a cool plane if you can't fly it how you want. Realize this, it really wouldn't be easy to make one of these that fly's great. But that is keeping with the Motion RC philosophy. Imagine the possible liveries. Getting company's to think outside of the box is a really hard thing. But let me tell ya, I think it would be a big winner. Not one that takes a year to assemble. But one that looks and fly's great, you have ready in a couple of days.

The bottom line, is the MRC folks are some of my favorite people. But some time they may need a well swung boat ore up side of the head to get them out of there rut.

HSD is making a Boeing 747, but I think they're missing the mark. Yea I'd like to have a 747, but we all know it's going to be too d..m big, and cost a small fortune. Kinda the HSD way, they have many, many planes that will cost in excess of 2K to get flying. I wont invest that kind of scratch to buy something that can ultimately pancake. I wouldn't be able to sleep for a week.

So let the laughing and scoffing begin. I would buy a nice 737, would you?

Best Regards
Woody

PS, HK has a Grumman Albatross on the way, most of us know this. Imagine if Flightline made one with retracts. It would blow the HK plane right out of the water. What if Flightline make a Catalina that had retracts. Think!

Note the part in red ........................... Didn't you say in the C130 thread that you're a "scale guy" sort of? I'm beginning to think that "sort of" is a very casual term for you. I'm in line for the C-130 and the Grumman Albatross as soon as they show up on their website. And if I had a 737 (not that I want one), yeah, I'd do loops and rolls and fly it inverted just to make the scale guys cringe. Like you, if I'm going to pay that kind of money for a plane, I'll fly it however I like and let the spectators in the peanut gallery shake their heads all they want.
Now having said that I'm all in for the Herc, I think once it comes out and we see what the cost is and then see what the quality is and note how severe the deficiencies are, we'll have our answer as to why Motion won't take on something like this just because people want it to be so. COST! To bring out a big Herc like this HobbyKing specimen AND meet the higher standards that Motion puts on ALL their project planes, the cost would be quite high. Sure, they'll sell quite a few of them but it would quickly be cast into the realm of "niche" planes. It won't appeal to the general RC community because of cost. I believe HobbyKing will keep the cost at a point where it has a fairly wide customer base. That's what they try to do. When they can't sell enough of them, the lifespan will be short and parts will disappear like the Dodo bird. It is my understanding (from a friend in the extrusion business) that these airplane molds can cost from $60,000.00 to $100,000.00, depending on the complexity and quality of the end product. I suspect Motion's project planes would be at the upper end of that range. If a company like HobbyKing can get their money back and then determine at that time if they should continue, they will. If it's not a sales winner, they'll jump ship and abandon the mold and write the thing off to try and increase their margin a bit.

[Woodcock]

Look Viper, I understand your logic, well sort of. A B-737 is (2) motors, not (4). Did you know the Boeing 737 is replacing the roll of a P-3? Yes Boeing 737's are the new P-3. Lots of people thought the P-3's would be a cool model, but 737's are replacing them. I'm not a big RC guy, only been back about a year, but I am a retiring US Navy Captain. Down to my last (2) months of reserve service. I've been a life long aviation professional, with more than 10K hours in Helicopter, and fixed wings, (the ones you can get up and walk around in). My great grand fathers pilot certificate was signed by Orville Wright. I love almost all facets of aviation. Nuff Said.

I like to think I know what a cool plane is.

So why would I like to do loops and rolls in a model 737. I'd do it because I think, it would be fun. Oh I'd probably fly it scale too. But I really don't think I would let any self limiting beliefs let me spoil my own personal fun. I wouldn't do it to rub anyone the wrong way, so to speak. I know model guys are, "Model Guys", and I'm an aviation guy.
But I'm in it for the fun of it pure and simple. As far as limiting my flying enjoyment to avoid someones pre conceived notion of how it should be is simply nonsense to me.

In regards to to the production of a model, I'm fully versed with lots of different type of injection molding, including foam. Yes it's a costly endeavor. But so is the prototyping of a prospective air frame. There is a lot of this to be considered also. So to say the least, if you're vested you really don't want to miss the mark, if at all possible.

You can rationalize many different ways as to why Motion chose not to be involved with a nice C-130 model. In my mind they simply missed the mark here, or missed the boat, or what ever. They indeed fell victim to there own self limiting beliefs plain and simple. THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE IT. They didn't lets move on.

But ignoring the possibilities of a nice 737. is simply the same mind set repeated. This is simply my opinion, nothing more. But sincerely, I like the Motion people a lot. They get the lion share of my business. They deserve my sincere and honest feedback. You may not agree. But one thing I value from the closest people in my life is their honesty in return.

Best Regards
Woody

PS, I agree 100% in regards to the HK marketing. FYI

[Woodcock]

I support the idea an C-130, it would be a very unique and versatile aircraft. I also think there is a need for some sort of airliner but I think it would have to be a good model that has different variants for it to have a wide appeal for it to be successful.
The 747 would be good candidate since there could also be the Air force one and Space Shuttle carrier variants.
However I think there would be a big interest if they did an Airliner that can also spin off production of the tanker variants such as:


McDonnell Douglas DC-10 / KC-10 Tanker
Boeing 767 / KC-46 Pegasus tanker
Boeing 707 / KC-135 Stratotanker

By the way there was a good thread going on for a while about airliners. Maybe you can revive it.

https://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/rc-airplanes/jets-and-edfs/114995-how-about-an-airliner

I would seriously love one of those too. : )

Woody

[rifleman_btx]

Didn't eflite have one a few years ago? Maybe 15 years ago or so?

