Tweaks for 2021

[bjt4888]

Xiangyu,

Rubber needed is .020” or possibly .025” if built heavier than the 500 mg minimum.

Roll will be manageable with this thinner rubber. Other designs I’ve flown like this have needed a lot of left wing washin too.

Fun to fly in the living room.

Brian T

[coachchuckaahs]

Brian: How about they do something like the Scraps plane (living room flyer size), but limit the rubber? Could be fun! Half a gram is not hard to reach, but could make min weight 3/4 gram?

Coach Chuck

Chuck,

That would be fun. Model boxes would smaller and cheaper too.

Brian T

I gotta say, this plane is really hard to trim and hard to fly for me. Also, I think it's really hard for most students to build to weight + make the prop from scratch.

On another note, is there any way to cut down rubber width without a rubber stripper? I'm trying to fly my scrap but the smallest size I have is 0.058 and the plane is torque rolling. I think I just need a smaller size rubber to prevent that...

Xiangyu

While it is a little hard to trim out, I had mine flying decent in 2-3 flights. SO plane took a LOT longer this year.

But, the rubber size could be an issue (though kit makers would trim rubber to suitable sizes). I suspect "old school" rubber stripping with a blade probably not effective at 0.025.

Dewind to 0.06 or even less to get rid of torque roll.

Coach Chuck

[builderguy135]

Chuck,

That would be fun. Model boxes would smaller and cheaper too.

Brian T

I gotta say, this plane is really hard to trim and hard to fly for me. Also, I think it's really hard for most students to build to weight + make the prop from scratch.

On another note, is there any way to cut down rubber width without a rubber stripper? I'm trying to fly my scrap but the smallest size I have is 0.058 and the plane is torque rolling. I think I just need a smaller size rubber to prevent that...

Xiangyu

While it is a little hard to trim out, I had mine flying decent in 2-3 flights. SO plane took a LOT longer this year.

But, the rubber size could be an issue (though kit makers would trim rubber to suitable sizes). I suspect "old school" rubber stripping with a blade probably not effective at 0.025.

Dewind to 0.06 or even less to get rid of torque roll.

Coach Chuck

I used a ton of wash in + bending/cracking the wing to get rid of torque roll. Was able to get over 2 minutes with a ~0.55g plane, but thick rubber's extremely hard to use.

[MoMoney$$$;)0)]

What about completely making all parts of the plane by hand, and no kits allowed. This would truly make the teams stand out from one another.

[knightmoves]

What about completely making all parts of the plane by hand, and no kits allowed. This would truly make the teams stand out from one another.

For the vast majority of normal teams, the kits at least give them a place to start. You still have to be able to tune the plane (and you see very different results from people with the same kits, so it's not like having a kit is a panacea). What fraction of the lower-ranked teams do you think would successfully build a flyable plane from scratch?

[MoMoney$$$;)0)]

What about completely making all parts of the plane by hand, and no kits allowed. This would truly make the teams stand out from one another.

For the vast majority of normal teams, the kits at least give them a place to start. You still have to be able to tune the plane (and you see very different results from people with the same kits, so it's not like having a kit is a panacea). What fraction of the lower-ranked teams do you think would successfully build a flyable plane from scratch?

Thats fair, but it'll help tell the skill from the luck, but it's true it does give a backbone for everyone to start from. I guess it's something to find out.

[bjt4888]

What about completely making all parts of the plane by hand, and no kits allowed. This would truly make the teams stand out from one another.

For the vast majority of normal teams, the kits at least give them a place to start. You still have to be able to tune the plane (and you see very different results from people with the same kits, so it's not like having a kit is a panacea). What fraction of the lower-ranked teams do you think would successfully build a flyable plane from scratch?

Thats fair, but it'll help tell the skill from the luck, but it's true it does give a backbone for everyone to start from. I guess it's something to find out.

Based upon my observations as a coach for this event, and other similar events, for the last 12 years and as an event supervisor for a couple medium large Invitationals each year, the basic set of rules for the Wright Stuff event is a difficult challenge for the average student and does not need to be made needlessly more difficult. The majority of teams I witnessed flying the event in competition this year looked discouraged with their results. In previous years, I saw the average team smiling as they finished competing, and I saw reasonable success for most teams.

Bonuses for carrying ballast or for reduced wing area (increasing wing loading) that require additional testing and finer trimming skills are, in my opinion, appropriate and reward teams that put more time into testing and research. We should consider the challenges of stable controllable flight we’re only solved a little over 100 years ago. The reason for this is complexity of the problem.

Brian T

[OpticsNerd]

I think if the SO board is against increasing the limit for the stab they should at least increase the limit for the prop. Many teams this year just cut down larger props to 8cm, and many teams probably still have spare props to cut down. Custom props are also not expensive at all to make, so this wouldn't be costly to teams.