• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Bush Plane Build Challenge II

So the worst part of that day for me was discovering yesterday upon inspection of the wreckage that my 10 channel receiver in my Racer was nowhere to be found. It must have gotten ejected with the battery on the second crash and far enough away that I didn't notice it . I went to the field first thing this morning thinking that I had removed it and had it with my stuff at mid field and just perhaps overlooked it, but no sign of it, so I reviewed the crash again when I got to work to see where exactly I had crashed. Went back there after work and of course the field got mowed today, LOL! Got to the crash site and found the remnants of my elevator extension wire around that area so it's probably a good guess that the receiver suffered the same fate, Crashes don't bother me , losing gear ...ouch! :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

william Metge

Well-known member
So the worst part of that day for me was discovering yesterday upon inspection of the wreckage that my 10 channel receiver in my Racer was nowhere to be found. It must have gotten ejected with the battery on the second crash and far enough away that I didn't notice it . I went to the field first thing this morning thinking that I had removed it and had it with my stuff at mid field and just perhaps overlooked it, but no sign of it, so I reviewed the crash again when I got to work to see where exactly I had crashed. Went back there after work and of course the field got mowed today, LOL! Got to the crash site and found the remnants of my elevator extension wire around that area so it's probably a good guess that the receiver suffered the same fate, Crashes don't bother me , losing gear ...ouch! :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Wow, I'm impressed.
 

Hondo76251

Legendary member
And now to start getting next year’s plane ready…
Working on it now 🤣

@Ratcheeroo yeah, murphy got me too!

Took the DO 28 v2 out for a spin early this morning after the rebuild. The new wing worked well but i forgot that the elevator servo i had built into the fuselage (reused tail section from v1) was also one of the batch of janky servos. Made for a hard landing but a broken prop was all i suffered, so i thought. Sat down tonight to get her ready for another try in the morn and i find that one of my motors won't work 🙄. No visible damage. Took it apart, no broken wires or magnets, bell spins nicely... who knows.
20210803_220451.jpg
Thought i had another but turns out its a 7500kv so i dug around and found a pair of 1108 4000's that looks like ill have to swap both to. Oh well, build fly crash repeat! Lol
 
Working on it now 🤣

@Ratcheeroo yeah, murphy got me too!

Took the DO 28 v2 out for a spin early this morning after the rebuild. The new wing worked well but i forgot that the elevator servo i had built into the fuselage (reused tail section from v1) was also one of the batch of janky servos. Made for a hard landing but a broken prop was all i suffered, so i thought. Sat down tonight to get her ready for another try in the morn and i find that one of my motors won't work 🙄. No visible damage. Took it apart, no broken wires or magnets, bell spins nicely... who knows.
View attachment 204692
Thought i had another but turns out its a 7500kv so i dug around and found a pair of 1108 4000's that looks like ill have to swap both to. Oh well, build fly crash repeat! Lol
Good words to live by(y)
 

Hondo76251

Legendary member
yea same.... hopefully by then ill have all my stuff ready for a giant build..... really giant style.....
Toying with some new ideas for rules next year. As the rules are now its a pretty tough challenge. Yave to be willing to push your plane and your skills pretty hard. A lot of people, especially ones with planes they've put a lot of effort into, aren't going to want to go as "all in" as @Ketchup does. While i myself prefer this approach it does leave out a lot of people that might enjoy trying this competition.

One idea i have is to have a set score. Now that we have some decent data on what the average plane could be expected to do we could have a set of goals to hit. Payload, for example, could be set at 20 points for achieving 100% payload. (1:1 ratio) This is the most damaging portion of the challenge and would eliminate the need to get the plane uncontrollably heavy.

The Endurance/Durability could be set at something like 20 points for 50 landings.

To keep some element of "all in" flying if more than one plane gets 100% scores on both of those the ties would be settled by the "peoples choice" on the publicly voted exhibtion stage. 20 points for 1st, 10 for 2nd, 5 for third...

