News on the UFO Helithruster

Thank you Angelo.

Thank you Angelo.

This brings me back to the original question.

Going with 35,000 Euros retail price, around $50,000 how much money does the manufacturer spend to manufacture the gyroplane?

I am trying to understand what margin does someone need to profitably manufacture market, distribute and support a gyroplane.

What profit margin does the dealer need?

When I was a motorcycle dealer I grossed between 17% and 22% on motorcycles so for a 20% margin the dealer would need to buy the gyroplane from the manufacturer for 28,000 Euros or $40,000.

Harley Davidson around 1995 was spending around 6% for marketing, 3% on warrantees 5% on distribution and was netting around 15% or in other words 29% gross profit. In our example the aircraft would need to cost 19,880 Euros or $28,237 to manufacture. They were selling around 200,000 units per year. As a dealer I was selling around 100 units in a small agricultural town.

I am wondering how the gyroplane business compares.

Thank you, Vance
 
Vance
That number is a rough stimate for the first machine, rigs, molds and such.
The cabin would cost 15 g´s real (7 g USD) for the mold and 10 gs for each one made after that.
So, add 3 gs for a Subaru (all dollars now) 2 g´s for a rotor, reductions vary but I say 1.5 will buy one and go from there.
I guess the 50 will be the price for USA and Europe with a little less for other nations under the Big Belt .. .but there must be local assembly to cut costs and import taxes.
Maybe 20% gross profit for each machine will be fair to estimate.
Lots of little details but the ball park figure is like this.
Start adding brand name, demand, luxury, perfomance and all goes up.
I have the same experience with UFO people, when we challenge them about going to NZ and buying one to bring back with us, the conversations stopped.
Heron
 
Well Vance, speaking for Europe (and methinks there are not too much differences between ELA, MTO3, Magni and XENON) the dealer receives between 5.000.- € (7.000.- $) and 9.000.- € (12.000.- $) per sold gyro ("power sellers" are in the upper range ´cause they are supposed to live on it).

Nothing to get rich from and partly spent for service-activities and marketing.

Still there must be another 10.000.- - 20.000.- € left for the factory otherwise they couldn´t invest in bigger facilities and development of new closed gyros the "market" (= we, or some of us like me) demands.

So if the Hungarian guy has to pay 17.000.- € for a Rotax 912 and then will have to live on building gyros (since European gyroists demand cheap gyros, thus making this ELA-clone a "self-runner" without much marketing) he only has to calculate the value of his working time regarding the fact that right now labour-costs are extremely cheap down in Hungary since the local currency dropped bottomless due to the almost bankrupcy of the Hungarian state.

Thus maybe he is going to earn a fortune compared with high-price countries like Germany/Italy/Spain.

We have to take what gyros are: windmills with a motor and a chair (and of course a basic design that in Europe derives vom Vittorio Magni and Juka Tervamakki thus almost all gyros beeing a a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy..............
 
A manufacturer will make more money selling "packages" than gyros. Also maintenance and upgrades will count for some fat at the end.
I think local assembly will make money instead of creating shippment cost. The assemblers will be doing maintenance.
No big facilities = less cost. A small assembly line can put 2 gyros per month in the region.
Some 4 years ago I did an excel with numbers from equipment, acessories and logo gear related, it makes the same amount in profit a gyro will make.
Brazil market (non existent today) will be able to acommodate 100 gyros per year. There are 7 Ultralite manufacturers here, all doing good.
South America as a whole is 300 million plus strong.
We are the second in registered airplanes in the world.
Heron
 
Confused

Confused

Thank you Angelo, I am not able to get the numbers to line up.

Starting at $50,000 and giving the dealer $9,000 that leaves $41,000.

If the manufacturer makes $27,000 on each one that only leaves $14,000 to buy the engine and build the gyroplane.

That doesn’t seem reasonable to me.

Working the other way, your friend pays $24,000 for the engine, gives the dealer $9,000 he has a cost of $33,000. If he is trying to make even $13,000 each that brings him to a cost of $46,000 before the rotors, airframe, instruments and body. It is hard to imagine that he could build all that stuff for $4,000.

What am I missing?

Thank you, Vance
 
A basic frame (aluminun tandem) will cost around 4 gs.
Add the rest and voilá!
Too much fat for name brand kill most projects.
Tom Miltom must have most of the prices handy.
Heron
 
Hi Heron !

