My 2 cents - The high quality and lower cost (to the consumer) of the DJ wood kits is very important to soaring and the hobby in general. Newbies cannot afford to go from the beginner level kits right to the latest state-of-the-art composite contest ships. Plus, there are a fair number of us sport fliers that need and appreciate the types of planes they will be offering.
Besides, some of us still like wood anyway. Ed Jett ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Iafret" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ed Jett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "RCSE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 10:40 AM Subject: Re: [RCSE] Re: D J Aerotech > It's just not small business guy's, it's all business. Getting out prior to > total failure of the product or the product makers is better than average > intelligence. > > Sounds like Ray Hays and DJ will be producing Woodies for some time.... > great. > > BTW Ray's Woody contest could be the start of something good for the > industry and modeling in general. Lots of low cost kits that fill both the > fun flyer bill as well as competition if you so desire. > > Not all contests need to be high cost, any two planes of the same ilk can > have a great contest. > > > > Jack Iafret > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > "Keeper of the Nostalgia Rules" > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ed Jett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "RCSE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 7:05 AM > Subject: Re: [RCSE] Re: D J Aerotech > > > > Thanks for the post Don. I will mourn the passing of your composite kits, > > but fully understand the situation you face. The problems you face with > > composite sailplane manufacture are the same as faced by any other > > manufacturing business and if it doesnt sell well enough, you just cannot > > afford to produce it. > > > > Regards - Ed Jett > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Norman H. Donnelly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 10:38 PM > > Subject: [RCSE] Re: D J Aerotech > > > > > > > Norman H. Donnelly asks: > > > > > > > > > >Just went to thier (DJ Aerotech) page and they no longer sell thier > > > >sailplanes!? > > > >Anyone know what happened ? > > > > > > First of all, for the record, the recent unpleasantness on this forum > was > > > directly responsible for Joe Hahn's unsubscribing from this e-mail list > > > last week, and I'm still debating my own decision on that issue. > > > > > > However, our decision to end production of our composite kits had been > > made > > > some time before this last batch of flame wars, so that we could give > > > enough advance notice to the employees involved to give them plenty of > > time > > > to find work elsewhere. Other than as noted below, it was largely a > > > coincidence that the final cutoff just happened to occur at the same > time > > > as the recent round of vendor bashing. > > > > > > We did consider keeping the composite competition sailplane business > going > > > on an extremely limited basis using just Joe's and my own labor. The > > > poisonous atmosphere on this list of late did have a significant bearing > > on > > > our ultimate decision not to do that, and to just plain end the making > of > > > composite sailplanes altogether. We have a couple of Spectre 120's we > are > > > finishing up (Tom, yours will be the last one made), and we will handle > > > replacement parts support for owners of existing composite models on a > > > case-by-case basis (no, we will NOT sell enough spare parts for someone > to > > > construct a complete airplane), but we've decided that for Joe and I to > > > keep the production lines open by ourselves even on an extremely limited > > > basis was just not worth the trouble. > > > > > > We still sell sailplanes, just not the composite ones. The Chrysalis HLG > > > and the Chrysalis 2-meter are still available, and I expect we'll be > doing > > > some more wooden sailplanes sooner or later. In fact, I just sent the > > parts > > > files off to our laser vendor today for a new and very different > > sailplane > > > model. I'll announce it when the time comes, although if things go well > > and > > > Murphy's Law gives us a break, some of you might get to see it in action > > at > > > Ft. Wayne on the 16th. > > > > > > As far as the demise of our composite kits, it was a business decision, > > > although the general atmosphere of this forum made the decision a little > > > easier. There are some hard facts of business involved: > > > > > > 1. Running a composites manufacturing shop involves a huge amount of > > > overhead, much of it fixed. If sales are slow, then the cost of labor > per > > > hour goes literally out the roof, far exceeding the revenue from the > sales > > > of the kits produced. Learning curves for manufacturing employees become > a > > > tougher nut to crack as well when production rates are low, and that > tends > > > to drive up scrap rates on complex parts. Also, some of the purchased > > > materials have to be bought in very large quantities to get a reasonable > > > price on them, and if sales volume is low, those materials purchases > > become > > > a problem. > > > > > > 2. The sailplane community is a very fickle customer. Folks can beg and > > beg > > > us for a particular product, and we can work our tails off, spending > > > bushels of dollars and manhours developing something truly special in > > > response to those requests, but for some reason many of those same folks > > > who seemed to be such loyal friends, and who made such a big fuss about > > how > > > we should develop such-and-such a product, all too often seem to forget > to > > > buy it once we put it into production. This experience was a major > factor > > > in our final decision. We had some really amazing sailplanes of various > > > sizes in development, and theoretically those should have taken care of > > the > > > production rate problems, but when we considered our past experience > with > > > the sailplane market, the idea of a boost in sales due to introduction > of > > a > > > new sailplane-related product was an extremely risky proposition, > > > especially a sailplane for the competition market. The risk and expense > > > involved in such an approach was just too big of a gamble. > > > > > > Competition sailplanes are especially bad in this regard, since they > have > > > to be redesigned over and over at least about every six months or so in > > > order to keep them at the "top of the pack". If