That would be awesome!
DRAFT Flite Fest 2018 WWII Community Design & Build Off Discussion
- Thread starter rockyboy
- Start date
That would be awesome!
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
I like them so far. My only comment is for 4.c.
Clarify this to be scored only for aircraft that actually had retracts.
A way to normalize the data is have the scoring be columnar. A column for points scored and a column for points possible.
Sum both columns and then divide the first column's sum by the second column's. Closest to 1.00 wins.
This way, concerning the retracts, a person that didn't include retracts but should have would get 0 out of 5 and a person who didn't include retracts because their plane wasn't designed to have them would get 0 out of 0. The column totals would be different but the normalized score would even things out.
Clarify this to be scored only for aircraft that actually had retracts.
A way to normalize the data is have the scoring be columnar. A column for points scored and a column for points possible.
Sum both columns and then divide the first column's sum by the second column's. Closest to 1.00 wins.
This way, concerning the retracts, a person that didn't include retracts but should have would get 0 out of 5 and a person who didn't include retracts because their plane wasn't designed to have them would get 0 out of 0. The column totals would be different but the normalized score would even things out.
Or, just group it into "other". Then again, if we are talking gliders you also group in the engine bits too. It gets tricky to come up with this stuff. Part of the reason I was happy to pass it on 
Good points both of you
Let's noodle over a different approach for a moment. All of these aircraft came down to the surface at some point. Most of them landed on hard surfaces with wheels, but some landed in the water. Maybe a couple really did belly land. Many of them had retractable landing gear, but some had fixed gear.
Maybe we score this as 5 potential points for 'does the model's takeoff and landing capability match the original design (fixed gear max 3)'. So we're looking for retracts if appropriate, or a strong set of fixed gear, or water landing and takeoff capability that actually works. And if the model has an easier to reproduce fixed gear design, it has a lower point ceiling.
Let's noodle over a different approach for a moment. All of these aircraft came down to the surface at some point. Most of them landed on hard surfaces with wheels, but some landed in the water. Maybe a couple really did belly land. Many of them had retractable landing gear, but some had fixed gear.
Maybe we score this as 5 potential points for 'does the model's takeoff and landing capability match the original design (fixed gear max 3)'. So we're looking for retracts if appropriate, or a strong set of fixed gear, or water landing and takeoff capability that actually works. And if the model has an easier to reproduce fixed gear design, it has a lower point ceiling.
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
I'm good with this part. Modeling the aircraft is all about matching the looks and capability of the original. Score based on how close to that the modeler gets.
Grifflyer
WWII fanatic
Hi rockyboy,
I was wondering if I could register for the for the challenge, build a plane, and what not but, I don't know if I'll be able to make it TO a flite fest, so would I be able to submit a design but, then possibly not make to flite fest? I would hate to cause any confusion if I don't show up at the event.
I was wondering if I could register for the for the challenge, build a plane, and what not but, I don't know if I'll be able to make it TO a flite fest, so would I be able to submit a design but, then possibly not make to flite fest? I would hate to cause any confusion if I don't show up at the event.
F106DeltaDart
Elite member
I could just throw a wrench in everything and say I want to build an H-21 . Although I do want to build one someday, it just doesn't make sense here. A big B-36 with twin actuated bomb bays and retractable turrets would be cool though! Or a giant Spruce Goose in a D-Day camo and a cargo bay loaded with Sherman tanks.. Awesome job with the scoring system though, this is going to be an amazing event!
. Although I do want to build one someday, it just doesn't make sense here. A big B-36 with twin actuated bomb bays and retractable turrets would be cool though! Or a giant Spruce Goose in a D-Day camo and a cargo bay loaded with Sherman tanks.. Awesome job with the scoring system though, this is going to be an amazing event!
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
An age restriction is in place. You must have an age to participate. It doesn't matter which one so just bring whatever you have at the time.
Grifflyer
WWII fanatic
OK, so how old do I have to be?
F106DeltaDart
Elite member
He is saying there is no restriction on age, you just have have an age
.
TexMechsRobot
Posted a thousand or more times
I'm sorry I was attempting a joke
There's no age limit. You are more than welcome to participate! My earlier post was me trying to say your age doesn't matter and that you only needed to "have an age" (which everyone does).
Grifflyer
WWII fanatic
I'm sorry I was attempting a joke
There's no age limit. You are more than welcome to participate! My earlier post was me trying to say your age doesn't matter and that you only needed to "have an age" (which everyone does).
I thought so, just didn't know for sure.
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
It is a little unfortunate that the deadline for registration is so close and that the wider world of designers and builders who are genuinely unable to attend a Flite Fest are somewhat excluded!
