DRAFT Flite Fest 2018 WWII Community Design & Build Off Discussion

[Hai-Lee]

In relation to complexity, I would discount build technique as from experience when a build technique is learned it is just a different approach to the same problem. When I did my first FT build, I kept referring to the FT website because I wanted to assure myself that they each had only two arms because it felt like I needed to be an octopus to build it properly, Now I could just about do the same build in my sleep.

This might be something to consider at sometime in the future but anyway how about each entry arrive with a box of bits of their entrant and have an airframe build off. The fate of the built airframe is at the discretion of the entrant but if done early in the judging process it would give spare wing, fuselage, and tail for those who fortune does not smile upon. It need not be compulsory but it would be a good show for onlookers and make a nice video with 10? different aircraft being produced before the camera in an hour or so.

If the build airframes are not used as spare parts and assuming the competitors are agreeable the resultant airframes could be auctioned for charity on the last day of the Fest. The RC Aircraft version of a "Cent Auction".

Besides when I build I am forever cutting out measuring and changing my mind and cutting out new pieces. I regularly have a secondary unit in which I am tracking the project build in case I find a serious miscalculation and need to change something major. The secondary unit is often finished after I crash or otherwise destroy the original of the design until then it is just effectively a pile of pieces. Though sometimes lack of storage means they get trashed.

Just a few mental ramblings!

Have fun!

Just a thought

ADDENDUM! The highest price at the "Cent Auction" could be adjudged as the peoples choice, and possibly get a peoples choice award!

 

[willsonman]

So, you have a team, who "owns" the airplane? Your problem buddy. We are reasonable people and in the end, we are going to meet at our FF events and have fun seeing these models in person. If we get TOO caught up in the specifics of the rules and super fairness of it all then we ALL LOSE. The winter builds I have coordinated over the years have always been very loose around the scoring, comparatively speaking. If you see them at other forums (RCG, RCU, WF, FG, etc.) they are MUCH more specific. The rules are mostly to keep us focused but still let us have fun.

The spirit and intent of Flite Test is to encourage each other on and not drag someone down. The more rules you place the more restrictive you get as to who can participate.

I will use my own experience to relate what I am trying to underscore. Yeah, I had loads of people extend compliments on the Bugatti at FFEast. I also gave numerous compliments to others and their aircraft that are ALSO amazing. Seeing a foam board Cub built as a beginner with crisp edges and the right amount of glue is a spectacular sight. I remember seeing an airplane (another Caudron) that was made from balsa, ply, and fiberglass and the builder was a teenager. He did a phenomenal job on the build. His CG was quite a bit aft IMO and I encourage him to use a CG calculator and I pointed him in the right direction because I understood how much effort he had put into his airplane. When a person came up to me and wanted me to sign the wing of their ARF I wondered why for a moment, but then I looked in their eyes. It was important to THEM. That's all that matters.

I've never been able to please everyone and I have irked my fair share of people but as long as we stick with the FT values we will all have a lot of fun with this.

 

[AircPirateNinsei]

Blohm & Voss Ha-137 V5

Count me in:

AircPirateNinsei
Blohm & Voss Ha-137 V5
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?35996-FTCC-18-WWII-Blohm-amp-Voss-Ha-137-V5

 

[rockyboy]

We have a pirate in the squadron! Awesome! :applause:

Being loose in the rules to encourage lots of participation and creativity is a primary objective - and I do want to make sure the guidelines I've put up on the front page don't get in the way of people trying more advanced techniques if they want to. I also want to make sure that with the combination of plans and build instructions, someone else can follow along and have the same success - so those advanced techniques should be well documented, especially as they get further away from the base Flite Test folding and gluing.

If anyone else wants to chime in on this topic I'm happy to get the feedback - otherwise I have about four different view points to consider from the community and should be able to put something together after I think it over a bit more today.

I know it can seem like conflicting ideas or missed points are aggravating, but we're all trying for the same thing - a fun challenge that loads of people can and want to participate in. Thank you to everyone for your input on this!

