Wright Stuff B

[jander14indoor]

<SNIP>My science O coach weighed all of our balsa seperately, and it helped us have a better plane(It did take forever granted)

.

Rant mode on...

Arrrgghhh, statements like that are part of what fuel the perception of excess adult participation in tech events

Your coach should have YOU weigh the wood, not do it for you. This is WELL within the skills of middle school students.

Next time it happens, take the wood and the scale from the coach, tell him/her to sit on their hands, and YOU do the work. They can advise as much as they like, but they need to do it hands off as much as possible.

Students, for any/all tech events, help your coaches realize their job is to advise, maybe demonstrate, but seldom, if ever, do it for you! Learn to be like my daughter did by two years old. "No, no, daddy, I dood it." as she pushed my hands away from her shoelaces.

Coaches, I know its hard, but your students can do far more than you expect. Make a habit of sitting on your hands. If you demo something, throw it out or keep it for yourself! Sounds cruel, but far less so in the long run.

OK, off soapbox for now.

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

[GitItWright]

I must Agree with Mr. Anderson on the issue of coaches-being-too-close-for-construction. We lose track of what SO is about and what Wright Stuff is about. The coach should be hands off except those very few instances when a "third" hand might be needed. These include carrying a box into the flying site or helping record data while the two student pilots are working on flight trim at school. Possibly your coach could be hands-on designing/assembling a flight box.

In the realm of building airplanes, the airplanes should be hands-off for coaches. There really are very few reasons that they can ever be involved. Having students observe the coach building as he/she builds their own coach's airplane (to show construction techniques) should be closest they come to any student construction. As for cutting wood, the coach can show technique but their finished pcs are technically-- trash.

Good Luck

[carneyf1d]

I totally agree with the last two posts. If my coach had done the building for me 1.) I would never have learned building techniques which carried on to penny planes, ministick, and f1d. 2.) I wouldn't have gotten interested in flight and wouldn't be majoring in Aerospace engineering, which is probably the coolest thing I've ever learned about.
So for all the coaches out there doing the building events instead of the students, they are just stealing away from the students future.

[gyourkoshaven]

Not to mention my teammate and I really want to get a good design over the summer, and had neither of us ever built a plane, it would probably be awful. Also isn't the point of SO to inspire students to grasp an interest in science and try it for themselves? And mentioning penny planes, we ordered a wright stuff kit from them, and the only directions we got were in Japanese. It was hilarious.

[chia]

And mentioning penny planes, we ordered a wright stuff kit from them, and the only directions we got were in Japanese. It was hilarious.

o.O where exactly did you order it from? that's pretty funny though

bah, i wish wright stuff were a C event. now that i've got the hang of it after this year, i'd really like to do it again... but can't. i'd like to try BLG, though. isn't that coming back to C in 3-4 years?

[jander14indoor]

Not to mention my teammate and I really want to get a good design over the summer, and had neither of us ever built a plane, it would probably be awful. Also isn't the point of SO to inspire students to grasp an interest in science and try it for themselves? And mentioning penny planes, we ordered a wright stuff kit from them, and the only directions we got were in Japanese. It was hilarious.

Not sure who 'them' is in your note, nor what kind of kit you wanted, but there are good Wright Stuff AND Penny Plane kits available out there, with instructions in good English. As much as I don't like the tail boom connection on the design, the Freedom Flights WS kit is a good kit and has good instructions. For Limited Penny Plane kits, try Indoor Model Supply, now sold through Peck Polymers. Though if you are ready for a LPP, frankly you are better off with one of the many plans from the web and scratch building.

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

[jander14indoor]

<SNIP>... i'd like to try BLG, though. isn't that coming back to C in 3-4 years?

Probably BLG or Helicopter will come to div C in the '10-'11 season. WS probably not till '12-'13 season.

But no guarantees, many things could change twixt now and then.

And you do have AMA free flight to explore in the mean time!

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

[carneyf1d]

Yea if anybody is interested in building Penny Planes over the summer, there is a great plan online by Warren Williams, and it is the actual Cat 1 record holder with 16 minutes! You can find it here : http://www.indoornews.com/modules/PDdow ... lpp_vs.jpg
So if are interested in building penny planes (for novice builders) /ministicks (for moderate builders) / f1d (for advanced builders) and dont know where to begin, PM me and i'll try to help you out.

[blue cobra]

Today's question regards tubes for the wing post.

To start off, I understand these tubes can be paper, coffee stirrers, or specially made and included in a kit for planes, and it also seems that practically everyone uses them.

First of all, do these tubes have a bottom? They flaunt consistency, but if you're relying on a mark on your wing post they wouldn't be any more consistent than other methods.

Do you have to sand the wing posts into circles?

Lastly, these are glued on to the fuse, so removing them would leave glue, adding weight, and possibly damage the wood. When experimenting, you will probably make different sized wings, so you would need a different fuse with different tubes for the wings, which makes it so that any differences you see in flight can not be definitively pinned on the wing you are trying to test.

[smartkid222]

Today's question regards tubes for the wing post.

To start off, I understand these tubes can be paper, coffee stirrers, or specially made and included in a kit for planes, and it also seems that practically everyone uses them.

First of all, do these tubes have a bottom? They flaunt consistency, but if you're relying on a mark on your wing post they wouldn't be any more consistent than other methods.

Do you have to sand the wing posts into circles?

Lastly, these are glued on to the fuse, so removing them would leave glue, adding weight, and possibly damage the wood. When experimenting, you will probably make different sized wings, so you would need a different fuse with different tubes for the wings, which makes it so that any differences you see in flight can not be definitively pinned on the wing you are trying to test.

Yes the tubes have two openings, and are cylindrical shaped (like a straw)
Yes you sand the wing posts into circles so they can snuggly fit into the posts(sockets). If they fit well without sanding, don't sand them.
the theory is that if the socket has 1/16 inside diamter and the wood is 1/16 x 1/16, using pythagorem theorum the cross section (diagonal) of the square wood would be greater than 1/16 and would be sanded down to fit.
I usually make one wing per plane, dont' do too much experimenting with different wing chords. If you want to change position of the wing, you can try to unglue the sockets (uncure or with blade), but you could also just keep one of the sockets that you used from before, and then glue another one on to accomodate for the different wing chord.