600 New TB60

James M. Lewis

James M. Lewis

Armed Forces
I was with fran11784 on this bird's maiden flight last Saturday. An excellent pilot who knows his aircraft and it flew so good. When it comes to quality control, very little gets by him. Hope the manufacturer pays more attention to their product line, being they are not cheap.
 
fran11784

fran11784

Goblin 380 Supporter
Well, I'll tell you my take, if you look at the two kits, TB60 vs TB70, the design is so close. There is a two hundred dollar difference between them. I've seen this with Align for years now. The links on their 700 sizes are 3mm while the links on their 600 sizes are 2.5mm. The 70 has a 12mm main while the 60 has a 10mm main. The 70 has plastic molding around both frames while the 60 does not. My point is they are probably saving way more than $200. The links should be the same 3mm on both. The TB60 probably more profitable then the 70 for them. When I built the TB70 I was very impressed with the design, then I built the TB60 and was like, this is just a scaled down version of the TB70. Almost not even worth it honestly. Maybe I'll do a comparison thread sometime to show what I mean.
T
 
James M. Lewis

James M. Lewis

Armed Forces
fran11784 said:
Well, I'll tell you my take, if you look at the two kits, TB60 vs TB70, the design is so close. There is a two hundred dollar difference between them. I've seen this with Align for years now. The links on their 700 sizes are 3mm while the links on their 600 sizes are 2.5mm. The 70 has a 12mm main while the 60 has a 10mm main. The 70 has plastic molding around both frames while the 60 does not. My point is they are probably saving way more than $200. The links should be the same 3mm on both. The TB60 probably more profitable then the 70 for them. When I built the TB70 I was very impressed with the design, then I built the TB60 and was like, this is just a scaled down version of the TB70. Almost not even worth it honestly. Maybe I'll do a comparison thread sometime to show what I mean.
T
Click to expand...
Good point and something to serious consider before spending your hard earned dollars:neglected:
 
RandyDSok

RandyDSok

Well-Known Member
fran11784 said:
How bad could this have been?? One, 5-minute test hover on this, was wondering why the blades were so far out of track. Great job Align....
Click to expand...

In the majority of cases, the quality control on mass produced products are done by machines often using optical scanners and a computer. At that point, only a single sample out of a batch will get ( if any get checked at all ) checked by an actual person. It has been like this for decades now and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone keeping up with manufacturing methods. In the case of something like a ball link, that QC step for that single item would have likely been performed before assembly when the batch of ball links were being made. I could also see the following steps such as when a control rod with the links on them was being made, could also possibly catch the problem. How many out of a batch ( of any single product ) that gets checked by a human will differ by company.

Pricing is a much more complex matter. The BOM ( bill of materials ) cost starts simply with adding up the cost of each part. The price difference between a lower end part and the next step or two up is often very little in the overall cost of the completed assembled unit. You'll often hear stories of these single piece prices of only differing by cents between the different levels. The next part is the cost of building the machines that build and perform the QC checks, these are often costing millions of dollars to produce ( if not more in some cases ). The next step is dividing up the cost of building the machines by the number of units they are going to be producing. Making up some numbers just to give an idea ... say the machine to assemble the product costs 1 million dollars, it is expected to produce 100,000 units. It then cost an additional $10 per unit to assemble. Now assume it will only assemble 10,000 units... that cost is now $100 instead of just the $10 each that needs to be recovered. Then you'd add in the other company costs, the price of the building, the salaries, insurance and everything else a company has to pay for etc. The final piece is the subjective ones... the price they feel the market will bare as well as the supply and demand portion. I didn't even mention the R&D costs with a company that is performing that portion having to recoup that but a company just making a copy ( clone ) of the same didn't incur a R&D cost near anything like a design from scratch one would.

So the price of the BOM between the TB60 and TB70 may not be all that large but factoring in how many units they are going to be able to produce and sell can make a large difference in the assembly portion of the cost. Of course it could just be the perceived value between the two that is driving up the cost.
 
James M. Lewis

James M. Lewis

Armed Forces
RandyDSok said:
In the majority of cases, the quality control on mass produced products are done by machines often using optical scanners and a computer. At that point, only a single sample out of a batch will get ( if any get checked at all ) checked by an actual person. It has been like this for decades now and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone keeping up with manufacturing methods. In the case of something like a ball link, that QC step for that single item would have likely been performed before assembly when the batch of ball links were being made. I could also see the following steps such as when a control rod with the links on them was being made, could also possibly catch the problem. How many out of a batch ( of any single product ) that gets checked by a human will differ by company.

Pricing is a much more complex matter. The BOM ( bill of materials ) cost starts simply with adding up the cost of each part. The price difference between a lower end part and the next step or two up is often very little in the overall cost of the completed assembled unit. You'll often hear stories of these single piece prices of only differing by cents between the different levels. The next part is the cost of building the machines that build and perform the QC checks, these are often costing millions of dollars to produce ( if not more in some cases ). The next step is dividing up the cost of building the machines by the number of units they are going to be producing. Making up some numbers just to give an idea ... say the machine to assemble the product costs 1 million dollars, it is expected to produce 100,000 units. It then cost an additional $10 per unit to assemble. Now assume it will only assemble 10,000 units... that cost is now $100 instead of just the $10 each that needs to be recovered. Then you'd add in the other company costs, the price of the building, the salaries, insurance and everything else a company has to pay for etc. The final piece is the subjective ones... the price they feel the market will bare as well as the supply and demand portion. I didn't even mention the R&D costs with a company that is performing that portion having to recoup that but a company just making a copy ( clone ) of the same didn't incur a R&D cost near anything like a design from scratch one would.