 

[Corbarrad]

Just to make this clear: I did not want to claim ownership of the BF 109 TL.
I just thought having as many unique Designs as possible in the competition will make it more fun for everyone.
I'm also willing to cooperate with others who might find the subject appealing, though given my track record it might not be the best idea to rely on me delivering a final product. You can count on me to share all and any documentaion I come across when asked and to overanalyze any design problem until your hair falls out, though.

The BF 109 TL was a proposed design for a twin engine jet Version of the BF 109 in case development of the Me 262 fell through.

As far as I can see the fuselage was modified with a nose cone which probably held fuel tanks (and the nose wheel of an incredible tall tricycle landing gear) and a center section carring two slim engine nacelles was added to the wing.

All these bits apparently came from other prototypes so I'll dig for information on those as well..

The shape of the nacelles would probably lend itself to a twin F power pack with clear 5 inch three blade props.

 

[LitterBug]

Curtiss Wright XP-55 Ascender

I am going into this challenge knowing that there will be quite a few challenges ahead and much to learn. I choose this path to advance my all around flying skills. Some things to overcome: 1) My plank flying skills are horrid, 2) This was a challenging airframe to fly, 3) it has some rather challenging design features. Fortunately it is a very well documented airframe with one original and several examples of models in the wild. The One surviving appears to be only a few hours away in Michigan. What I thought was a Canard design is actually a flying wing with an elevator up front. The VERY front.... I'm sure this will go through many wadded up iterations from now till the end of the challenge. Going to start with an ultra simple 3D foamyish "flat" + profile design, and work up to a more curvaceous build.
Some pictures pulled from the web:




I have no reservations with others building their own renditions of this plane. Really like the idea of keeping this an open challenge as has been stated previously in the thread.

Cheers!
LitterBug

 

[Sir Fly]

For anyone looking to get started but don't know much about CAD or drawing software, an excellent option is the Free DoubleCAD XT - LocalFiend shared his Flite Test style templates and a video about designing foam board airplanes using this software a while back.

http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?25514-FT-Style-CAD-Templates

Thanks for the link rockyboy! Do you know any video/thread for designing planes in Google Sketchup? I have seen a few planes made with it and I have the most experience working in that program.

 

[rockyboy]

Thanks for the link rockyboy! Do you know any video/thread for designing planes in Google Sketchup? I have seen a few planes made with it and I have the most experience working in that program.

Yep - a couple in fact!

There is a FliteTest article series that focuses on DTFB design in Sketchup - here's the link to episode 1:

https://www.flitetest.com/articles/sketchup-for-rc-aircraft-design-tutorial-1

Youtube of course has a couple - this one looks pretty decent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQA6Y1YHaAk

And over on RC Groups there is a small thread that references a video series too:

https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?2070913-Using-Sketchup-to-design-RC-aircraft

And if anyone is more interested in using Adobe Illustrator there is the excellent video series by NerdNic (all these techniques will work in the free Inkscape too, but the commands might be called something else):

https://youtu.be/U-duqt8JjDI?list=PLGtJe51vDgt1Iff4AcfUh4km2cvdSkfrz



Anyone else have RC foam board tutorials for other CAD/design tools?

 

[Hai-Lee]

It seems I am "Ruffling a few feathers but that is not my intention.

Having lived through the development of Multifunction radio control and the explosion of RC everything I would like to make the whole RC world more inclusive. Even on these forums there is a common thread of a past lack of willingness to help, elitism, antagonism, empire building, and exclusivity which lead to many people trying to get into the hobby only to give up and not return for a generation or 2.

By all means keep the competition rules as open as possible but also try to make them as inclusive as possible. To me a "Profile Plank" designed and built by a 10 year old that flies well is actually far more impressive and deserving of praise than an engineering workshop product that has flight stabilisation and 10 RC functions.

Being a multi-discipline technologist I applaud and appreciate the skill, design flare, and even the structural designs of many of the builds I have seen through these pages but sadly there is a large number of them which will always be beyond the capabilities of the general readership. My input in this thread is just trying to keep it real for those who do not have access to large workshops even though they are quite talented in their own way. Nothing would be better than designs that could be built in their thousands around the world by almost anyone who has some basic skills.

