Funny, I didn't know that there were any copyrights on airfoils, dimmensions or tapers.
Sal DeFrancesco wrote:
> 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]
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
