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

FTFF 2017 International Air races: Design-Off

willsonman

Builder Extraordinare
Mentor
#1
Planning for the Air Races has been challenging and rewarding all the same. First, I want to thank each person who has contributed to the idea and criteria for the competitions. While the race rules are being finalized, lets begin the design-off!

Summary:

Participants will build a 1/6 (single-engine) or 1/10 (multi-engine) scale electric motor driven, radio-controlled airplane model and demonstrate that it is capable of controlled flight. At the end of the competition, a panel will be selected to select winners from completed and flight-proven models.

Objectives are to:

o Celebrate the Golden Era of aviation
o Foster interest in building and racing at FTFF2017
o Promote designing and building as one of the aspects of the FT community
o Friendly forum banter ;)

Design-Off Rules:

1. Subject must resemble a full-sized (real, no fantasy aircraft) aircraft that follow the same design from 1920 - 1939, if not from that time period. Scale outlines may be changed within reason to improve flight characteristics or for ease of construction. Aircraft that were used in a military capacity are excluded as are modern Red Bull air race type aircraft. The aim is to celebrate the Golden Era of flight. Please consult the community in this thread if you have doubt about inclusion.

2. Entries must be powered by at least one electric motor and be at 1/6 scale. Multi-engine aircraft should be at 1/10 scale to keep models approximately the same size for the races.

3. To include as many pilots as possible in the races, FT building techniques Must be used as a foundation. Other techniques may be used but you should keep in mind that others may want to build YOUR airplane and may require additional skills to do so. Incorporation of FT power pods, FT Elements firewalls is encouraged for this purpose, but is not required.

4. Entries must demonstrate that they are capable of controlled flight before the Design-Off closing date. Only videos of the entry in flight will be considered proof of flight-worthiness.

5. Already started builds may be entered.

6. A complete set of digital plans must be available by the close of the Design-Off. Vector-based formats are preferred but not required.

7. Build instructions MUST be provided through video instruction, textual write-up, or build log.

8. Participants may submit more than one entry.

Note: Rasterize (Stephen Rosema) will be selecting models to skin as part of this contest. He will be considering factors outside of this contest. He will select a model or models that he is willing to do. Winning the Design-Off plays NO factor in his decision. Use of compound curves, lower part count, and ability to put parts on standard-size paper (11" x 17") are major factors for your consideration.

Coordinator's Instructions:

- Registration for the Design-Off will be by posting participant members’ FT user name, the model to be entered, and a link to a build thread on this thread, NOT via PM to the OP.

Example of entry format:

Willsonman
Bugatti 100p
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29203-Flite-Fest-2017-Bugatti-100P

- Registration for entries will open and the Build-Off will start on September 2 2016.
- Registration will close and the Design-off will end on December 31st, 2016. This is to facilitate time for folks to build aircraft well in-advance of FTFF 2017
- Build-Off adjudication will be completed and points accumulated will be posted by January 31st 2017.
- It is recommended that designers to not review the rubric for adjudication during the course of their project. To foster creativity and fun, review at the start to make your plan, build, and then review when nearing completion to see where you may accumulate additional points. The rubric has been attached to this posting.
- Any further questions may be posted in this thread or directed to the coordinator (Willsonman).
 

Attachments

Last edited:

willsonman

Builder Extraordinare
Mentor
#2
RockyBoy
Caudron C.460
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29316-FF2017-Int-Racers-Caudron-C-460
Complete

HilldaFlyer
Curtis CR-4 (1938)
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29231-FF2017-Int-Racers-Crosby-CR-4

AkimboGlueGuns
1934 version of Steve Wittman's "Chief Oshkosh"
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...f-Oshkosh-(1934)-FF17-International-Air-Races

Mid7night
Folkerts Speed King SK-3 "Jupiter"
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...rs-Folkerts-Speed-King-SK-3-quot-Jupiter-quot
Complete

RCBuildIdeas
Percival Mew Gull
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29646-FF2017-Int-Racers-Percival-Mew-Gull

Jim_Buxton
Rider R-4 Firecracker
Needs a link

localfiend
Gee Bee Z
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29622-FF2017-Int-Racers-Gee-Bee-Z

Michael763
Miles M-5 Sparrowhawk G-ADWW
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29391-Flite-Fest-2017-Miles-M-5-Sparrowhawk

FAI-F1D
Folkerts SK-4
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...-Sk-4-no-compromises!&highlight=Folkerts+SK-4
Complete

AlternateSource
Hughes H-1
Needs a link

telegraham
1931 Supermarine S.6B
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29745-Flite-Fest-2017-Supermarine-S-6B

Aviator08
Laird Super Solution 1930
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...cers-Laird-Super-Solution&p=305261#post305261
Complete

Xantos
de Havilland T.K.4
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...t-Racers-de-Havilland-TK4&p=307579#post307579

Fidget
Curtiss RC3
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?30187-FF2017-Int-Racers-Curtiss-R3C
Complete

BridgeInspector
Travel Air Mystery Ship
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?31559-Flite-Fest-2017-Travel-Air-Type-R-Mystery-Ship
Complete
 
Last edited:

willsonman

Builder Extraordinare
Mentor
#3
Results:

First lets break down the leaders for each section. I do this to emphasize the strengths of each finalist and share how close this was.

