Scioly.org

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 9:06 am**

One question about rules:
Is it required to buiLd a plane with normal design(wing, stablizer,... etc.)

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 9:49 am**

topazand wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 9:06 am One question about rules:
Is it required to buiLd a plane with normal design(wing, stablizer,... etc.)

Some people have built canards if that is what you mean.

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 10:54 am**

CrayolaCrayon wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 9:49 am
topazand wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 9:06 am One question about rules:
Is it required to buiLd a plane with normal design(wing, stablizer,... etc.)
Some people have built canards if that is what you mean.

Well, I mean like a helicopter powered by rubber bands

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 11:57 am**

topazand wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 10:54 am
CrayolaCrayon wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 9:49 am
topazand wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 9:06 am One question about rules:
Is it required to buiLd a plane with normal design(wing, stablizer,... etc.)
Some people have built canards if that is what you mean.
Well, I mean like a helicopter powered by rubber bands

I do not think a helicopter would fit section 1 of the rules, which says a "Monoplane or Biplane". Plus, a heli, at 8g, would not be good for times. Finally, a heli would not likely meet the 100% bonus criterion of circling the room in opposite directions.

However, monoplane and biplane configurations with canard certainly would fit the rules

Coach Chuck

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 12:02 pm**

scioly2345 wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 6:55 am Any tips on how to get my plane to fly in a tighter circle? It ends up turning in a really wide circle to the point where it’ll hit a wall before turning (even in gyms), so I want to try getting the circle to be smaller

A number of things affect the circle. These may include the rudder offset, tail tilt, wing offset, thrustline, wing washin/out, balance, etc.

First step would be to make sure your plane is straight. No unintended warps in the wings, wing perpendicular to fuselage. Make sure the plane is well trimmed in terms of CG and decalage. A nose-heavy plane will be harder to turn.

The FF plane, I believe (have not built one) relies primarily on rudder for turning. But if any of these other areas are not straight, then they could fight the rudder. One thing to try would be to attempt the right turn as well. If it readily does a right turn but not a left, look for something not straight. If both have difficulty, look at CG/decalage. Due to prop rotation, I would expect it to be slightly harder (need more rudder) to go right.

Some have reported that too much rudder leads to dive into ground. This can be fixed with wash-in on the inboard wing, but that is one more thing that would need adjustment between flights.

Coach Chuck

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 12:31 pm**

coachchuckaahs wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 12:02 pm Some have reported that too much rudder leads to dive into ground.

That's what happened to Luke yesterday after he added rudder to tighten the left circle. He didn't realize that the reason his 2nd plane flew 1'53" (15 seconds longer than his identical main plane) is because it was set for a too-large circle, banked less, so it needed less decalage to stay aloft, and the reduced drag gave longer times.

I added a 1/32" leading edge shim today and it flies with a comfortable radius for 1'45" to 1'47" both ways every time even on the last run before a motor breaks (no video, Luke had enough of WS for the weekend). The flaring prop (the one in the second prop video) works great, the launch stalls are gone both ways.

Next we have to install the wing offset mechanism on his planes but we're still using my plane as a test mule to determine the simplest mechanism and optimal offset.

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 3:20 pm**

lechassin wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 6:04 am Luke is solo. It's probably too late for this year but hopefully if he does well, more kids will take notice and want to try WS next year. Luke is a senior but I have an 8th grader too, so we'll stay with it and see how it plays out.

I agree a biplane with lower wing loading is better for this particular contest, but Brian, I notice you always nail the numbers. How did you get 10%?

Eric,

The 10% number is based upon prototype testing.

Brian T

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 3:38 pm**

Does anyone else have trouble with plane inconsistencies during competition? I test my plane out a couple of nights before, and I am pleased with my results. When I bring it in to compete, it does much less than desirable. I try to keep my plane at a stable temperature, and I am almost certain that it was not damaged during transportation. Does anyone have any thoughts?

Also, what causes wing dip and what are some possible solutions to fix it?

Posted: **November 24th, 2019, 4:11 pm**

vehicleguy wrote: ↑November 24th, 2019, 3:38 pm Does anyone else have trouble with plane inconsistencies during competition? I test my plane out a couple of nights before, and I am pleased with my results. When I bring it in to compete, it does much less than desirable. I try to keep my plane at a stable temperature, and I am almost certain that it was not damaged during transportation. Does anyone have any thoughts?

Also, what causes wing dip and what are some possible solutions to fix it?

Vehicle,

Please provide details of your design, trimming and motor winding, fight duration and character of a good flight and flight duration and character of the less desireable flight and I can offer very specific help.

Brian T

Posted: **November 25th, 2019, 8:46 am**

lechassin wrote: ↑November 23rd, 2019, 1:11 pm Chuck, the amount of stuff there is to know about flying these things scares me.

So, Luke just called from the meet after finishing his official flights, and his performance was consistent with his all-in personality, in a logical way. He brought both of his planes, one thoroughly vetted that flies 1'35" both ways every time, and the other plane that he completed last night after work and never flew (you see where this is going).

He noted that some teams today had combined scores close to 4 minutes (wow!) and figured his vetted plane was destined to lose. He decided to try some trim flights on the new plane, was happy to have it fly 1'45" repeatedly both ways, and decided to use it for his official flights:

To the right, 1'45" right under the ceiling . A banner in the contest area concerned him so he added left rudder before his second flight (ARRRGH!).

To the left, 3/4 lap into the floor . We have experienced that in practice, so I think nerves got him *sigh*.

Anyhoo, we've got work to do. We'll use only flaring props moving forward and we need to flatten his circles, plus who knows what else that you guys aren't telling us .

I think he should stick to a fixed game plan regardless of what others are doing, and only incorporate what he sees into future plans, but he vigorously disagrees...

I was there Sat and saw Luke's flight. It was awesome, and avoided the two big US flags hanging down from the rafters (saw a few planes crash and not recover after hitting those). The stories of 2min both ways are not true. I think Luke finished first in the event overall - across all three classes A, AA, and AAA with only one flight. Here are the results. https://app.avogadro.ws/il/palatine-inv ... s/event/22

You guys are in great shape. That invitational is basically the state meet. It has all the powerhouse teams, Stevenson, New Trier, Nequah Valley, Naperville, etc. plus teams from WI and IN, so finishing first with only 1 flight means you guys are miles ahead of everyone else in Illinois at this point.

Scioly.org

Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C

Re: Wright Stuff C