Wright Stuff C

User avatar
Unome
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4133
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
Division: Grad
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby Unome » September 4th, 2019, 5:42 pm

Jeff:

Thank you for your insights.

Is that the same faction that believes that kits are needed to win?

While I understand the reverse circle is to force the kids to re-trim the plane, it is unfortunately still strapped with the 8-minute limit. With the small prop, expect super thin rubber with many turns, It will be a challenge to get two flights started in the 11-minute window (3 preflight, 8 flight). IF this were science, then there would be time to retrim the plane between flights. If last year's goal was 3 minute flights, and 5 resulted, then I would expect this year's designs, with some optimization, will reach the 3 minute target. The kids will need pre-set adjustments, rather than truly perform a handful of trim flights making adjustments as required.

I have been coaching my HS kids to F1D this summer. It has been a LOT of work, with 4-6 hour days most weekdays for the last month. But I am impressed with how quickly these kids pick up building skills FAR more complicated than WS. Since many planes are kit-based, with comprehensive instructions, I really do not see the prevalence of parent-built or coach-built planes. My kids are now convinced they can build an SO plane in one 6-hour session (scratch built, not kit). They have built LPP's and F1D's, all of which fall under similar BOM rules. And they have shown themselves very capable!

I agree that test/eval is the core of this event. WE have a goal to get in the gym as early as possible, and typically log 400 or more flights before Nationals. A build-on-site event eliminates the science (presumably it would be a one-design contest), and makes it all about building quickly. In a 50-minute window there would be little time to optimize in a data-driven approach. I hope we never go that way!

As for my team, I would welcome any and all observers to come watch my kids during a build. We are probably going to do a parent build of P18's before Eager in April, because the parents are feeling left out!

Coach Chuck
Presumably this faction is the group pushing Aerial Scrambler - I am not sure how to take that with regard to a generalized belief of kits being needed to win.

By the way, when you talk about "many turns" with the smaller prop this year, how many are you thinking?
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

coachchuckaahs
Member
Member
Posts: 340
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 9:19 am
Division: B
State: NM

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby coachchuckaahs » September 4th, 2019, 6:41 pm


By the way, when you talk about "many turns" with the smaller prop this year, how many are you thinking?
So far? "Many"

LOL

We are just discussing design ideas so far. My team is consumed by prep for F1D Junior Team Trials, so we will not actually build until October at the earliest. But, the rubber will likely be in the 0.030-0.035 g/in range, so it will take a lot of winds. Heaven help us if we over-torque and break rubber! No time to wind a third loop, I am guessing! Cannot mess up one flight, since bonus takes both flights. I guess that puts some luck into it, perhaps that is what they want. We blew our first flight at State last year, flew conservative second flight (3:30 at 24'). This year both flights count, but cannot risk getting caught in rafters.

Hmm. If you get the bonus both flights score. So how do they break tie with "longest non-scored official flight"? Well, chances of tying are pretty slim, with 100ths of a second.

So, wind a lot, fly a lot, you'll figure out how many turns you need (break a lot of rubber too).

Amount of rubber will be an optimization, as it was last year. So, I am probably not going to disclose how many winds, because that discloses how much rubber, and eliminates that key optimization for your plane!

Coach Chuck
Coach, Albuquerque Area Home Schoolers Flying Events
Nationals Results:
2016 C WS 8th place
2018 B WS 2nd place
2018 C Heli Champion
2019 B ELG 3rd place
2019 C WS Champion
AMA Results: 3 AAHS members qualify for US Jr Team in F1D, 4 new youth senior records

jander14indoor
Member
Member
Posts: 1565
Joined: April 30th, 2007, 7:54 am

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby jander14indoor » September 5th, 2019, 7:02 am

Is that the same faction that believes that kits are needed to win?
MMmmm...
...could be.
Presumably this faction is the group pushing Aerial Scrambler - I am not sure how to take that with regard to a generalized belief of kits being needed to win.
Again, MMmmm...
...could be.
I'll note though, I think people are underestimating the importance of pre-work for success in Aerial Scrambler. And nothing says you can't modify the design of the plane in the provided kit. Currently the rules have two kits provided, bi-planes anyone?