Section 1 leader: Folkerts SK3 (average of 9.3)
Section 2 leader: Travel Air Mystery Ship (average of 13.7)
Section 3 leader: Folkerts SK4 (average of 26.7)
Section 4 leader: Laird Super Solution (average of 15.2)
Section 5 leader: Laird Super Solution (average of 16.3)
Section 6 leader: Curtiss RC3 (average of 29.7)

Final placement with average overall score:

1: Laird Super Solution (103.8)
2: Folkerts SK3 (101.7)
3: Curtiss RC3 (101.5)
4: Travel Air Mystery Ship (99.3)
5: Folkerts SK4 (97.7)
6: Caudron C.460 (91.7)

Finally, I want to mention that the designer with the most further development after the close of the design-off was the Caudron C.460. I mention this because Rockboy has been actively improving his model and has included his very own skins. Inclusion of this artwork is a very welcome bonus and adds quite a lot to a fine subject. In the past month he has compiled a VERY concise set of build instructions in his thread and has worked diligently to overcome some issues with plan accessibility. Bravo Sir!

Many congratulations are in order to EVERY participant in the design-off. ITS NOT TOO LATE to finish your designs. EVERY entrant from this design off will be eligible for the races.

NOTE: Rasterize is working through some life things right now. Its fairly well-know that he is in the process of re-locating his family across the country. I will keep you all posted on his availability to create a skin. As stated previously, it is his prerogative to do or NOT to do any skin. Should he not have the time to do so, we understand and wish him and his family well.


RockyBoy
Caudron C.460
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29316-FF2017-Int-Racers-Caudron-C-460
Complete
Comments:
Good selection of appropriate materials aluminum spar, some bamboo. All DTFB paper covering and posterboard. Printed skin available now but not at time of contest completion. well thought out structure, well designed. Excellent hatch for access. All inexpensive materials, easily accessible. Belly lander should be OK. Flaps may be susceptible to damage as they protrude below fuse surface. Rudder only on upper portion of vert and should be safe from ground damage. Well designed and built. Lots of potential for future improvements. All methods familiar to FT builders. Does use aluminum spar but that has been around long enough most FT builders are familiar.

Mid7night
Folkerts Speed King SK-3 "Jupiter"
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...rs-Folkerts-Speed-King-SK-3-quot-Jupiter-quot
Complete
Comments:
All DTFB, posterboard, and ply firewall. Nothing “fancy” required. Chin scoop will be problematic long term. Excellent cad build plans.

FAI-F1D
Folkerts SK-4
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...-Sk-4-no-compromises!&highlight=Folkerts+SK-4
Complete
Comments:
Multiple materials used. Foam (sheet and block), FG, CF, and Kevlar. More expensive materials used. Air intake and scale exhaust. Minimal engine detail required. Several techniques deviate from FT method, but not beyond average FT modeler.

Aviator08
Laird Super Solution 1930
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...cers-Laird-Super-Solution&p=305261#post305261
Complete
Comments:
Good selection of appropriate materials (CF spar, aluminum gear, ply mount points). More expensive materials used but materials readily accessible. Air exhaust behind cowl could easily be added as well. Excellent plans in PDF.

Fidget
Curtiss RC3
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?30187-FF2017-Int-Racers-Curtiss-R3C
Complete
Comments:
Open cockpit. Windscreen in posterboard but could be made clear easily. All methods familiar to FT builders. Some non FT type foam used in final version. Good plans in PDF. PDF build instructions.

BridgeInspector
Travel Air Mystery Ship
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?31559-Flite-Fest-2017-Travel-Air-Type-R-Mystery-Ship
Complete
Comments:
Lots of rigging for gear is nice plus. Well thought out structure, well designed, Extra planning for suspended gear is nice. Several techniques deviate from FT method. Gear will be a challenge but wheel pants easier for FT builders than the other fixed gear planes in this contest.
 
Last edited:

HilldaFlyer

Well-known member
#11
HilldaFlyer
Crosby CR-4 (1938)
FF2017 Int. Racers: Crosby CR-4




Sounds great...
If I am able, I'm going to complete the 1/4 scale Curtis CR-4 since I've started and the plans are almost completed (linked above) and do another at 1/6 scale for the race (New Thread when started). I'll make the 1/6 scale really FT technique friendly (boxy) which allows the 1/4 scale to use novel techniques (smooth & round) that may not be approachable by most of the FT community. This contest will challenge my building techniques into new realms of being scale - will be fun.

