You must Sign-in or Register to post messages in the Hobby Squawk community
Registration is FREE and only takes a few moments

Register now

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What's next from Motion RC?

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Valkpilot View Post

    You mean The Clunk.
    Yeah. I guess it looks good there on a frozen pedestal in the middle of frozen nowhere. Then again, they could make a 64mm with twin hair dryers....

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Alpha.MotionRC View Post
      If push comes to shove, I'd wager y'all would prefer we keep working on what I'm looking at right now across the room...;)
      The creativity that goes into the new generation of Flightline and Freewing birds is impressive. Yes they are some great looking and flying birds with some great features and details.

      But, there is so much more that is overlooked or not seen. The foam packaging alone is a work of art. The time and money it takes to design and manufacture it alone, cannot be inexpensive. Yet, once our new bird arrives safely, the packaging is discarded.

      I recently went about the task of "salvaging" bits from a set of damaged Avanti S wings. Now, by salvage, I mean removing anything that might come in handy later. This includes anything structural. Getting to the framework itself was a challenge. This is one strong wing! Once accessed, I was surprized at the type and amount of carbon fiber rod and square tubing used. The tube transition joiner from square to round was strong and well designed.

      These things are never really designed to be "seen". Yet we can count on them being done right to perform the task they were designed to do. Well done Alpha!!! and Thank You!!!!:Cool:

      Comment


      • That spreadsheet is very well done, but it does have one typo. The last column should read "2000mm" instead of "1600mm."

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Woodcock View Post
          Ya know a FL SBD would be cool. Working dive breaks are a must! HK offered one of these in a wooden format ARF, but if you read the reviews everyone that has them seems to complain that the dive breaks are junk, and end up disabling them. I'd probably be in for one of those, as long as it was equal to the FL Corsair in quality and had working dive breaks. Here's a hint, don't attempt to make the dive breaks out of foam! They would need to be injected molded plastic, out of a quality plastic. If they were molded right, with the right plastic, you could mold the hinge right into the dive break it's self. I think one of these would be very cool. I would have to go back and watch, "Battle of the Midway" all over again. i really wish Spielberg would do a remake of that movie.

          Woody
          :Thinking: ?? Hey Woodcock, do you know that Flightline did offer a very nice Slow But Deadly with detailed cockpit and gunner, then it was discontinued after some time. Working speed brakes and lots of other details! I got mine in May 2016, it was my first purchase from MRC. And I still have it!! (I still want to make the bomb drop work with that trapeze!) This was a really great model and the only thing I did was ditch the ridiculous wing tanks and installed bombs.


          Click image for larger version  Name:	20160529_093851.jpg Views:	0 Size:	154.9 KB ID:	182464Click image for larger version  Name:	20160530_180051.jpg Views:	0 Size:	491.2 KB ID:	182465
          Marc flies FW & FL: AL37, MiG-29, T45,F4, A4, A10, F104 70 and 90, P38, Dauntless SBD, Corsair, B17, B24, B26 & P61, Lipp.P19, ME262, Komets, Vampire, SeaVixen, FMS Tigercat, FOX Glider & Radian XL.

          Rabid Models foamies, including my 8' B17 & 9' B36... and my Mud Ducks! www.rabidmodels.com

          Comment


          • Originally posted by AirHead View Post

            Yeah. I guess it looks good there on a frozen pedestal in the middle of frozen nowhere. Then again, they could make a 64mm with twin hair dryers....
            It's not a negative. Like the B-52 is the Big Ugly Fat F@#$ker, and the A-6 is the Ugly, the CF-100 is the Clunk, because when the nose wheel went up, it made a "clunk" sound.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Valkpilot View Post

              It's not a negative. Like the B-52 is the Big Ugly Fat F@#$ker, and the A-6 is the Ugly, the CF-100 is the Clunk, because when the nose wheel went up, it made a "clunk" sound.
              Didn't take it as one. The 64mm comment may have been a zinger, but I was laughing when I wrote it. I do stand corrected and educated though. I wasn't aware that the CF had a nickname. I thought the "Clunk" may have been the sound of a wing falling to the ground as they cut it up for scrap like the Arrow. They made under 700 of these. They had a top speed of 552 MPH. It was an early jet, not so high performance as some. They sit motionless on pedestals throughout the North. Reminders of invention and early jet development....

              Comment


              • Originally posted by AirHead View Post
                Ditto on the F100; T33 or a big F9F Panther. Seems like enough interest to resurrect vintage jets....
                F9F agreed......

                Comment


                • I've been bugging Alpha for a big Panther for YeEeAars....

                  Comment


                  • And a big go here for aT 33, Panther, and F 100. Sooner the better.

                    Comment


                    • I really believe there is a larger market for vintage jets. Most of the pilots I talk to love vintage jets. I have the MiG 21, Me 262, A-10, F-104, T-50 and the Gloster. Holding out now for the next classic. I would have bought the T-33 from Lander had they not discontinued it.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by themudduck View Post

                        :Thinking: ?? Hey Woodcock, do you know that Flightline did offer a very nice Slow But Deadly with detailed cockpit and gunner, then it was discontinued after some time. Working speed brakes and lots of other details! I got mine in May 2016, it was my first purchase from MRC. And I still have it!! (I still want to make the bomb drop work with that trapeze!) This was a really great model and the only thing I did was ditch the ridiculous wing tanks and installed bombs.


                        Click image for larger version Name:	20160529_093851.jpg Views:	0 Size:	154.9 KB ID:	182464Click image for larger version Name:	20160530_180051.jpg Views:	0 Size:	491.2 KB ID:	182465
                        Here is mine with the brakes and flaps deployed!!!!! I bigger one would be sweet, but this one is a keeper for sure!!!!! :Cool: I agree the drop tanks are just silly, kind of like the pilots...

                        Comment


                        • Wow, I would have never guessed that a zero would be a money loser!

                          So now I'm really curious about the whole process. I know there's a lot more into it, but is it really as simple as aircraft not flown by the allies do badly regardless how well they fly?

                          Adversary flights are so cool. We get lots of joy when the Mig21 and F4 are up together. Even the Yak130 mixing it upuwith the Hawk is awesome. Are we outliers?

                          I guess what I'm asking is what makes a particular plane profitable over another?. I'm guessing the cost of goods for a power system isn't going to be that different from one plane to another. Which implies that the cost of designing and producing the molds must be a significant factor. Still, I would have guessed producing a P51, wouldn't have been significantly different from a similarly sized zero.

                          I'm rambling now...

                          To be clear, I'm not complaining. I love Motion RCs work and wish I had enough money for at least 1 of every plane you sell. They are all .that good. When I see something I don't understand or realize my assumptions are wrong, I want to know why.

                          Thanks
                          ​​​​​​

                          ​​​​​

                          Comment


                          • Pretty sure it's a simple and demand equation. There are a LOT of RC flyers that like WWII fighters but mostly the ones they know well, like ones from their own country or that they've read stories about. Patriotism runs deep in the aviation crowd. Now, WWII aviation enthusiasts that also fly RC are open, or would enjoy and appreciate the entire gamut of pre-war, WWII and post war prop planes but are a much smaller group. It takes "X" to design, pay a mold maker to create, then produce a new model. It's my understanding just having a new mold made is a six figure proposition. With the new rise in taxes (tariffs) and increases in shipping costs a company has to apply a price point based on so many units to make a profit that is still "reasonable" to the average R/C ARF buyer or the projected crowd that may be interested in the particular subject.
                            Mustangs, Corsairs, Thunderbolts, Spitfires, Cubs, etc. are always good sellers. That is why we always see them. It's a huge financial risk for a company to stray too far from these. Fortunately for us Motion RC is willing to venture out on occasion and give us something unique but it's still a big risk. This is probably why the "outside the norm." offerings are the smaller, cheaper models.

