What's next from Motion RC?

[Hoomi]

So when ARE we going to see all these "new fabulous wonders"? Horizon's been cranking them out like crazy including an Osprey now.

Yeah, but it's not exactly a good "scale" V-22.

[Valkpilot]

Yeah, but it's not exactly a good "scale" V-22.

The thing is I remember a time when MRC was doing 1-2 NEW aircraft a month, and usually, something totally new. And while it seems like a cliche, what have they done lately? Another Mustang and another Corsair. What happened to the innovation?

[F106DeltaDart]

Yeah, but it's not exactly a good "scale" V-22.

I keep hoping that Motion is going to stock the Rotormast V-22 at some point, since Roban is distributor. It is a much more scale, albeit much more expensive rendition of the V-22.

[xviper]

So when ARE we going to see all these "new fabulous wonders"? Horizon's been cranking them out like crazy including an Osprey now.

It looks like a scaled down version of this ................................. https://www.bananahobby.com/5-ch-bli...plane-arf.html

[Woodcock]

The thing is I remember a time when MRC was doing 1-2 NEW aircraft a month, and usually, something totally new. And while it seems like a cliche, what have they done lately? Another Mustang and another Corsair. What happened to the innovation?

This is exactly what I've been harping about. Nuff said.

Woody

[MikeT]

I keep hoping that Motion is going to stock the Rotormast V-22 at some point, since Roban is distributor. It is a much more scale, albeit much more expensive rendition of the V-22.

http://www.rotormast.com/en/

Get it here. From what I've gathered following various builds it's lots of work.

Mike

[JamesonC]

That V22 was a huge let down. UMX sized with a hefty price tag. Hard pass.

[F106DeltaDart]

http://www.rotormast.com/en/

Get it here. From what I've gathered following various builds it's lots of work.

Mike

That is currently the plan. Hoping to pull the trigger later this year. The designer is local, so at least I can go talk with him if I’m having any issues.

[MikeT]

That is currently the plan. Hoping to pull the trigger later this year. The designer is local, so at least I can go talk with him if I’m having any issues.

Nice. I've been following this from day one. Seems like the price has dropped a bit from the 1st kits. I just may have to put this back on my "list"
Mike

[OV10]

The thing is I remember a time when MRC was doing 1-2 NEW aircraft a month, and usually, something totally new. And while it seems like a cliche, what have they done lately? Another Mustang and another Corsair. What happened to the innovation?

Really.............:Confused: I don't ever remember that occurring. That would be 12-24 new birds a year, just haven't see it;)

[Aros]

Really.............:Confused: I don't ever remember that occurring. That would be 12-24 new birds a year, just haven't see it;)

Me neither and I have been working for the company for nearly 6 years but what do I know, I just work here. LOL LOL LOL

[JamesonC]

Me neither and I have been working for the company for nearly 6 years but what do I know, I just work here. LOL LOL LOL

And just so happen to do the web pages for the new releases. Geez, you don't remember all that OT you put in trying to get pages done that fast??? :Thinking:

[Woodcock]

Valks, numbers may have been off. But I understand exactly what he's saying. Bottom line, it might be time to consider some sort of crowd funding for the dev of new interesting RC airplanes like an OV-10, as well as others. Models that some of us old fashion thinking customers, might think would be good to make. It happens with video games all the time. My son just told me about one of these yesterday.

Woody

I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea here. Say Motion said they were going to start a crowd funding campaign for say ah, "OV-10"! So they set it up, and say when we hit $100,000 in campaign contributions we will produce the plane, (getting the idea here).
If it doesn't make the bench mark of 100k, (or what ever the line is) then you get 50% store credit for a failure. If it doesn't fail and is produced, then the original contributes get there models at whole sale cost, or just get one for free if they made the necessary donation to the fund.

I would be in for this sort of thing. Anyone else think it's interesting?? Yes/No??

[OV10]

Interesting proposal Woody based on the Vid Game success but I would suspect they also most likely have a world wide customer base that is at least 1000x larger than us ol' boys flying toy planes;)

[Hoomi]

Valks, numbers may have been off. But I understand exactly what he's saying. Bottom line, it might be time to consider some sort of crowd funding for the dev of new interesting RC airplanes like an OV-10, as well as others. Models that some of us old fashion thinking customers, might think would be good to make. It happens with video games all the time. My son just told me about one of these yesterday.

Woody

I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea here. Say Motion said they were going to start a crowd funding campaign for say ah, "OV-10"! So they set it up, and say when we hit $100,000 in campaign contributions we will produce the plane, (getting the idea here).
If it doesn't make the bench mark of 100k, (or what ever the line is) then you get 50% store credit for a failure. If it doesn't fail and is produced, then the original contributes get there models at whole sale cost, or just get one for free if they made the necessary donation to the fund.

I would be in for this sort of thing. Anyone else think it's interesting?? Yes/No??

Crowdfunding can work in different ways. With Kickstarter, if the goal is not achieved, none of the backers are billed anything, so if the threshold amount to produce the plane is $100K, then backers only get charged if the total raised is $100K or above. In such a case, MRC would not need to worry about awarding any kind of credit for a failed fundraising campaign.

With a system like GoFundMe, then backers are charged whether the goal is reached or not. In such a case where the goal is not reached, so that MRC could not fund developing the model, they would need to decide how to compensate the backers, but likely something a bit better than a 50% store credit.

In both cases, the creators need to calculate how much will be required to accomplish the task, including the fees assessed by either Kickstarter or GoFundMe. The beauty of either of those systems, is that the campaign gets visibility far beyond the reach of just the MotionRC page or Hobbysquawk forums, and both pages handle collecting the funds and disbursing them to the creators.