Note, I'm in neither of those factions (I too have much experience in what students can do with appropriate guidance, after all, I'm the guy who coached Brett Sanborn to build his FIRST plane, no responsibility for the rest.), but all the rules writer's need to consider these things.

And thanks for the comment on how the prop size is going to drive the timeline, something for us to consider next year...

Some thoughts on winding...
- Develop techniques for fast winding that aren't too detrimental.
- Teach your students to wind identically and two motors at once.
- Definitely wind while the first plane flies.

Oh, a general comment. These rules are NOT written by an individual, definitely committee written. And reviewed by lots of people. So they tend to be compromises between competing ideas (The reason I hate rulings based 'spirit of the rule' when I'm not sure the authors agree on what the 'spirit' is! Though I have used that reasoning at least once...). So don't hate on someone you 'think' threw in a rule you don't like. The responsibility is shared.

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

User avatar
CrayolaCrayon
Member
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: October 25th, 2017, 8:24 am
Division: C
State: PA

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby CrayolaCrayon » September 5th, 2019, 7:48 am


( I'm the guy who coached Brett Sanborn to build his FIRST plane)

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI
Image
Wright Stuff National Runner-up 2019
USA F1D Team 2020

User avatar
klastyioer
Member
Member
Posts: 414
Joined: April 22nd, 2018, 4:46 pm
Division: C
State: PA

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby klastyioer » September 5th, 2019, 8:27 am

Jeff:

Thank you for your insights.

Is that the same faction that believes that kits are needed to win?

While I understand the reverse circle is to force the kids to re-trim the plane, it is unfortunately still strapped with the 8-minute limit. With the small prop, expect super thin rubber with many turns, It will be a challenge to get two flights started in the 11-minute window (3 preflight, 8 flight). IF this were science, then there would be time to retrim the plane between flights. If last year's goal was 3 minute flights, and 5 resulted, then I would expect this year's designs, with some optimization, will reach the 3 minute target. The kids will need pre-set adjustments, rather than truly perform a handful of trim flights making adjustments as required.

I have been coaching my HS kids to F1D this summer. It has been a LOT of work, with 4-6 hour days most weekdays for the last month. But I am impressed with how quickly these kids pick up building skills FAR more complicated than WS. Since many planes are kit-based, with comprehensive instructions, I really do not see the prevalence of parent-built or coach-built planes. My kids are now convinced they can build an SO plane in one 6-hour session (scratch built, not kit). They have built LPP's and F1D's, all of which fall under similar BOM rules. And they have shown themselves very capable!

I agree that test/eval is the core of this event. WE have a goal to get in the gym as early as possible, and typically log 400 or more flights before Nationals. A build-on-site event eliminates the science (presumably it would be a one-design contest), and makes it all about building quickly. In a 50-minute window there would be little time to optimize in a data-driven approach. I hope we never go that way!

As for my team, I would welcome any and all observers to come watch my kids during a build. We are probably going to do a parent build of P18's before Eager in April, because the parents are feeling left out!

Coach Chuck
isnt the limit 11 mins this year? or did i just read the rules wrong
it's not about the medals; go out there and have fun. make progress, learn a few things, have one heck of a time, because that's all that matters.

Builder Cult >:)

'17 - Towers, WS, rocks
'18 - Towers, WS, Mystery Arch, road
'19 - WS
'20 - WS, Boomilever, PPP

coachchuckaahs
Member
Member
Posts: 340
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 9:19 am
Division: B
State: NM

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby coachchuckaahs » September 5th, 2019, 8:49 am

Looks like same as last year: 3 minute preflight, 8 minute window for flights.