So the price of the BOM between the TB60 and TB70 may not be all that large but factoring in how many units they are going to be able to produce and sell can make a large difference in the assembly portion of the cost. Of course it could just be the perceived value between the two that is driving up the cost.
Click to expand...
Hmm, that's an interesting point you covered. When fran11784 (Tony) and I were building Hulk Jr. , had to make our own push rods for the main rotor head. That head was for a 5 blade setup got on ebay, and it was a clone. Couldn't find the correct size (mm) because none were available. We searched every where on line and hobby shops without any luck. So if Tony discovered a flaunt in a well named brand, then how many are there industry wide?
 
RandyDSok

RandyDSok

Well-Known Member
James M. Lewis said:
So if Tony discovered a flaunt in a well named brand, then how many are there industry wide?
Click to expand...

I assume "flaunt" was a typo and "flaw" was meant.

The industry uses the word "defect" when a bad part gets past the QC steps... therefore I'd think that they'd call a "flaw" as a problem with design ... so I'll use those definitions also. So I'll be subbing in "defect" into the question... hopefully that was the intended question and I didn't assume incorrectly.

Every industry will have different acceptable percentage amount of defects for that type of production. I'm uncertain what that is for the various hobby products like airplanes and heli's ... and even those will have differing amounts between them. IN fact, say for airplanes, it probably even breaks up into say, balsa, fiberglass and foamy etc ... but I think I'm digressing. So I'd say to ask someone that has been in the industry long enough to know what the acceptable amounts are if you want better numbers.

I can say what I classify as acceptable in the IBM PC compatible industry since I have dealt with custom desktops since the late 80's. As average quality part will likely have a 5% or above failure rate. A good quality part will be in the 1-2% range. There are also levels of usability within that "good" range as well. A perfectly fine and good quality board may not be built with as many layers and as good of a VRM ( voltage regulator modules ) or have a good cooling features... so the board may have a low failure rate but may still not perform as well as a better built one. Typically the better built good quality boards are twice the price as the less quality ones and still both will have low failure rates.

So using my own industry as the example... I'm certain it also applies to other industries like the RC hobby industry. I doubt that Align has a high parts failure rate typically, I expect when a defect is found it is more of an exception than a rule. Of course I'm making assumptions on that. As an example, Asus ( in my industry ) had built up a reputation of high end high quality for the longest time. Then their arrogance and greed kicked in, they started cutting corners and their QC started slacking. I started seeing failure rates ( ie defective boards ) that often exceeded what an average quality board ( ie 5% and up ) should see. I'm not saying that has happened to Align but it is just a possibility.

Typically when a larger company starts slipping up... another smaller company comes in and starts taking some of the market share because of it. Still the momentum the larger company created when they did make good quality parts will carry them for decades... but as more of their clients get tired of them, the more that move onto the other smaller companies that have built upon their own quality and customer service standards.

So now the big question is... has Align's QC decreased and do they still provide the same quality customer care that they once had and that they built their reputation on? Defects will always be a thing no matter the actual quality of a part/product, they are unavoidable since no system is perfect. What is in question is how did Align react when the defect was reported to them or their reseller? Were they willing to provide a replacement without question?
 
James M. Lewis

James M. Lewis

Armed Forces
RandyDSok said:
I assume "flaunt" was a typo and "flaw" was meant.

The industry uses the word "defect" when a bad part gets past the QC steps... therefore I'd think that they'd call a "flaw" as a problem with design ... so I'll use those definitions also. So I'll be subbing in "defect" into the question... hopefully that was the intended question and I didn't assume incorrectly.

Every industry will have different acceptable percentage amount of defects for that type of production. I'm uncertain what that is for the various hobby products like airplanes and heli's ... and even those will have differing amounts between them. IN fact, say for airplanes, it probably even breaks up into say, balsa, fiberglass and foamy etc ... but I think I'm digressing. So I'd say to ask someone that has been in the industry long enough to know what the acceptable amounts are if you want better numbers.

I can say what I classify as acceptable in the IBM PC compatible industry since I have dealt with custom desktops since the late 80's. As average quality part will likely have a 5% or above failure rate. A good quality part will be in the 1-2% range. There are also levels of usability within that "good" range as well. A perfectly fine and good quality board may not be built with as many layers and as good of a VRM ( voltage regulator modules ) or have a good cooling features... so the board may have a low failure rate but may still not perform as well as a better built one. Typically the better built good quality boards are twice the price as the less quality ones and still both will have low failure rates.

So using my own industry as the example... I'm certain it also applies to other industries like the RC hobby industry. I doubt that Align has a high parts failure rate typically, I expect when a defect is found it is more of an exception than a rule. Of course I'm making assumptions on that. As an example, Asus ( in my industry ) had built up a reputation of high end high quality for the longest time. Then their arrogance and greed kicked in, they started cutting corners and their QC started slacking. I started seeing failure rates ( ie defective boards ) that often exceeded what an average quality board ( ie 5% and up ) should see. I'm not saying that has happened to Align but it is just a possibility.

Typically when a larger company starts slipping up... another smaller company comes in and starts taking some of the market share because of it. Still the momentum the larger company created when they did make good quality parts will carry them for decades... but as more of their clients get tired of them, the more that move onto the other smaller companies that have built upon their own quality and customer service standards.

So now the big question is... has Align's QC decreased and do they still provide the same quality customer care that they once had and that they built their reputation on? Defects will always be a thing no matter the actual quality of a part/product, they are unavoidable since no system is perfect. What is in question is how did Align react when the defect was reported to them or their reseller? Were they willing to provide a replacement without question?
Click to expand...
Opps yes flaw thank you:peaceful: As always great input:arms:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom