Ta-Da!~~~The SmallBlimps Prize~~~

Latest Prize Regs as of March 3, 2010.  Lift capacity has been reduced to 150 kg, equivalent to one person and 50 kg luggage.  Allen M

SMALLBLIMPS FIRST FLIGHT PRIZE

Description

A Prize will be awarded by the SmallBlimps Forum for the First Flight of an UltraLight Airship costing less than $10,000, in materials, to build.

Free balloons with motors are not allowed. The Prize is for streamlined vessels which can navigate upwind with an apparent wind speed faster than five knots.

Amendments to the Rules: The FirstFlight Prize Committee may amend the details of these rules at any time, without liability, until the Prize is won.

Purpose

To promote international amateur airship development capabilities and to develop a wider skyboat community.

Closure Date of Prize

The last day to attempt the SmallBlimps First Flight Prize is June 30, 2011.

Closure Extension Requests

The Prize closure date may be extended by the Prize Committee for the good of the airship development field. Upon such extension, the Committe may change whichever rules it deems advisable.

Requests by entered teams for an extension of closure, due to adverse events beyond the team's control, MAY be entertained by the Prize Committee without obligation to do so.

Eligibility

          No branch of any incorporated for-profit company shall be eligible to enter The Prize competition.

            Schools are especially invited to enter The Prize.

Funding, Sponsorship

          No entered team is allowed to receive money, free goods or free services from, or to have a corporate sponsor, or any sponsor responsible to, or related to, a for-profit corporation.

Teams may accept funds from non-profit organizations which do not receive more than 10% of their annual funding from any one particular corporation.

Teams may accept funds from individuals who wish to contribute their own, personal, funds.

Prize committee

The Prize Committee shall be chosen members of the online community of the SmallBlimps Forum located at http://smallblimps.lefora.com/

The Founder of the Smallblimps Forum shall serve on the Prize Committee and shall chose which Forum members may serve as committee members.

As of December 1, 2009, Allen Meece is chosen as Prize Committee ChairPerson and Moderator of The Prize topic on the web Forum.

SAFETY Disclaimer

CAUTION, altitude may be hazardous to your health.

Happily flying in airships includes an element of danger. Before you make your first flight you MUST employ an airframe and powerplant expert to inspect your vessel to ensure that it is structurally and operationally sound to fly.

The SmallBlimps Forum encourages safety-consciousness in all phases of construction but assumes no liability should anyone suffer an unfortunate injury in the pursuit of this magnificent sport and Prize competition.

SkyBoat Specifications

The winning airship will demonstrate the flight characteristics of both LTA ships, Lighter Than Air ships; and HTA, Heavier Than Air ships. In that sense, it may be called a hybrid airship because it merges two distinct flight regimes in one craft.

The construction of The Prize entry may be of any material and of any type; blimp, rigid or semi-rigid airship.

Payload

Payload shall consist of one person weighing 100 kilograms and luggage weighing 50 kilograms. Thus, total payload shall be 150 kilograms or 331 pounds US measure.

Lighter Than Air, LTA, flight

The winning SkyBoat will demonstrate Lighter Than Air craft characteristics by performing a tethered vertical lift off with or without any ballast or payload, as the entrant desires.

During a period of ambient windspeed less than 10 knots, the entry will perform a controlled, stationary hover at ten feet altitude, remaining within a 100-foot diameter circle, for one hour without touching anything but a tether anchor.

Heavier Than Air, HTA, flight

The winning SkyBoat will demonstrate Heavier Than Air characteristics by performing a horizontal take off with a full payload on board, consisting of, at least, one  pilot person and ballast to increase the payload to the standard pilot weight allowance of 100 kilograms.  [Reduced from 150 kg total payload on April 1, 2010 by Allen Meece.]

The entry will climb to 100 feet and fly a more-than one mile diameter circle and perform an aerodynamic, well-controlled, low-impact landing and then taxi smartly to the tie-down area to conclude a successful First Flight.

Ballast

Ballast is defined as removable solid objects which have no relation to the operation of the airship other than to perform as dead weight.

Gasoline, instruments, tools, equipment of any kind, including safety, is not considered ballast for these rules.

Total Allowable Cost

Total cost of flight materials incorporated in The Prize entry vessel shall be less than $10,000 US Dollars as internationally-valued seven days before the day of the entry's First Flight.

Materials

 

Consumable Materials

 

Flight Materials

 

Excess Materials

 

Labor

 

Consultants Input

 

Construction Labor

 

Transportation, storage

 

Propulsion

Propulsion power shall be electricity from a gasoline-fueled generator or from solar cells or from a battery or from a fuel cell or any combination of all the above.

Electric Motor

The propeller[s] must be mechanically connected to, and directly moved by, an electric motor.

