Fred, I did not say you copied the laser planform for the Addiction. I do know
that you have made copies of the wings that we make for other pilots.
FRED SAGE wrote:
> I haven't weighed in on the thread concerning the Schpot Dorker being a
> clone of the Addiction because I thought the allegations didn't warrant the
> dignity of an answer. I know Daryl Perkins is a premier pilot and glider
> designer and certainly doesn't need to copy an existing design to make a
> marketable glider. The truth of the matter is that both the Schpot Dorker
> and the Addiction are fine examples of light weight unlimited designs that
> are optimized for typical AMA thermal duration tasks. Either glider is
> capable of winning with the right pilot at the controls. However, a pilot
> that wins with either glider is probably equally capable of winning with any
> number of alternate gliders.
>
> After reading Sal Defrancesco's recent post, I find that I can no longer
> remain quiet. Sal states that I copied the Laser 3MC plan form as the basis
> for the quad taper Addiction. This is simply not true. First of all, I
> offer the Addiction in any number of configurations including double, triple
> and quad taper variants. In addition, I allow a pilot to select the span
> of the glider he wants from a minimum of 112" to a maximum of 125". In
> other words, the wings are custom designed to customer specification
> depending on the proposed use and skill level of the pilot involved.
> Furthermore, I offer the wing in multiple airfoils including the 7037,
> 7035, 7036, 7035,6,7 blend, RG15, SD7080, RG15, etc. When I take an
> order with the span and airfoil stipulated, I simply run the numbers
> through John Hazel's fine plan form optimization program to achieve an
> efficient wing. I'm able to do this because I've been accumulating
> templates for about 10 years and am not constrained by the restrictions of
> production work.
>
> The real truth of this "who copied who" scenario is that as gliders become
> more optimized around a particular design parameter (light weight three
> meter thermal duration optimized), they become very similar. Given an
> airfoil, wing loading and aspect ratio, panel breaks and taper ratio's are
> going to be almost identical. Does this mean that one glider is a clone of
> the other? Certainly not.
>
> As a final statement, whenever inflammatory opinions or derogatory remarks
> are made on the RCSE such as Eric Farmer's post of three days ago or the
> post that prompted this response, the logical consideration should be to
> determine the motivation and credibility of the drafter. With a little
> common sense and reading between the lines, the truth becomes apparent.
>
> Fred
--
Sal DeFrancesco
Northeast Sailplane Products
140 Kirby Lane
Williston, VT. 05495
802-658-9482
Website: http://www.nesail.com
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