The risk, of course, is that the campaign successfully funds, but unforeseen circumstances increase the development costs well beyond the projected goal. In such a case, though, MRC already would have a substantial head-start on the development of the model, rather than having to make the entire initial investment out of their own accounts.

[Elbee]

Woods, In the past year, I have often thought about 'underwriting' certain projects like this but would require some thought about partial ROI. It could be as simple as being provided enough of the parts to 'build' the aircraft whether it is produced or not. Expensive only if one could not deflect the true monetary losses. Great idea, otherwise. I used to propose these types of investments, i.e., take the short-term loss if there were no return on production. If successful; however, the profit upside for the mfr is diminished somewhat if a certificate of credit is given to each investor, though there is little or no R&D outlay in the beginning. Certainly, worth the discussion, I think. The downside might be reaching a consensus of each potential investor with regard to aircraft. :Scared: Best, Steve

[Woodcock]

I just think we need to implement something to make things interesting. Interesting to me is not a new P-51, or P-47, or Hellcat, or Zero, etc. Ya know there isn't any A-7's, or S-3's I could go on and on and on. Starting crowd funding campaigns would indicate in no uncertain terms if it's worth making or not. As for the donations for the crowd funding. It's kind of like putting moneys down on a blackjack table. Some times you win, some times you loose. But even if the bench mark was hit, the plane indeed moved forward, and additional costs were incurred. At the very least the lion share of the dev costs were paid by us the contributors. Sounds like a win, win for everyone in my opinion. Except of course for the self proclaimed geniuses that are now deciding what comes next these days. It will be our funding, we decide what comes next.

Woody

[Twowingtj]

One of the main problems with crowd funding a project like this is secrecy. In our hobby the company that is "first to market" with a desirable aircraft, often gets the lion's share of the sales.

With these models, it often takes two years from concept to market for a good quality, well tested model. In that time a competitor can quickly make thier version first. The resulting partial sales loss to the developer of a better quality product can be substantial. This is especially true for a company that strives to keep margins slim to offer a good price point to us, the customer. It can and has happened.

[Woodcock]

One of the main problems with crowd funding a project like this secrecy. In our hobby the company that is "first to market" with a desirable aircraft, often gets the lion's share of the sales.

With these models, it often takes two years from concept to market for a good quality, well tested model. In that time a competitor can quickly make thier version first. The resulting partial sales loss to the developer of a better quality product can be substantial. This is especially true for a company that strives to keep margins slim to offer a good price point to us, the customer. It can and has happened.

Ok, let's just have a look here. What's the big secret with say a Corsair, or a P-51 eh. I mean there were literally dozens of manufacturers offering that one for a long time. Basically, that secrecy thing just doesn't work in my opinion. Case in point, FMS basically copying everything Freewing & Flightline does. Not only do they copy it but they align themselves with the 2-ton gorilla in the room, "Horizon". Nuff said.

So to this, I say the crowdfunding thing is the only thing that puts people like me in the selection process. It's my money, I'd like to spend it on a potential model that I would like to have, not what others think I should have, as, In my opinion, their choices suck. LOL

Ya know last weekend I was at one of the local flying clubs and was watching what I thought was a very nice Freewing F-22 flying around. I approached the guy and commented, I'm really thinking about getting one of these Freewing F-22's. Well, guess what? It wasn't a Freewing. LOL

To that end, I'll say we need more diversity in our models and the present formula simply isn't working, especially for me, and I'm sure many many others.

It appears to me that Motion has lost there, "Walt Disney". Disney land has never been the same after his passing. To me at least, Motion is much much different since the days they made the A-6 Intruder, the F-14. and F-104. Have no idea who it was, but things are totally different now it seems.

I think a good crowdfunding option would be a really good thing. If someone else decided to follow suit, I think it would be a great thing. The more the better.

Woody

PS If it's taking 2 years to field a model, that's simply too long in my opinion. It should be done in 6 months. With technology, we have today to do these sorts of things this timeline, in my opinion, is an embarrassment.

[JamesonC]

Ok, let's just have a look here. What's the big secret with say a Corsair, or a P-51 eh. I mean there were literally dozens of manufacturers offering that one for a long time. Basically, that secrecy thing just doesn't work in my opinion. Case in point, FMS basically copying everything Freewing & Flightline does. Not only do they copy it but they align themselves with the 2-ton gorilla in the room, "Horizon". Nuff said.

So to this, I say the crowdfunding thing is the only thing that puts people like me in the selection process. It's my money, I'd like to spend it on a potential model that I would like to have, not what others think I should have, as, In my opinion, their choices suck. LOL

Ya know last weekend I was at one of the local flying clubs and was watching what I thought was a very nice Freewing F-22 flying around. I approached the guy and commented, I'm really thinking about getting one of these Freewing F-22's. Well, guess what? It wasn't a Freewing. LOL

To that end, I'll say we need more diversity in our models and the present formula simply isn't working, especially for me, and I'm sure many many others.

It appears to me that Motion has lost there, "Walt Disney". Disney land has never been the same after his passing. To me at least, Motion is much much different since the days they made the A-6 Intruder, the F-14. and F-104. Have no idea who it was, but things are totally different now it seems.

I think a good crowdfunding option would be a really good thing. If someone else decided to follow suit, I think it would be a great thing. The more the better.

Woody

If it wasn't FW, it must've been the LX models twin 70mm, since that is the only other similar sized F22 on the market. If you mistook that thing for the FW model, you certainly need to see the FW one up close!!