Battery

The main battery may be any type of electrical storage device.

Charger

The battery may be charged by an on-board electrical generator and/or from a ground-based elecrical source.

The utilization of solar cells and/or fuel cells as an auxiliary battery charging system is highly encouraged.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Comments?

Good work overall, but I have a problem with the static lift requirement. I think the airship must be able to sit on the ground without its occupants and not float off.

At the bare minimum, the static lift must be low enough that one occupant can get out and tie the craft down. Otherwise you need a ground crew.

Let me propose a change.

"The craft must be able to taxi, take off, land, and park without a ground crew." 

"The airship must have accommodations for two adult occupants and must lift 250 kg of payload (including the weight of occupants)."

Take out the static lift requirement.

This way the competitor can choose the route that they want to go.

BTW we also need to talk about what the prize should be.

One prize I will never agree to is any prize named after a sponsor. It is so sad when a non-profit sells out their community spirit idea to a money-grubbing mercenary corp that only wants to buy public goodwill with the contest. The REAL payoff can only be the status, prestige and self esteem which The Prize confers. In that sense, it doesn't have to offer a lot of money, just a pewter jug with some lofty inscription will be fine. Costs about a hundred bucks. In other words, it's about winning a personal place in the history books. That's more lasting and more attractive than a money prize. That said, there's no harm in soliciting public spirited cash donors after the basic rules are in effect. It'll help offset the builders' expenses, not make them rich. Witness Burt Rutan who spent 20 million to win the 10 million X-Prize. high cheers from the Navigaiter Flight Plan = First Flight Prize

That is a decision I would like to have before us. I would like to be in the position of having to decide if we want to take a sponsor's offer. 

Unfortunately, I don't see a prize from the SmallBlimps Forum as having much prestige. Maybe NASA could offer a trophy and gain big participation, but I don't see that as possible for this forum. The only influence we have is our collective financial power. I think we should follow the X-Prize model. It is simple and it works. 

BTW, who is the above guest poster?

I have been thinking about the purpose of the competition. I think we should keep the idea of certificates and such for the minor competitions. But, the end goal is to get a project all the way to a successful prototype. 

<<At the bare minimum, the static lift must be low enough that one occupant can get out and tie the craft down. Otherwise you need a ground crew.>>>

True. In case a lone operator wants to taxi around HTA he can do that. He just vents enough gas to get the heaviness he wants and takes off  and lands horizontally and taxis around like an airplane except he has more windage and must do more crabbing, sideways taxiing.


   The 101% static lift capability spec is important. It means the owner can lift off vertically from any field. He doesn't have to operate from a runway. Airports are expensive, expensive places.

   Another reason the spec is important is that it means the owner can turn off the accursed propeller whopping sound and drift in silence for a quality flight experience. It's an important dimension of performance. It also means he can't fall down when the motor/battery fails. It's a safety feature that way.


   But how does he/she land if they're buoyant?  They vent some gas. Costs money sure. If they're using H2 it costs not so much. If they're using He, they've got enough money to blow some out the flapper.

   The electric motors may not have the power to be vectored downward and force a buoyant skyboat to the ground. But a designer can go for that mode if he wants. 

   Granted, if they're mounted on the nose and/or tail, they should be vectored to help turn the ships head but not to boost the ship up or down, I don't imagine. It depends on the power available. Could be done.
Plan to Fly.

What about the complication of ground handling? Won't you need a crew, mast and/or shed at any landing site to handle a buoyant craft? It will certainly be larger than an HTA hybrid craft and will be effected by wind to a greater extent. Not to mention that it will be slower and more expensive.

On this landing thing, I plan to carry an anchor. If all goes well, and I ever find the design of Rousson's 'chein de mer' I'll build one. Guess what, it looks just like a modern sailboat anchor. On water it floats from the top bar, and the hook part grabs the water. On land, it will hook just about anything. It won't dig into the ground, but it sure will snag a tree or something. Once anchored, you pull yourself down to it. Like 'Gaiter says, 'ta da!
If you check the Goodyear technique, they keep sandbags handy. To take off, they chuck out a few. When they land, a ground guy tosses a few back in.  Ta da.
I've sent out a bunch of RFQ for plastic, will see what I get. Been looking into plotters to make patterns, looks good. I will find out what program they use. I will enjoy talking to my sign maker about her equipment, she is real cute. No double entendre' there folks, this is a family show.

Nav, the idea is that two people will be in the airship and one of the two will get out and tie the ship down. So aerodynamic lift must carry at least 1 person (or 100 kg for our example). That is the bare minimum. 

