DRAFT Flite Fest 2018 WWII Community Design & Build Off Discussion
- Thread starter rockyboy
- Start date
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
Is this restricted to foam board? The specifications in the original post seem to suggest this without actually saying it.
@Litterbug - Airships and rocket ships that meet the other criteria are fine as long as you design them with the FT Power pack compatible electric motor in mind.
@TexMechsRobot - Flite Test building techniques are strongly encouraged (and that encouragement will be reflected in the scoring rubric) but foam board construction is not mandated. Fiberglassed foam board, building from foam blocks, etc. would be acceptable but the requirements for community released plans and build instructions still need to be met - and the further the deviation from standard FT techniques, the more in depth those plans and instructions should be to help other interested builders grow their skills.
For other weird designs, http://www.unicraft.biz/uniavail.htm has a ton of neat and unusual planes down in their 1/72 scale kit listing too - need to sort through with an eye for the right time period, but it's a treasure trove of odd ball airframe ideas.
@TexMechsRobot - Flite Test building techniques are strongly encouraged (and that encouragement will be reflected in the scoring rubric) but foam board construction is not mandated. Fiberglassed foam board, building from foam blocks, etc. would be acceptable but the requirements for community released plans and build instructions still need to be met - and the further the deviation from standard FT techniques, the more in depth those plans and instructions should be to help other interested builders grow their skills.
For other weird designs, http://www.unicraft.biz/uniavail.htm has a ton of neat and unusual planes down in their 1/72 scale kit listing too - need to sort through with an eye for the right time period, but it's a treasure trove of odd ball airframe ideas.
Wait, I though this was to be WWII themed... did I miss that?
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
Seems the theme is "aircraft designed to be a part of WWII but that were either never built or never actually saw combat in WWII even if they were built in time".
Yes - military planes intended for use in WWII, designed during WWII (or during the build up to WWII and the designer intended it to be ready for use), or built during WWII but didn't arrive at the front on time, etc.
Not all of the planes on the http://www.unicraft.biz/uniavail.htm site would meet the criteria, but a lot of them would. Their listings are sort of sparse though, and anything that catches the eye probably needs more research to confirm it fits.
I've made the following update to address (current lack of) FT Power Pack EDF availability:
"Until Flite Test makes available an EDF power pack, jet or rocket designs may use any available EDF or modify the airframe for pusher prop or prop-in-slot with no scoring penalty."
Depending on when FT releases an EDF (and how many community designers are building using an EDF), we'll make a decision on how to provide scoring incentives to address changing designs.
Or maybe that's something we should work out now just in case.... hmmm....
"Until Flite Test makes available an EDF power pack, jet or rocket designs may use any available EDF or modify the airframe for pusher prop or prop-in-slot with no scoring penalty."
Depending on when FT releases an EDF (and how many community designers are building using an EDF), we'll make a decision on how to provide scoring incentives to address changing designs.
Or maybe that's something we should work out now just in case.... hmmm....
I'd Claim Snoopy's doghouse, but he flew in combat against the Red Barron. 
Guess I can still build it for Giggles. Been wanting to for quite some time. Should be a good build for the Owl or Danaus frames.
I'm kind of thinking about the Curtiss-Wright_XP-55_Ascender or XP-56-black-bullett
Cheers!
LitterBug
Guess I can still build it for Giggles. Been wanting to for quite some time. Should be a good build for the Owl or Danaus frames.
I'm kind of thinking about the Curtiss-Wright_XP-55_Ascender or XP-56-black-bullett
Cheers!
LitterBug
I'll be excited to see what comes out of this one! A LOT of unique options, and I love that this is pushing into the dawn of the jet age. Will allow for a lot of diversity. I've got a few projects to think about first but I'll be watching closely and mulling things over for a bit
I'd love to see a released set of plans for that plane, but according to sources it did see limited combat in WW2
So from a design perspective it doesn't meet the scoring criteria, but I would leave it to the local coordinator to see if it's disqualified from joining the community events at Flite Fest if the design and build instructions are released. At the very least, we'll just brand it as an outcast for being such a succesfull airframe and less weird than the rest of the cool kids
Last edited:
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
I know that most people are going for different types of power but I'm fascinated with the gliders that most military groups were developing and using. I think it could be fun to try for the 5 minute duration with a prototype military glider.
