Legendary member
Acrobatic : symmetrical
Payload: cambered


  • Airfoil_camber.jpg
    22.8 KB · Views: 0


Site Moderator
Staff member
I agree with @leaded50, aerobatics and payload are conflicting goals. You are going to compromise one for the other.

A flat bottom Clark Y will be very good at payload. If you increase the throws and move the CG aft it will do a lot of acrobatics. Inverted flight is possible but will suffer. The cambered wing will out perform the flat bottom in payload and the symmetrical wing will outperform the flat bottom in aerobatics.


Legendary member
Also, undercambered wings do great at heavy lift at slow speeds. They have a ton of drag though,


Elite member
There are ways to strike a consensus between aerobatic & high payload wing design. A variable chord & profile or a flatter profile with extended span, or even variable geometry with slats, fowler flaps or dropped aileron hinge designs. Load capacity might be a take off only issue, while a symmetrical wing design might benefit from flaps to slow it down for landing, etc. I think that’s the fun of designing wings in foam where you can easily experiment. I’ve seen a lot of wing designs on this forum.


Master member
Every plane has to be a compromise of one sort or another. There is no 'perfect' plane although some pilots may think so. ;)
Every designer has to work within specific parameters and find the best solution in his opinion.

If you select opposing parameters like aerobatics and payload it means there will be a whole range of possible solutions but none will be ideal at both.
If you give some more detail of what you are aiming to achieve you may get more specific advice.