The problem is that the airship will be light when totaly empty, and will want to float away. That makes things more difficult. All things being equal, a LTA capable airship will be slower and more expensive to build and operate than a HTA hybrid. Is short take off and landing not enough? If we want vertical take off and landing, that can be accomplished with a "pogo stick" pneumatic ram to pop us up and ease down. http://smallblimps.lefora.com/2009/07/08/super-short-take-off/#post0

Let me propose a new approach. Lets make the requirement that they must only "lift 1 person and not require a ground crew". This will be a proof of concept, and then the decision can be made about % buoyancy when they need to size up to carry 2 people and cargo.

Mike, I hope you get some hits on the plastic hunt. I have been researching vacuum molding and I started a thread on the topic. http://smallblimps.lefora.com/2009/11/29/transparent-monocoque-shell/#post0

On the anchor, I think it would have to dig into or hook something to be of use. 

Aargh. You go to the trouble of typing a post, only to have it not show, then you have to remember what you said and do it again. I'm using Firefox/Mozilla/G-mail.

     One plastic supplier responded, said he would get back to me. Another said they would not quote me a price. I don't know if they were wholesale only or what. Eventually I'll find a good vendor.
     In your drawing program, take the nice wireform drawing and see if you can break it down into separate panels. Identify the panels and flatten them out for a pattern. I think I saw this done before. Then set the patterns to fit a 4X8 foot sheet, reducing waste where you can. This would make a pattern for the full size ship. Then change the ratio to 1:10 for a rc model, using the same 4X8 foot size sheet. Finally make a smaller pattern for a paper model for show and tell, etc. Keep all these programs ultra secret, they will be the only thing we will have exclusively. I'll let you know if I'm ever ready to use one. Even then the program could be password protected.

I'm gonna select all and copy to clipboard. Then if it doesn't post, I just paste. ta da.

That worked real good. Ta Da. Pass it on.

That is the way to go. Minimalist size and frame. Helium-assisted HTA all the way. The new Piper Cub of airships! But I will put a minimum static lift spec in there so they don't go entering lifting bodies with big engines and small envelopes. Say it has to weigh less than 100 kg when gassed up. I spect the empty weight will be 250 kg. A solo ship will be affordable and convenient to operate and will have a better chance of making airships popular. There's nothing prohibiting the builder from leaving some extra room inside the shell for more gas bags if he wants to go LTA after he wins the SmallBlimps Trophy! <<>> UP! The Nav

Nav, We could specify a minimum of %50 buoyancy. That would make it more fair for airships of different weights.

Mikek, you might try using "back" and submit again, if it fails to post next time. I will look into getting a pattern printed out for building a model. If are we still considering a vacuum forming approach, we could use that to build the molds.

We also need to have video of the small achievements, and we should schedule a visit to witness the main award attempts. 

hmmm, probably 2/3 static lift would be more appropriate for a hybrid airship contest. 
~
I also recommend a 4 kw power limitation to block airplane-type contestants from making power a more dominant factor than static lift.

pack the flight bag!

I looked up the def of airship and it means an LTA vessel so the LTA spec requirement must remain for The SmallBlimps Trophy to be an airship Prize.
~
 But I think it'll be ok if we just say it must prove it's an LTA vessel by being able to statically lift, not a 100kg pilot payload, but at least its own weight against a tight anchor tether with no one on board. That reduces the load requirement by 100kg for an envelope volume-saving of 100 cubic meters.
~
That means that the operator has to ballast it to walk away from it. 
~
Or he could operate with lift bags only 2/3 full to make it HTA with just him aboard and enabling the ability to walk away from his craft without ballasting.. 
 
~
The benefits of LTA are:
 being able to turn the motor off for silent rest and
 not crashing when power fails, making it safer.

If you place a restriction on aerodynamic lift, you don't need a power restriction. It would be kinda redundant. With the specified buoyancy, more power means more speed, not more aerodynamic lift. So a power limitation means a smaller, slower, less massive (not lighter) airship.

Why should we be so restrictive? We are setting a minimum, people can choose to be more buoyant if they want to. What happens if they build the thing and it weighs 5% more than they expected, and they were shooting for the 2/3 buoyancy? They miss the specifications, even though the craft might fly great.

Perhaps your original requirement of less than 100 kg unloaded weight was a step in the right direction. If we could put that in a percentage, we would have a better system. For example, the requirement could be "The empty buoyancy should be at least 80%." We could make that 90% or whatever percentage makes the most sense. That is really what we want to specify, the unloaded buoyancy.

I don't want to let the dictionary dictate our decisions. We need to use reason and nothing else. We can choose to make this competition whatever we want, regardless of the definition of "airship". We can also call it a hybrid airship, if we so choose.

Howzabout a second prize, an HTA prize for those who prefer the advantages of HTA designs?