On June 10, 1995, Ron Clem of San Diego, California set a new world record for a model aircraft. He flew a Desperado (built from 25-year-old plans), powered by an Irvine .20 diesel engine and carrying 68 oz. of fuel, from Ocotillo, California to Lordsburg, New Mexico. This 428 mile journey established a new record for straight-line distance piston-powered aircraft.
In 1998, David Garis and William Hubbard are going to break this record!
In 1996, I (William Hubbard) came across an article in the January issue of Model Aviation Magazine that reported Ron Clem's record-breaking success. Having been involved in R/C for many years, I was naturally inspired. It seemed natural to me, anyway. And some time later, I planted the seed in my friend's (David Garis) mind, suggesting that we might attempt to break that record. I knew if anybody could do it, Dave could!
Dave and I go way back. We have this problem whereby if we talk on the phone for any length of time, ideas start to flow, new projects are born, and then we don't sleep for long periods of time. At some point during the year, the right combination of things must have come together, because Dave got the bug. His knowledge had gathered new life, and through his inspired efforts, he developed and obtained all the technologies required to break Mr. Clem's record. Today, not only does Dave expect to break the distance record, he believes he can double it!
This record-breaking attempt will involve a few more issues and concerns than Ron's team had to face. Ron's trip took 10 1/2 hours to complete and required 481 road miles to establish a 428-mile straight-line distance record. That's 53 miles lost in altitude changes, twists and turns - not to mention time lost while fighting traffic and putting gas in the car while the plane flew in circles overhead. Working out the numbers reveals a 12.3% distance loss, and an average total trip speed of 45.8 MPH. If these numbers are applied to a hypothetical attempt to double the record, the trip would require 962 miles over a 21 hour period to establish an 856-mile straight-line distance record.
We don't like these numbers!
If we can find a route that will cut our distance loss down to 9%, that will shorten the required distance to 933 miles to establish an 856-mile straight line distance. At 45.8 MPH, we just saved 38 minutes of travel time. That's not much of a difference when we're looking at a 21-hour trip (it's only a 3% difference!). Now, if we could bring the total average trip speed up to 55 MPH, then the total trip time is reduced to 16 hours and 57 minutes (i.e. 17 hours!) - a 19% difference!
We like these numbers better!
Obviously, the average trip speed is more critical than the travel distance. Therefore, our considerations will be more focused on ways to reduce the total travel time. One problem is that the faster we fly, the faster we burn fuel. So, the trick is to find that optimal performance point where we can cover the required distance in a desired period of time without having to carry an inordinant amount of fuel. Fuel is heavy. The more fuel the plane has to carry, the heavier it is on take-off. The heavier a plane is, the more power it takes to move it (thus, burning even more fuel). There is a point where adding greater fuel capacity defeats its own purpose; and a plane that is too heavy, simply will not fly. Therefore, we must find ways to increase the power and fuel efficiency of the aircraft, and improve the aerodynamic efficiency of its airframe.
Enter new technology. Actually, the technology is nothing new, but the way Dave has applied it (in combination with other technologies) will ensure the success of this mission. Dave is a miracle worker when it comes to engines, and he has machined a power plant that we expect to outperform the Irvine .20 diesel used in Ron's Desperado by a factor of 2 to 1. That means, we should be able to double Ron's record using approximately the same amount of fuel! Preliminary testing has already produced results that far exceeded even Dave's expectations! Dave has gone as far as constructing an aircraft (from a kit he modified in various way to adapt to this endeavour) that is an excellent match to the engine in terms of power-to-weight and aerodynamic efficiency. The real test will be when Dave and I fly the plane from Ocotillo, CA to Lordsburg, NM as a test run! We expect to complete that run in about 8 to 8 1/2 hours. By the end of February, we will have some actual flight data that will help us with our estimates.
No matter how you look at the new record attempt, unless we can average about 70 MPH heading due west (which isn't going to happen!), there's going to be a portion of the journey flown in the dark of night.
Enter more new technology. Again, it is a new adaptation of existing technology - reduced to a scale applicable to the small aircraft it has been implemented in. Dave and I have been experimenting with this particular technology for the past two or three years (or more!). Dave has once again demonstrated his ability to tap into every bit of efficiency a component has to offer and has produced an on-board electrical power and lighting system that will enable us to fly as easily at night as we do during the day. We've been avid night flyers for about a year now (after a year or two of experimentation and shaky starts), but thanks to Dave, we now have a completely reliable system. The power system is driven by the diesel engine (which hardly seems to notice it's there!), which means we can reduce the weight of the aircraft by eliminating extra batteries that normally would have been required to power the radio receiver and servos for the duration of the trip. We also have ample power to apply to the lighting system when it gets dark. We figure that the last leg of our journey will be flown at night so that any additional power that the electrical system takes away from the engine will be offset by the reduced power requirements due to weight lost by the drained fuel tanks.