Sorry for beeing vague in the calcs (I´m still no mathematician):

For the Hungarian guy the calc runs as follows (according to him):

lets take the prize he calculated in the lowest range (always w/o taxes that differ from country to country):

30.000.- € selling prize
- 17.000.- € Rotax 912
________________________
13.000.- €
- 5.000.- € building materials (frame/wheels, tanks, rudder, cables, etc.)
________________________
8.000.- €
- 2.000.- € rotor-head/alu-blades (from Poland)
_________________________
6.000.- € netto win for builder

since he has no costs for dealers and looking at the average living costs in Hungary this is a fortune !

When You just copy a rotorhead instead of buying it and find a company to extrude Your blades costs are further reduced. In the German forum someone who works in aircraft industry told us that extruded alu-blades in serial production are about 100.- € per blade. This was the reason why the MT03 company changed from the French Aircopter-blades to self made blades 2006.

The so called "German-quality" survived as a fairytale but is not consistent to reality. They reduce manufacturing-costs wherever possible to sell their gyros cheaper than the competitors.

The XENON is built in Poland since it would be 20%-30% more expensive to build it in France.
 
Comment from Australian Sport Rotorcraft Association Forums:

Reply #2 on: September 02, 2008, 14:01:21 PM »

Gidday All,

This is an interresting post in that one of ASRAs respected TAs has just returned from the UFO factory in NZ to conduct preliminary inspections of the gyro and the manufacturing facility. His report was very positive.

The manufacturer is working closely with ASRA with a view to having the UFO imported into OZ as a fully compliant non-provisional 2 seater. A few difficulties have been noted and the fixes have already been incorporated. With UFOs flying in 3 countries and 2 in the US being certified to LSA and E-LSA standard respectively, we don't anticipate any major problems into the future. The manufacturer is most co-operative which is a pleasant change.

There have been UFOs built in OZ in the past and it is no secret that they were far from the current product. It is unfortunate perhaps, that this has occurred and that the current model bears the same designation as these early "kits". I use that word loosely here.

and ...
Reply #7 on: August 18, 2009, 11:14:33 AM »

I have some experience with the engineering around the UFO as there is one here in the West that needed many mods to meet our OZ standards. I am just waiting for the owner to sort out a few engine issues before I test fly it. Based on my descusions with Kevin Traeger it will not be a low hour pilots machine! The one here is 506kg empty to start with!
 
Stev, why did you choose to compare the smaller Xenon to the big birds?
I'm not gonna get in a pissing match but figures are a lot different with different motors.

Since there is alot flying where are the photos, and it is funny you say the factory is busy, because and i know this is second hand but was told they are not.

I included the Xenon purely because it was also a side by side two seater.
I'm not trying to suggest that the UFO's are equivalent to or better than any other machine. However it seems that some of the critical comments relate to older versions than that which is currently produced.

It certainly would be helpful to know how many of the current (and previous) version have been sold, and how they are faring. Achievement of certification in Australia would also provide more confidence in the UFO product.
The only training school in my part of the country happily uses Xenon.
 
I included the Xenon purely because it was also a side by side two seater.
I'm not trying to suggest that the UFO's are equivalent to or better than any other machine. However it seems that some of the critical comments relate to older versions than that which is currently produced.

It certainly would be helpful to know how many of the current (and previous) version have been sold, and how they are faring. Achievement of certification in Australia would also provide more confidence in the UFO product.
The only training school in my part of the country happily uses Xenon.

I was referring about the smaller engine reference, and figures you used.
I do not know of any UFO othre than the 1 in the West, still not flying as far as i am aware.
 
It is a pitty the UFO, after this long while, is not in full production and all over the place.
We do know from the mast back we have some pretty well designed and powered machines using Subarus.
As far as the Xenon, it is a great gyro, I don´t know if its possible to modify it for a bigger engine with simple steps. But it will be right there with the UFO in confort and price range.
So far no one that told me to stay away from UFOs explained why . . .
Heron
 
What we need is better division of the classes micro, ultra and lite. More sound measurements.
Heron
 
Hi StevNZ !

These are good news ! Since I will come down to NZ this Xmas do You think it will be possible to have a test-flight for some direct experience ? I´ll be in NZ from Dec.18th to Jan. 6th........
 
Hi Buce, Get in touch with Alf Crowe from fielding, he was the UFO test pilot. You say you are training, are you training with Tony Unwin in Tauranga? I highly recommend him, Cheers Sybe.