Just an idea. Tell me what y'all think?
 

Ketchup

4s mini mustang
Toying with some new ideas for rules next year. As the rules are now its a pretty tough challenge. Yave to be willing to push your plane and your skills pretty hard. A lot of people, especially ones with planes they've put a lot of effort into, aren't going to want to go as "all in" as @Ketchup does. While i myself prefer this approach it does leave out a lot of people that might enjoy trying this competition.

One idea i have is to have a set score. Now that we have some decent data on what the average plane could be expected to do we could have a set of goals to hit. Payload, for example, could be set at 20 points for achieving 100% payload. (1:1 ratio) This is the most damaging portion of the challenge and would eliminate the need to get the plane uncontrollably heavy.

The Endurance/Durability could be set at something like 20 points for 50 landings.

To keep some element of "all in" flying if more than one plane gets 100% scores on both of those the ties would be settled by the "peoples choice" on the publicly voted exhibtion stage. 20 points for 1st, 10 for 2nd, 5 for third...

Just an idea. Tell me what y'all think?
I really like this idea. At least a few people would probably reach the maximum points allowed, and then the winner is decided by who the voters think was the best. The amount of allowed points and the payload ratio/amount of landings may need to change depending on how many people reach them though. If everybody reaches the maximum then it might become more of a challenge where the main goal is to just get votes. The numbers seem pretty good right now though.
I was also thinking about why there aren’t usually many people finishing this challenge, and the pandemic might play a big role here. The other annual challenges have mostly shut down during the pandemic, and many people are quite busy. I feel like this particular challenge has a lot of potential to be one of the biggest annual ones, even without a prize, but it isn’t just yet and I think it might be related to why the other big challenges have stopped for now.
 

Hondo76251

Legendary member
@Ketchup yes, been a strange few years; thats partly why im keeping this going. It gives us something else to do/talk about! I'm not too concerned about making the challenge a big deal, just want to make sure its not too intimidating for our average pilots or those that might be more restricted by field size and such. One thing about keeping the payload at a smaller weight is that it will be easier to achieve for smaller planes. Easy to hit 1:1 on a 50" bird, much harder (at least with foamboard) to do that with a 24" one...

The landings we could probably go to what? 70 or 80 for top score? I know my first bushwacker could do over 100 but again, to keep it playable for the smaller birds we might want a bit lower...
 

Hondo76251

Legendary member
I just have a hard time having foam bush planes appeal to me. I have my two pnp ones and its hard for me to justify taking up the space for another
Yeah, i get what you're saying. Outside of this challenge, i dont fly the "cub" style planes much at all but not all Bush planes are cubs. ;)
How about a guinea modified to look like a twin otter with a functional bomb drop?
Heck, theres not any requirement for it to be any specific style of plane at all. Fact is, lots of warbirds are actually built under similar parameters; good payload, wide flight envelope, and endurance.

Ill be sure to make it more clear next year that any plane is welcome.
 
Yeah, i get what you're saying. Outside of this challenge, i dont fly the "cub" style planes much at all but not all Bush planes are cubs. ;)
How about a guinea modified to look like a twin otter with a functional bomb drop?
Heck, theres not any requirement for it to be any specific style of plane at all. Fact is, lots of warbirds are actually built under similar parameters; good payload, wide flight envelope, and endurance.

Ill be sure to make it more clear next year that any plane is welcome.
I was kind of thinking of going back and redoing the tandem wings I was playing with last year. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/delanne-tandem-wing-project.64464/

I'd use the twin from page 3 and 4 and it would need beefier, tail-dragger landing gear. Or steering tricycle gear, also beefy. Maybe a little smaller and use 2205 motors instead of the 2212s it's running now...and I'd have to do the flaps that I avoided doing on the original. That would be like 9 servoes. If I start now I might have it all figured out by next summer. :p It would certainly NOT be a cub.

Or a tri-motor? Hmmm...