you don't, the sales dry > > > up. That's assuming the customers are willing to give it a shot after > the > > > redesign. If you don't make significant changes, you are limited on how > > > much performance and handling improvement is possible, but if you hunt > for > > > those "sacred cows", "think outside of the box", etc., and come up with > > > something truly new and different that really does offer significant > > > advantages, it appears that folks are afraid to try it. In any case, we > > > could not trust a new sailplane design to fix the problem. Composite > HLG's > > > are especially bad, since their profit margins are even worse than other > > > sailplanes, and tend to pretty much just break even at best, even when > > > sales are good. We had some truly promising DLG's in development > (contrary > > > to JIm Bacus' impressions, I did indeed see the benefits of discus > > > launching, I just wasn't willing to sacrifice a bunch of other > performance > > > parameters in the process, and our experiments and analyses told us we > > > wouldn't have to!), but we knew from past experience that commercially > > > those would not be more than a stopgap at best, even if they sold well. > > > Hollow-molded larger sailplanes are somewhat better, but the high cost > of > > > development and tooling makes the gamble even bigger. > > > > > > The bottom line is that it's not wise to count on competition sailplane > > > sales alone to generate enough work to keep a composite shop viable as a > > > full-time business. > > > > > > 3. We had some commercial work that promised to provide enough volume to > > > keep the shop busy and profitable, which would have allowed us to keep > > > making composite sailplanes on the side. However, the schedule for that > > > work is suffering at the moment, at least in part due to some of the > > events > > > of this past fall. > > > > > > If that commercial business heats up again, or if we can generate enough > > > non-R/C sailplane composite business (perhaps in some other types of > > > models?) to guarantee enough reliable business to keep a composite shop > > > viable on a steady basis, it's conceivable that we could start making > > > composite sailplanes again strictly on the side, as long as we are not > > > counting on them to keep the doors open. Joe and I have been working on > > > developing and then producing composite sailplanes since the late 80's > and > > > early 90's, and in that time we've pretty conclusively proven that > > > composite competition sailplanes by themselves are economically a very > bad > > > way to try to make a living. We have some really innovative ideas for > > > everything from HLG's to F3J's, and some of those ideas will only work > > > through the use of composites. The Spectre concept is still very far > from > > > being fully explored, and the other folks in this business still don't > > seem > > > to have figured out the concepts behind them. We might go ahead and > build > > > some of those ideas just for fun, for our own use. However, we will not > go > > > back into the composite kit business unless we can use something other > > than > > > sailplanes to provide an economic backbone for that business. > > > > > > Our wooden kits are doing very well, especially the electrics. We've > > > recently added some new equipment that will dramatically improve our > > > ability to develop more of those quickly, significantly improve the > > quality > > > of those kits, and free me up to concentrate on designing the new > models. > > > The overhead for wooden kit manufacturing is much more easily managed > than > > > for composites, so fluctuations in sales volume are not nearly as much > of > > > an issue. The product development cycle is a lot quicker and less > > > expensive, so we can develop a whole bunch of new designs for about the > > > same effort that one new composite sailplane involves. If one or two of > > > those don't sell as well as we'd hoped, it's no big deal as long as the > > > average sales of the group is reasonable. In addition, since these are > not > > > for competition, they don't have to be redesigned over and over. A good > > > sport model today will still be a good sport model next year and the > year > > > after that. > > > > > > A number of years ago, Bob Dodgson wrote an article called "Don't become > a > > > Sailplane Manufacturer", which outlined many of the points I've > discussed > > > above. In our own experience, we've seen that just about every thing he > > > wrote about in that article was pretty much right on the mark. A few > years > > > after that, he heeded his own advice and we all know what happened then. > > > Right after that there was a lot of crying and wailing on this exchange > > > about what a tragedy it was that Bob decided to quit the business. The > > > crying and wailing has pretty much subsided, but his designs have become > > > collector's items, with a group of enthusiastic followers that almost > > > qualifies for cult status. The sad thing is that if folks had > appreciated > > > Bob's designs back then as much as they seem to now, I suspect it's > > > possible he might still be making them. I don't expect our composite > kits > > > to ever be in that league, but I expect there might still be a few folks > > > who will miss them. > > > > > > Meanwhile, as I said at the beginning of this, we still make our > > > non-composite kits, and our new focus will allow us to dramatically > expand > > > those offerings. You're going to see a lot more stuff from us for the > > > typical sport flyer. Who knows, some folks might even decide to fly them > > in > > > competition, even though we designed them for sport flying (I was truly > > > astounded to see some of our Chrysalis HLG kits show up at the Nats, I > > > NEVER had that in mind when we developed it!). > > > > > > There's a good book you can probably find in your local library called > > "Ben > > > and Jerry's - the Inside Scoop", about the founding and development of > the > > > Ben and Jerry's ice cream company. One of the axioms that Ben and Jerry > > > tried to follow was "If it's not fun, why do it?!" Joe and I are having > a > > > lot of fun with our new models these days, more fun than we've had for > > > quite a while now. We're planning and hoping to continue having fun with > > > them for a long time to come. > > > > > > > > > Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://www.djaerotech.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] > > > > RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