A little background
The CR-4 was the brainchild of Harry V. Crosby, a barnstormer, airmail pilot, and test pilot who was killed trying to bail out of the Northrop XP-79B jet flying wing in 1945.
The CR-4's racing record:
1938 Greve - out;
1938 Thompson - out;
1939 Greve - flagged down on 13th lap, 164.9 mph, 3rd place;
1939 Thompson - 244.5 mph, 4th place.
 
Last edited:

willsonman

Builder Extraordinare
Mentor
#12
Ok, Seems like there are some unhappy campers with the subjects they had in mind. Please be mindful that a LOT of considerations went into this. Let me address the two frowny faces thus far:

1: Size. I polled 12 aircraft from the entire era and gathered the wingspan data. The average was calculated and an approximate relative size for FT comparability was made. It worked out to be 1/6 for singles and 1/10 for twins. Rather than stick to a wing size range this was a more general approach. When you see the aircraft race at the event there will be actual differences to discuss on the ground, not just in the air. The other major consideration was limiting power and this sort of plays into size. Rather than get every single detail worked out for everything NOW I focused on just this portion. Keeping the aircraft the same approximate size by scale also will scale the power among the different designs. many of these airplanes had the same or similar engines but they performed vastly different due to the DESIGN. In the spirit of what we are doing with this, a decision was made to try to keep things a bit more relative.

2: Military Aircraft. They are awesome. They are marvels of engineering that were and are primarily driven by the pressures of war, not entertainment and advancement of technology. Focusing our history on the civilian efforts gives us more focus and more unique subjects to discuss and learn about.

I knew there would be some and I apologize but from the ongoing discussions that have been going on this since Flite Fest, it is just impossible to please everyone on this. Please accept my apology and consider this alternative:

The Bugatti 100p project will absolutely NOT be part of the design-off or races. I would highly encourage anyone who would like to build something that is not under the criteria of the Design-Off to NOT feel hindered. Please contribute to this community and the spirit of Golden Age aviation and make something awesome! I'm not stopping you, I'm encouraging you! Together we all can contribute to this theme. I have no doubt that awesome things will come from this.
 

rockyboy

Skill Collector
Mentor
#13
RockyBoy
Caudron C.460
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29316-FF2017-Int-Racers-Caudron-C-460

I'm going to need to check the scale against the plans as drawn up so far. But, I can ditch the power pod awkwardness in the fuse and use a glue in firewall, so that's nice. :)

I do think the target of 1/6 or 1/10 scale is a very good idea (even though I need to adjust my plans :) ) - things are going to look really neat on the field with all the variations in size this will create.
 
Last edited:
#14
I must say, this is a very exciting and educational challenge. I just very briefly researched race planes from 1920-1939, and wow, this was a great and dangerous time for flight design.

I also learned that I now have to build the "Solution," as it was flown in the 1930 National Air Race by Mr. Charles "Speed" Holman, the same last name as mine!!! Who knew! I was blown away. The only biplane to win a speed race, and it only won because the lead plane crashed on the final leg. Read here: http://www.airracinghistory.freeola.com/1930 National Air Races.htm

So, I scaled down the 21' wingspan, and it comes to only 3.5', should be quite do-able, if that is the scale criteria.
http://neam.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&layout=edit&id=865

This should be fun. Thank you for the response, no apologies needed, just keep the fun and challenges coming!
 

localfiend

I like 3D printers...
Mentor
#18
2: Military Aircraft. They are awesome. They are marvels of engineering that were and are primarily driven by the pressures of war, not entertainment and advancement of technology. Focusing our history on the civilian efforts gives us more focus and more unique subjects to discuss and learn about.
I get not including them in the competition, they weren't purpose built racers.

I plan on releasing plans for a Boeing P-26 Peashooter (military). It was present at the real life air races but only as an exhibition craft. I figure that those who have military craft in mind can join me in an exhibition race just for fun. The exhibition race could include just about anything for those that really want to race something that doesn't fit the competition criteria.

For the competition I'll be designing a Gee Bee Z.

*******************************************


Entry:

localfiend
Gee Bee Z
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?29622-FF2017-Int-Racers-Gee-Bee-Z
 

willsonman

Builder Extraordinare
Mentor
#19
That is a great suggestion, Dale. Exhibitions were indeed an integral part of the races to showcase the outcome of the past. I think you should attack this in the discussion thread to see if it would be something others may want to jump in on.
 
#20
In reading the Design-off pdf, I am seeing that there are points to be given for retracts, under the scale features. So, what if the plane being designed was not built with retracts? Does that give the planes with retracts the potential to earn more points? Maybe so, because they are more involved? I think I'm answering the question as I ask it. :)