I've got my eye on the Junkers JU-322 Mammut
I've got my eye on the Junkers JU-322 Mammut
On the Avro Anson, rather than saying 'it's out' when it is really close on the line, following last year's example with the scoring rubric I think we have a way to include it but still give preference for the other designs that do meet the base criteria. I'll put up the draft scoring rubric in a moment and would like your (and anyone else's) feedback on this.
Still would like the weird stuff the most
Thanks,
Last edited:
There are certainly some weird (and big) glider prototypes out there - are you thinking a tow line up or bungee / high start to get going?
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
Tow line or powered ascent. I don't know if I could build it light yet strong enough for a bungee start. I have a year to experiment though!
DRAFT Scoring Rubric
So here's where I'm at with the draft scoring rubric.
Hopefully this will help us address some of the edge case requests while keeping in mind that we want to encourage more participation, more community designing, and more fun as a primary goal, and working within the same guidelines as a secondary goal. I'd rather include an aircraft that was involved in one skirmish in WW2 at a steep point penalty instead of lose a participant in the challenge - but the scoring preference should be weighted towards those meeting all of the requirements.
Design-off Scoring Rubric: 163 points total
1. Selection of views: 10
2. Aerodynamic design: 20
3. Materials: 40
4. Scale features: 20
5. Flight (not based on pilot skill): 18
6. Basic rules: 55
So here's where I'm at with the draft scoring rubric.
Hopefully this will help us address some of the edge case requests while keeping in mind that we want to encourage more participation, more community designing, and more fun as a primary goal, and working within the same guidelines as a secondary goal. I'd rather include an aircraft that was involved in one skirmish in WW2 at a steep point penalty instead of lose a participant in the challenge - but the scoring preference should be weighted towards those meeting all of the requirements.
Design-off Scoring Rubric: 163 points total
1. Selection of views: 10
a. Quality and accuracy: 5
b. Additional reference material for modifications: 5
b. Additional reference material for modifications: 5
2. Aerodynamic design: 20
a. Scale airfoil: 5
b. CG, loading(area or cubic), incidence, washout: 10
c. Other design incorporations (NACA ducts and cowls, etc.): 5
b. CG, loading(area or cubic), incidence, washout: 10
c. Other design incorporations (NACA ducts and cowls, etc.): 5
3. Materials: 40
a. Quality and selection of materials for strategic use: 5
b. Covering selection: 5
c. Resourcefulness: 5
d. Thriftiness: 5
e. Durability: 5
f. Prefabricated parts (higher score for less used): 5
g. FT Power Pack motor (or approved EDF/Glider exception): 10
b. Covering selection: 5
c. Resourcefulness: 5
d. Thriftiness: 5
e. Durability: 5
f. Prefabricated parts (higher score for less used): 5
g. FT Power Pack motor (or approved EDF/Glider exception): 10
4. Scale features: 20
a. Cockpit: 5
b. Engine (dummy, cowl, vents, exhaust, etc.): 5
c. Retracts (1=none): 5
d. Other (Provide comment): 5 ___________
b. Engine (dummy, cowl, vents, exhaust, etc.): 5
c. Retracts (1=none): 5
d. Other (Provide comment): 5 ___________
5. Flight (not based on pilot skill): 18
a. Take off: 5
b. Stability: 5
c. Maneuverability: 5
d. Landing: 3
b. Stability: 5
c. Maneuverability: 5
d. Landing: 3
6. Basic rules: 55
a. closeness of design to selected scale: 5
b. FT build techniques: 5 (fewer FT techniques=lower score)
c. Subject meets "intended for WWII use but did not see combat" requirement: 25
d. Quality of plans: 10 (higher for FT-quality)
e. Quality of build instructions: 10
b. FT build techniques: 5 (fewer FT techniques=lower score)
c. Subject meets "intended for WWII use but did not see combat" requirement: 25
d. Quality of plans: 10 (higher for FT-quality)
e. Quality of build instructions: 10
Similar threads