                            Comment


                            • You're right on it, Beeg. While Alpha, Mark and Tom would have the best insight, for me personally it comes down to what is most popular is most profitable, i.e., the two are not mutually exclusive. While I believe we are the leaders when it comes to breaking out of the norms from time-to-time in foam warbirds, to keep the lights on it is fiscally responsible to offer models that consistently show themselves to be the most popular. Having said that it behooves us to be innovative and support the idea of bringing models to the market that have never been seen before and that will continue. We all have our unicorns we pray will see the light of day in production (for me it's a scale Concorde). Hopefully that special model many covet will one day make it!
                              My YouTube RC videos:
                              https://www.youtube.com/@toddbreda

                              Comment


                              • Here's what I have wondered lately... Take the 3 latest releases. Large, expensive F22. Large, expensive Corsair. Smaller, less expensive P51. Now, logic and common sense tells us that the F22 and Corsair have a larger profit margin per unit sold than the P51. But, in the long run, my guess is there will be quite a few more of the P51s sold. So, if X is the break even point where you start seeing profits from a new release, how many more lower profit margin P51s does it take than the expensive, higher grossing F22?? In the end, are the cheaper models or bigger, more expensive models more profitable??

                                Now, I know I am making a bunch of assumptions here but my daily life deals heavily in sales/gross/net figures so it always has my mind thinking about it.

                                Comment


                                • I'm thinking Motion RC is tapping into both markets. We know Hobby-zone or HobbyLobby, Can't remember which and E-flite were one of the front runners for the smaller "affordable", better scale foamies. This may have been just to dip their toes in the market to see the response. I think it was very good timing on their part. Since then we have seen a number of manufacturers enter the market. Some knocked out an amazing number of models with new scale features but were of lesser quality and they either change their evil ways or collapsed altogether. A couple others saw the light but strove to increase scale features as well as higher quality foam models at similar low price points. The market responded very well indicating people want, and prefer the higher scale fidelity but also better quality. And don't let us forget better customer support and service.
                                  With this said I think there is a definite market for both the smaller models and the larger more expensive models. The smaller models which are affordable to many more customers but like any product usually means lower margins so you have to sell more units. And with smaller units their is less investment and risk. With the newer, more expensive, higher quality, higher scale fidelity models and more "acceptance" by the "scale" crowd Motion RC is riding the wave of what they have essentially been the primary shaker and mover these last few years into higher dollar "foam" models. Margins are usually better with bigger but their is also more investment in R&D and financial risk. If this wasn't the case we wouldn't be seeing a sustained offering of $500-$600 airplanes and EDF's indicating the market is good for the larger more expensive models as well.
                                  So, I think that is probably one of MRC's primary conundrums in how to measure their investment strategy in both markets. Just my thoughts. Could be way off... :Confused:

                                  Comment


                                  • Regarding big vs small discussion … Yeah its true that gross profit margin is greater on the larger planes (or simply more bang for the buck), but there's a much higher investment. So its about the same. Agreeing with Mr Beeg. :Cool:

                                    So they're definitely in both markets. Why - IMHO - I am pretty sure that MRC is making a terrific (and purposeful) business decision to go in both directions (offer both small and large models) because it diversifies their portfolio. If they only did the lower cost small models, yes they would sell a lot and make some money. If they only sold the high-quality bigger models, they would sell fewer of those (at higher prices) and still make some money. But there is a greater risk if they are only in one portion of the hobby market - there is a greater chance of failure with no "safety net". Like Beeg said - we've seen other companies fold because they only had one good idea. By tapping into both parts of the market at the same time, MRC is making their overall investment much less risky. Just like advisors tell you to have stocks AND bonds. I am certain that's why they are doing it.

                                    And customers who purchase the smaller planes can dream of moving up to a larger model one day... guys who buy the big planes may buy some of the small ones just to have some less expensive fun (less hassle transporting, lower battery cost, etc). Its a win - win with all these options to pick from. I think its fantastic that MRC is offering reasonably-priced smaller models and larger well-detailed planes at the same time!
                                    Marc flies FW & FL: AL37, MiG-29, T45,F4, A4, A10, F104 70 and 90, P38, Dauntless SBD, Corsair, B17, B24, B26 & P61, Lipp.P19, ME262, Komets, Vampire, SeaVixen, FMS Tigercat, FOX Glider & Radian XL.

                                    Rabid Models foamies, including my 8' B17 & 9' B36... and my Mud Ducks! www.rabidmodels.com

                                    Comment


                                    • Ya know, "Duck" That was very well put.

                                      Woody

                                      Comment


                                      • The YF-22 wasn't my thing so bring on the next 80mm or 90mm EDF hopefully soon, kind of bored with what I have now.......:)LOL

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X