[Woodcock]

Didn't eflite have one a few years ago? Maybe 15 years ago or so?

Hey Rifleman, the ones that have been offered are mostly poorly designed and need lots of mods and upgrades to make fly even marginally.

Have a nice night mate
Woody

[RCjetdude]

Look Viper, I understand your logic, well sort of. A B-737 is (2) motors, not (4). Did you know the Boeing 737 is replacing the roll of a P-3? Yes Boeing 737's are the new P-3. Lots of people thought the P-3's would be a cool model, but 737's are replacing them. I'm not a big RC guy, only been back about a year, but I am a retiring US Navy Captain. Down to my last (2) months of reserve service. I've been a life long aviation professional, with more than !0K hours in Helicopter, and fixed wings, (the ones you can get up and walk around in). My great grand fathers pilot certificate was signed by Orville Wright. I love almost all facets of aviation. Nuff Said.

I like to think I know what a cool plane is.

So why would I like to do loops and rolls in a model 737. I'd do it because I think, it would be fun. Oh I'd probably fly it scale too. But I really don't think I would let any self limiting beliefs let me spoil my own personal fun. I wouldn't do it to rub anyone the wrong way, so to speak. I know model guys are, "Model Guys", and I'm an aviation guy.
But I'm in it for the fun of it pure and simple. As far as limiting my flying enjoyment to avoid someones pre conceived notion of how it should be is simply nonsense to me.

In regards to to the production of a model, I'm fully versed with lots of different type of injection molding, including foam. Yes it's a costly endeavor. But so is the prototyping of a prospective air frame. There is a lot of this to be considered also. So to say the least, if you're vested you really don't want to miss the mark, if at all possible.

You can rationalize many different ways as to why Motion chose not to be involved with a nice C-130 model. In my mind they simply missed the mark here, or missed the boat, or what ever. They indeed fell victim to there own self limiting beliefs plain and simple. THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE IT. They didn't lets move on.

But ignoring the possibilities of a nice 737. is simply the same mind set repeated. This is simply my opinion, nothing more. But sincerely, I like the Motion people a lot. They get the lion share of my business. They deserve my sincere and honest feedback. You may not agree. But one thing I value from the closest people in my life is their honesty in return.

Best Regards
Woody

PS, I agree 100% in regards to the HK marketing. FYI

How do you know that Motion doesn't have something going on with planes like this? Their pipeline is always full and if there is a C-130 or 737 in there somewhere I am willing to bet it would be far superior to anything we're seeing so far. Just because they haven't released something like these doesn't mean they have missed the mark or fell victim to their own self limiting beliefs. Cut 'em some slack for crying out loud. They have done an incredible job and will continue to do so. They can't make everything and they can't make what some want when they want it but if there is a market and when time and technologies permit it I think you will see things like a big beautiful C-130 or 737 come to fruition. It's in their nature.

[Woodcock]

I wanted to clarify. Viper, I agree 100% with how you described the HK business stratigy. I don't like it ether.

Jetdude, incredible is a pretty powerful word mate. They have seemed to do a pretty good job. I buy more than a few things from them. You have your opinion mate, and We know how opinions are.

I may buy myself one expensive plane this year. I may go for the, "Jet Hanger Hobbies" Super Scale US Navy A-7. It's an ARF, and beautifully done. Never thought I'd see JHH, develop a beautiful foam ARF like that. Simply stunning plane, truly excellent flight reviews and exceptionally powerful for an EDF. I'll have to bring my wallet though, lol.

Woody

[RCjetdude]

The A-7 is discontinued. Sorry.

[tclaridge]

I gotta ask this question: Why no WWI planes? There must not be a market, but I have a 1/6 scale Sopwith Camel, and I love it. Put a sound system in it with the engine going puck-it-a-puck and the guns going rat-a-tat-tat! It is a wonderful RC experience. With today's 3D printing, many scale details are available. So why no WWI? Are you guys not interested?

https://youtu.be/lrVrTY69PRk

[fhhuber]

Low interest.

Every WWI ARF series produced has been a sales flop.

WWI biplanes and triplanes have a reputation (pretty well deserved) of requiring advanced pilot skill. Poor ground handling, easy to flip on landing.

I still have all but the Dr1 from the Electrifly speed 400 powered series. (near 30 inch wingspans) Proctor/VK powith (90% complete) and Proctor/VK Fokker Dr1 kit in box. I also have the Dynam Albatross (with it s grossly undersize pilot)

[Woodcock]

The A-7 is discontinued. Sorry.

Well I suppose you would know. Bummer.

Woody

[Hardway]

Well I suppose you would know. Bummer.

Woody

http://jethangar.com/Accessories/Accessories.htm#A7

[Woodcock]

http://jethangar.com/Accessories/Accessories.htm#A7

Welp, I suppose that won't be happening. Yea I was just checking out the link mate. Was really looking forward to that one. : (

Woody

[Hardway]

:(:(:(

[RCjetdude]

Welp, I suppose that won't be happening. Yea I was just checking out the link mate. Was really looking forward to that one. : (

Woody

I felt the same way....even emailed Larry at JHH for clarification. You get all keyed up by one page until you click the link to order and them BAM! Major let down.