Perhaps a JUNIOR competition run in parallel for designs of 10 pieces or 2 sheets could be run as well for those followers under 18 years of age. They are the torch bearers for the hobby into the future.

Have fun! (That is the only important thing).

 

[cvdmaverick]

Thanks for the link rockyboy! Do you know any video/thread for designing planes in Google Sketchup? I have seen a few planes made with it and I have the most experience working in that program.

I started out deigning things in Sketchup but I personally get very fed up with it and I find it to be difficult to export to a PDF at 1:1 scale. I switched to doublecad after watching Localfiends tutorials and I have to say I like it much better. It's also very easy to export the plans to a PDF and localfiend has templates available as well. Just my personal opinion.

 

[Sir Fly]

I started out deigning things in Sketchup but I personally get very fed up with it and I find it to be difficult to export to a PDF at 1:1 scale. I switched to doublecad after watching Localfiends tutorials and I have to say I like it much better. It's also very easy to export the plans to a PDF and localfiend has templates available as well. Just my personal opinion.

Ok thanks! I'll try designing in Sketchup and then if I have to I'll switch to a better CAD program.

 

[cvdmaverick]

Ok thanks! I'll try designing in Sketchup and then if I have to I'll switch to a better CAD program.

I believe you can import sketchup files into doublecad as well but I have never tried it.

 

[SlingShot]

@Litterbug -- Do you know which museum this is?

View attachment 91404
View attachment 91405


Cheers!
LitterBug

 

[LitterBug]

@Litterbug -- Do you know which museum this is?

Not sure where those pictures were taken, but believe it is currently in Portage, MI. http://www.airzoo.org/page.php?page_id=207

Cheers!
LitterBug

 

[SlingShot]

Not sure where those pictures were taken, but believe it is currently in Portage, MI. http://www.airzoo.org/page.php?page_id=207

Cheers!
LitterBug

Cool! They have a really nice collection and visiting exhibits.

 

[DamoRC]

On the Sketchup thing, this excellent article by thatjoshguy is what I followed when trying to take my sketchup designs to 1:1 scale pdfs (using doublecad).

DamoRC

 

[Datum]

Can I submit an aircraft which eventually saw minor combat but not in WW2? If not, no worries I'll just page through german sketches until I find a funny one.

Seems like a really cool competition!

 

[rockyboy]

Can I submit an aircraft which eventually saw minor combat but not in WW2? If not, no worries I'll just page through german sketches until I find a funny one.

Seems like a really cool competition!

Yes - the scoring restriction is specifically on WW2 combat. If (for example) it's an early jet that started development during WW2 but peace broke out before it was deployed, it's a perfect match for the challenge.

 

[Tench745]

I am going into this challenge knowing that there will be quite a few challenges ahead and much to learn. I choose this path to advance my all around flying skills. Some things to overcome: 1) My plank flying skills are horrid, 2) This was a challenging airframe to fly, 3) it has some rather challenging design features. Fortunately it is a very well documented airframe with one original and several examples of models in the wild. The One surviving appears to be only a few hours away in Michigan. What I thought was a Canard design is actually a flying wing with an elevator up front. The VERY front.... I'm sure this will go through many wadded up iterations from now till the end of the challenge. Going to start with an ultra simple 3D foamyish "flat" + profile design, and work up to a more curvaceous build.

LitterBug

Model Aviation had a balsa build of the Ascender's predecessor, the CW-24B, in their March 2015 issue. http://www.amaflightschool.org/getstarted/build-diy-fiberglass-scratch-tutorial
In case you need to get your creative juices flowing.
They also had a build of the Miles M20 in 2015. I think I saw someone building that for this competition as well.

 

[rockyboy]

Guidelines and scoring rubric updated to ensure that more advanced techniques are not penalized, but if included they need to be well documented. A cleanly executed design and documentation following basic techniques will not be held back from scoring well either. Also provided more clarity on the non-WWII combat wording to address questions that have come up.

I think we are very close to being locked in here.

Thanks!