Coach Chuck
Coach, Albuquerque Area Home Schoolers Flying Events
Nationals Results:
2016 C WS 8th place
2018 B WS 2nd place
2018 C Heli Champion
2019 B ELG 3rd place
2019 C WS Champion
AMA Results: 3 AAHS members qualify for US Jr Team in F1D, 4 new youth senior records

jander14indoor
Member
Member
Posts: 1565
Joined: April 30th, 2007, 7:54 am

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby jander14indoor » September 5th, 2019, 10:18 am


( I'm the guy who coached Brett Sanborn to build his FIRST plane)

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI
Image
Not sure how much I'm being tweaked here, but to be clear, my point is that many students I've coached surpass MY ability somewhere in their first year, if they are diligent. I mean, it sounds like you are flying F1D, so you have ME beat!

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

coachchuckaahs
Member
Member
Posts: 340
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 9:19 am
Division: B
State: NM

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby coachchuckaahs » September 5th, 2019, 11:03 am


( I'm the guy who coached Brett Sanborn to build his FIRST plane)

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI
One of the greatest SO success stories. Ever.

As a coach, we LOVE to see our students take off and run with it. I have more fun at ama indoor events watching and supporting my students than I ever get competing myself. I hope that some of them stick with flying after SO, I believe several will. Build sessions are pretty boring for me now, they just want to be left alone to build. I get to do things with scrap to try to find better techniques, but otherwise stay out of the way.

Who knows, maybe one of them will follow in Brett's footsteps!

Regardless, the problem solving, data collection, and reasoning will serve them well in any career. Their competitive drive is refreshing in these days of participation trophies.

Coach Chuck
Coach, Albuquerque Area Home Schoolers Flying Events
Nationals Results:
2016 C WS 8th place
2018 B WS 2nd place
2018 C Heli Champion
2019 B ELG 3rd place
2019 C WS Champion
AMA Results: 3 AAHS members qualify for US Jr Team in F1D, 4 new youth senior records

Jdh3
Member
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: December 4th, 2018, 3:11 pm

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby Jdh3 » September 5th, 2019, 3:26 pm


The rules are poorly formed resulting in truly ugly airplanes. Doubling the stab span would have greatly eased the trimming difficulty and made for prettier looking airplanes. Basically, the rules are crap because they wanted to screw us all over with difficult to fly airplanes. As a manufacturer I couldn't care less, but as a mentor of umpteen young modelers it makes my blood boil, especially considering who writes these rules. He should know better, and he keeps doing this crap anyway.
I agree completely. The kids with previous experience or good mentors will be ok. The rules are particularly difficult for the new teams because airplanes built to these rules just fly poorly.
I predict a large massing of people at the bottom and a few top scores rather than a nice distribution.

User avatar
klastyioer
Member
Member
Posts: 414
Joined: April 22nd, 2018, 4:46 pm
Division: C
State: PA

Re: Wright Stuff C

Postby klastyioer » September 6th, 2019, 6:07 am


The rules are poorly formed resulting in truly ugly airplanes. Doubling the stab span would have greatly eased the trimming difficulty and made for prettier looking airplanes. Basically, the rules are crap because they wanted to screw us all over with difficult to fly airplanes. As a manufacturer I couldn't care less, but as a mentor of umpteen young modelers it makes my blood boil, especially considering who writes these rules. He should know better, and he keeps doing this crap anyway.
I agree completely. The kids with previous experience or good mentors will be ok. The rules are particularly difficult for the new teams because airplanes built to these rules just fly poorly.
I predict a large massing of people at the bottom and a few top scores rather than a nice distribution.
pigeon now i feel bad for the ppl who havent done this before
like it wont be awful for people who already did this since they have some sort of past experience w this event
but for the newbies its gonna be actual hell
it's not about the medals; go out there and have fun. make progress, learn a few things, have one heck of a time, because that's all that matters.

Builder Cult >:)

'17 - Towers, WS, rocks
'18 - Towers, WS, Mystery Arch, road
'19 - WS
'20 - WS, Boomilever, PPP


Return to “Wright Stuff C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest