The Biggest Butt...

[Inq]

Last Edited: 3/23/2023

Leaderboard​

Winners

1. @quorneng - Score = 5.33 - https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/the-biggest-butt.71215/#post-746009

Honorable Mention - Those thinking about, designing, building, flying, videoing

1. @Dr. Looping Looie - Score ~= 2.5.

Actually, The Biggest, but... but, I wanted to catch your attention. The basis of the challenge is to be practical in the sense of going out for a lazy day of flying, launching the plane, get it up to altitude to fly thermals in unpowered mode and fly for hours if desired. This is not a criterium... just a stated reason for the challenge. This is an on-going challenge and I'll try to keep the current "winners" and all runner's up listed above.

I propose the challenge of designing/building/flying the biggest wingspan model possible with the following constraints...

1. It must be a motor powered model... electric, fuel... your choice. The motor has to be strong enough to show positive altitude gain. No sailplanes cheating with a watch battery and a 8520 motor and a 1.5" propeller going along for the ride.
2. AUW must weigh equal or less than 2 pounds - The idea that it meets AMA Park Flyer classification.
3. No material limitations.
4. Can be hand launched.
5. Must survive landing to be launched a second time and show - This would show that it is controllable and re-flyable.
6. Scoring... (span in millimeters) / (mass in grams).
7. Linked video showing launch, positive altitude gain using motor, soaring would be nice and landing with no damage, ready for another flight and your plane's score. Per standard forum rules - "It didn't happen unless you video it."
8. We love the honor system, however, as some models might get very creative (pressurized helium filled Mylar wings ) and challenge our B.S. meters, we would like to see span and weighing images.

That's it! As a baseline, what models have you made that would meet these two little rules? Looking in the FT Hanger, I see the Kraken has the Biggest Butt, but is too heavy. The Simple Soarer is next, but isn't powered...

 

[Piotrsko]

2lbs OA means about 6 ft: 2 meters for the Eurocentric, and about 450 square inches. @quorneng will end up being the winner ( because it is a build contest) however if it doesn't really need to fly @bracesport will make the prettiest, @flyboa will have the lightest and @FoamyDM will be the most unique

 

[Inq]

2lbs OA means about 6 ft: 2 meters for the Eurocentric, and about 450 square inches. @quorneng will end up being the winner ( because it is a build contest) however if it doesn't really need to fly @bracesport will make the prettiest, @flyboa will have the lightest and @FoamyDM will be the most unique

I too was thinking that a baseline that someone had already made might go above 2 meters.

I like contests... if even a couple are interested, I'd go for it. I think the final solution will involve a significant amount of combined talents.

I haven't gone through the 25 pages of this challenges forum (Internet Bandwidth Challenged)... do any (many) of them make it to flight?... much less having more than one challenger?

I need to check out the members you referenced... sounds interesting.

 

[Dr. Looping Looie]

Ive made this one. Weight is exactly 2pounds and wingspan is 7.44 feet.
Yes, it is a glider, but it has a 4023 Motor spinning a 10" Folding prop. 3S 1200 Battery. It climbs steeper than 45°, so definitely enough power.

And its 3D printed.

 

[Inq]

Ive made this one. Weight is exactly 2pounds and wingspan is 7.44 feet.
Yes, it is a glider, but it has a 4023 Motor spinning a 10" Folding prop. 3S 1200 Battery. It climbs steeper than 45°, so definitely enough power.

And its 3D printed.

View attachment 232034 View attachment 232035

Outstanding! That certainly raises the bar for a baseline. Hell! That's even a practical, conventional looking airplane with lots of motor and battery... and not even trying to go for some span challenge. Do you have a build thread for it?

Can anybody beat this for an already built model???

 

[Bo123]

I should reeaally give it a go....

 

[Inq]

Since I'm a rooky pilot, my original thought for the challenge was really coming from the basis of hearing, "It's easier to learn on a bigger model... slower, smoother, easier to see... etc." And trying to keep it under 2 lbs so it can be flown as a park flyer. Something like...

Weight is exactly 2pounds and wingspan is 7.44 feet

... sounds just the ticket for those learning to fly.