It is also a bit of a pity that there is not a pool of Proxy builders who could,, working with those unable to attend, build and submit international designs.
The selected category of aircraft whilst interesting enough is just an extension of the warbird category which has been very well served in the past. Perhaps a separate competition for FUN and Sport designs based around the Mini Powerpod could be considered in the future because whilst we all seem to aspire to build and fly warbirds, I currently have 7, the majority of real fun is had with the light and simple builds that the newbies use to bridge their flying skills from trainer to warbird. High speed, and warbird designs are not always high in pure flying enjoyment
If anyone is offended by this post I apologize as that is not my intent but rather to try to broaden the participation to encompass as many Flitetest followers as possible.
Have fun!
It is also a bit of a pity that there is not a pool of Proxy builders who could,, working with those unable to attend, build and submit international designs.
The selected category of aircraft whilst interesting enough is just an extension of the warbird category which has been very well served in the past. Perhaps a separate competition for FUN and Sport designs based around the Mini Powerpod could be considered in the future because whilst we all seem to aspire to build and fly warbirds, I currently have 7, the majority of real fun is had with the light and simple builds that the newbies use to bridge their flying skills from trainer to warbird. High speed, and warbird designs are not always high in pure flying enjoyment
If anyone is offended by this post I apologize as that is not my intent but rather to try to broaden the participation to encompass as many Flitetest followers as possible.
Have fun!
Absolutely join us for the challenge! All the design / build documentation / scoring / and design awards are conducted through the forums here. If you can join at an event, that's awesome! If not, that's less awesome, but we'll be keeping registration for the group in person events separate from the main design challenge.
And if you're old enough to join the forums, you are absolutely old enough to join in!
I think I might have miss-communicated something here.
The deadline for registration to open is August 1 - that's on my head to get a final set of guidelines up for people to start declaring their intention to build against. The registrations don't close for the design competition until December 31, and for the in person event challenges they don't close until the event happens. I don't think I can be more open and inclusive than that
Also, the entire design and build challenge portion, including the scoring and awards, is 100% through virtual participation here in the forums, through each participant uploading their photos, files, and videos - I'll probably unfortunately never get to meet some of these wonderful people who participated in the Flite Fest International Air Race challenge last year, or people who participate in the event this year either. The in person challenges at each Flite Fest event are there to give an opportunity to celebrate and have fun with those who could make it in person - but the main challenge scoring and awards are entirely virtual and completed long before an in person event occurs.
And I love the idea of going down very different path in the future. And by focusing this challenge on military planes that never saw combat, we are specifically trying to steer away from the common warbirds in every hanger and every hobby shop. We are trying to foster inclusion and learning and trying something new, and for people already steeped in war birds this might not seem like a good fit at first. But have you seen the plans for British twin boom fighter with the cockpit built on the elevator? The amazingly wacky three engine Russian flying submarine? Or the twin engine Luftwaffe canard bomber? These are my leading ideas right now for my own entry, and they are anything but typical warbirds.
(I'm not posting model numbers for those yet - but I will as soon as I decide which one I like most )And I'm absolutely not offended by your post - I'm very glad you've spoken up! I'd really hate for my descriptions to have miss-communicated the intent and caused an community member (you or anyone else) to decide not to participate without a clear understanding of what I meant to convey in the guidelines. I'll be looking for things I can clarify in the main guidelines so going forward I can help prevent some of these miss-understandings.
Thank you!
Last edited:
Lufthouse
Member
He-162?
The Heinkel He-162 "Volksjager" was an airplane I've always wanted to model. The real one was built from non strategic materials, by unskilled labor...that was the premis at least. Very few were ever operational, but one is rumored to have shot down a Hawker Hurricain I believe. Would that disqualify this airplane from this contest? 1/10 scale puts this airplane right at about a 29 inch wing span...sounds about perfect.....
The Heinkel He-162 "Volksjager" was an airplane I've always wanted to model. The real one was built from non strategic materials, by unskilled labor...that was the premis at least. Very few were ever operational, but one is rumored to have shot down a Hawker Hurricain I believe. Would that disqualify this airplane from this contest? 1/10 scale puts this airplane right at about a 29 inch wing span...sounds about perfect.....
Not disqualified, but it'll get a scoring penalty for doing it's intended job in combat - so bring it on!!
Also, I've reorganized the guidelines a bit to better clarify the design challenge's relation to the event challenges, and put the scoring rubric up on the first post for people coming to this thread for the first time.
I'd appreciate if folks can take a quick review and let me know if it's getting clearer
Thanks!
Last edited:
Grifflyer
WWII fanatic
if you do a B-36 you gotta make have so there is 6 turning and four burning and/or a FICON version.
Similar threads