Yes just started training with Tony before he went to Europe. Can't wait to get going again.
I will get in touch with a few people, but not yet. I will wait until I have a few hours up and have absorbed a bit more knowledge and experience.
Hopefully someone comes forward with some firsthand experience (thats not to say I aren't grateful for any news on them).
 
Why stay away from UFO

Why stay away from UFO

So far no one that told me to stay away from UFOs explained why . . .

Heron, is the information you got above not speaking for itself???

After over 6 years of web advertising we cannot spot here, among
all the forum users, a single person that saw UFO flying for longer
than just a few flights before crashing.

Is this not enough for you.

In the same time Xenon went from single hand made prototypes
to serial manufacturing with over 80 sold (documented)
and the frame #100 in the pipeline this year.

Probably 90% of these delivered machines are successfully flying,
with just one taxiing accident (mole hole in Norway) and a few
incidents with door latches in the beginning.

No injuries, no fatalities.

Do compare yourself, Heron, and draw your own conclusions.
 
PT
I can´t draw any conclusions without testing the machine.
I have seen the Xenon, it is superb, a little underpowered for my taste but a great project.
I do love the UFO shape, have seen couple of videos and since day one I got one of our Forum coleagues telling me He would not touch it with a 10 ft pole . . .never told me why.
If you present me a problem I will try to find a solution or alternative, it can´t be the shape I guess it is with the mast/rotor configuration because that is what flies.
No buyer half educated will buy an UFO, off cours the Xenon is a better machine at present moment.
There is the Sportcopter but I can not compare haven´t see the later . . .
So tell me what is the problem with the UFO, other than bad marketing and how can we make it a better ship?
thanks
Heron
 
PT...
If you present me a problem I will try to find a solution or alternative, it can´t be the shape I guess it is with the mast/rotor configuration because that is what flies.

Flying is about weight and lift.

The problem with UFO is weight.
The frame is steel, the cabin is glass fibre.
Both are heavy materials.
The cabin is not self supporting, needs steel support.
This ads to extra weight.
On top of it, the size matters,
the bigger, the more material you need.

Xenon has self supporting cabin, being structural support
to aluminium mast and tail booms.

The key to aviation design is weight optimization.
If you haven't designed it into your project from the very beginning,
there is not much you can do later.

As far as I can remember, some of the people trying to build UFO,
noticed, that, for example the engine cowling made of fibreglass
was over 35kg alone. Total nonsense.
The same cone made of aluminium was half the weight.

It is just an example, but if you have to do the same with
every part of this project, then it's pure nonsense.

Weight problem in aircraft is a "devils circle".
You ad weight, you need bigger rotor and bigger engine.
Bigger rotor and bigger engine mean even more weight,
so you never come out of this mess, until you save weight
from the very beginning.

The other matter is the "tall tail".

Look at the SportCopter II, they tried it and gave it up.
Why?
It's way to heavy for it's function.
The same story with the SparrowHawk.
Extremely heavy "tall tail" machine,
recently abandoned by the manufacturer.

Few years ago I was also deeply impressed by the look of UFO.
But over the years it came out, that not always
"what looks, good flies good".

At least not in this case.

Xenon, or Arrow-Copter were designed from scratch
with the weight in mind from the very beginning.

Raphael Celier know by hart the weicht in gramms of every nut and bolt
on his machine and carefully designs it to optimize the function against weight.
 
Last edited:
The so called "German-quality" survived as a fairytale but is not consistent to reality. They reduce manufacturing-costs wherever possible to sell their gyros cheaper than the competitors.
I agree 100% with you.
The German cars long ago (20-30 years ago) lost their quality.
Now you pay just for the logo on the hood the extra 30-40%...

The XENON is built in Poland since it would be 20%-30% more expensive to build it in France.
This is not only matter of price, but also value for money.
The quality of Polish fibreglass manufacturing is renowned around the world.
Almost all of the best sailing yachts under the French or German trademarks
are made in Poland.
Also the best gliders are made in Poland.
The FK and Remos UL fiberglass aircraft are made in Poland.

BTW: The Xenon rotor hubbar and blades are not (yet) made in Poland.
They are imported from France.
 
Last edited:
The other matter is the "tall tail".

Look at the SportCopter II, they tried it and gave it up.
Why?
It's way to heavy for it's function.
The same story with the SparrowHawk.
Extremely heavy "tall tail" machine,
recently abandoned by the manufacturer.

A tall-tail doesn't have to be heavy.

The Xenon uses a "tall-tail", except that it's mounted sideways with the verticals and rudders below it. I'm sure Raphael made it structurally sound without any excess weight.
 
Top