But for the Biggest Butt Challenge... and since I'm still getting my bearings of who's who and how active the forum is... I'm wondering does the forum go after a challenge like this... pulling out all the stops??? I imagine we have all sorts of members from true craftsmen in every aspect (foamboard, 3D print, Balsa) to hard-core aerodynamicists among the forum members. Those with expert knowledge of what are absolute minimum weight techniques either from a life of building against those that might take theory to the extreme and throw the dice with the less than expert building skills.

I gave it more thought over the weekend, would it be a good idea to set a minimum battery and/or
motor size to level the playing field? OR... open that up to interpretation... like there might be some avid electronics experts on the forum that would go solar to power and punting that brick of cells.

For instance sacrificing all other considerations like... being friendly to fly... would people go to extremes like...

I wonder if this challenge might bring out new techniques to whole forum and the hobby.

 

[Piotrsko]

SOME of The members of this forum are capable of building a 1/8 scale Rutan Boomerang or a Blohm & Voss BV 141 and have it meet your weights restriction. Your illustration is more prescient than you'd imagine. There is a challenge subforum, post your proposal there

 

[Inq]

SOME of The members of this forum are capable of building a 1/8 scale Rutan Boomerang or a Blohm & Voss BV 141 and have it meet your weights restriction. Your illustration is more prescient than you'd imagine. There is a challenge subforum, post your proposal there

Isn't that where I posted? - "User Generated Challenges" or is there another that is more appropriate?

How cool is that... non-symmetric plane?! I take that the members are talented enough... but competitions with an end product that wouldn't be all that fun to fly, might not be their cup of tea.

 

[speedfix]

I’m thinking about trying this, but what counts as added wingspan? Like could I put a very thin strip going out from the wing that extends a lot?

 

[Inq]

I’m thinking about trying this, but what counts as added wingspan? Like could I put a very thin strip going out from the wing that extends a lot?

I don't see why not. Anything too flimsy will take care of itself ... fall off, flop over. If it stays out, it's good! If it helps with lift... even better.

We didn't get critical mass on it actually becoming a "real" challenge and we didn't come up with a criteria. Off the cuff now, I'd say we'd have to have some kind of scoring system to rate the winner.

1. Can be hand launched, but must show positive altitude gain via motor/prop.
2. The AMA park flyer limit of 2 lbs (907 grams).
3. Must survive landing to be launched a second time and show (#1) - This would show that it is controllable and re-flyable.
4. Scoring... something like (span in millimeters) / (mass in grams).

Although, I don't think I've really pushed the limits, one of my FTFC23 was along these lines. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/ftfc23-build-ruary-by-inq-inqd-boomerang.71700/

It would only score about (3300 mm / 400 grams) = 8.25. I think a score over 10 would be easily doable with an optimized powertrain and better wing structure.

 

[FoamyDM]

2lbs OA means about 6 ft: 2 meters for the Eurocentric, and about 450 square inches. @quorneng will end up being the winner ( because it is a build contest) however if it doesn't really need to fly @bracesport will make the prettiest, @flyboa will have the lightest and @FoamyDM will be the most unique

Thankyou @Piotrsko.

I have built a Clurican at 9' and a Foamy BOT at 110". what are the material Limitations. Just DTF? what reinforcements are allowed? although I think both are a little over the Weight limit. at 2-1.5kg

 

[quorneng]

About the best I could do is this.

2133 mm span and 354 g. It would only score 5.33 but then it is a true scale Glasflugel Libelle.
Flew many times and was strong enough to be looped - carefully!
A very 'skinny' plane. I made the mistake of staying in a thermal when too far downwind. I never saw it again!
The only video I have is its maiden flight in 2013. It was rather tail heavy. It flew much better when the battery was moved forward.

 

[Inq]

what are the material Limitations.

No material limitations.

There was no interest in making this a typical "FT Challenge" with an end-date. Some people have more time on their hands than others and some gain/lose interest. Some might discover a new technique and try to apply it. I think it's just on-going and I'll try to keep the current "winner" listed at the top. I'll edit it and point to the current "winner".

No material limitations. DTFB, Depron, 3D printed, paper, balsa... even using exotic materials... honeycomb, carbon fiber, we're not talking about a lot of expense. I can see based on the criteria wingspan(mm)/weight(grams) that even things like @TooJung2Die 's "Arena Rat" might have a competitive edge. It's all about being design, engineering, fabrication creative.

 

[Inq]

Edited O.P. to include suggested rule clarifications and to post a "current" winner.