Aside from all the factors to consider regarding the aircraft and its performance, one other major consideration is the human factor. 17 hours is a long time to ride in a vehicle without doing anything. 17 hours riding in a vehicle while flying a model airplane is going to be a challenge in and of itself. In order to fly the aircraft, the pilot needs to be able to see the aircraft, which means he will probably be exposed to the elements - not the least of which will be the constant 55+ MPH wind. Exposure to the sun is a concern, as well as bodily functions and the need to eat. We also have to be aware of the forecasted weather conditions and select appropriate clothing accordingly. Then there is the question of vehicle reliability and required maintenance along the way (like getting gas & checking the oil). The more fuel efficient the chase vehicle is, the fewer stops we'll have to make. The fewer stops we have to make, the less time we waste flying around in circles, and the closer we can come to maintaining our target average speed. And to make matters worse, a 933 mile journey will surely present a few obstacles along the way, whether it be unruly traffic conditions, power lines, towers or other structures that could present a hazard to the aircraft. Our greatest concern is the possibility of radio interference interrupting control of the aircraft! We will be minimizing that possibility by operating a transmitter under the auspicies of an amateur radio operator license rather than taking our chances with a more mainstream frequency.
February was a very wet month in California. Over 38 inches of rain fell in the Bay area by the time February ended. I sure picked a good time to go visit Dave! That was meant to be sarchastic. We encountered plenty of rain where we were, so we didn't have much of a chance to perform all the field tests we would have liked to have performed on the airplane, but I must say that Dave has done a phenomenal job. The Bird is truly a wonderous machine. We were able to fly it one day, and its performance in the sky was flawless. It was quite a sight to see - and I even got to fly it, myself!
The day the Bird took to the sky for the first time was not the best of days. It was cold, a bit breezy, and the fuel mixture control on the engine was not adjusted properly. The engine performance was not tuned - it was cold and running rich - and the propeller was not quite the right match for the aircraft. But in spite of all that was working against it, it flew like it didn't care, and the engine performance as far as fuel efficiency at the speed we estimated the plane to be flying, far exceeded our expectations for a good day!
We were pleased.
The Bird completed two beautiful flights on that day in late February. The first flight lasted approximately 20 minutes and consumed approxmimately 0.75 oz. of fuel. The second flight lasted 25 minutes and consumed approximately 1.5 oz. of fuel. We estimated an average speed of the aircraft to be roughly 50 MPH (we weren't able to do any actual chase tests). From this information, we were able to produce some rough theoretical estimates regarding the aircraft's performance.
From the first flight, the fuel consumption rate was estimated to be about 0.0375 oz. of fuel per minute, or 2.25 oz. per hour. The second flight yielded results of about 0.06 oz. of fuel per minute, or 3.6 oz. per hour. Dave has estimated the fuel capacity of the aircraft to be approximately 70 ounces when fully loaded. At 2.25 oz. of fuel per hour, the plane could theoretically fly (neglecting any performance changes due to altitude, weight loss due to fuel consumption, and other factors) for about 31 hours. At 50 MPH for 31 hours, that's 1550 miles! ON A BAD DAY! Now, consider the second flight where the fuel consumption rate was worse. At 3.6 oz. per hour, the plane could theoretically fly for about 19.4 hours. 19.4 hours at 50 MPH is 970 miles. And this is our worst case scenario! That's more than enough to double the existing record! Even if we take an average of these two low-end estimates, we're looking at the 1200-mile range. Not bad for a bad day at the field!
Of course, there are other factors involved that we have not taken into account (and really have no test data to work with), but we are confident that we have enough of a cushion to work with to enable us to achieve our goal.
Currently, we are in the process of assembling the chase team as well as securing the official event coordinator(s) and time keepers in order to fulfill the requirements for doing this officially. We have decided that the first leg of the journey will be flown at night, taking advantage of the denser air to provide the lift necessary to carry a full payload of fuel. The engine will be running least efficiently at that time (because of the cooler air), but the denser air should help provide more lift and give better performance for the propeller. It will also provide a safety net to some degree for a number of reasons: If the lighting system on the plane should fail, it will happen early in the trip. If the last leg of our trip was flown at night and the lighting system failed sometime during the day, we would be flying into disappointment late in the journey. Also, by flying out in the dark, if anything should go wrong, we'll be closer to home when it does. Furthermore, if we were to fly into the darkness near the end of our trip, it may prove to be a more difficult time to try to fly following the fatigue that I'm sure we'll be feeling as we approach our destination.
So, we'll fly out at night, and as the day grows on, the air will heat up, the engine will become more efficient, and the aircraft will become lighter as fuel is slowly consumed. It will settle in for a nice, leisurely efficient cruise for most of the remainder of the flight. Now all we need is a sponser.
Dave will be performing many additional tests on the aircraft before the actual flight, as well as making some minor changes to the installation of some of the components on the aircraft. A different fuel line has been selected, due to defficiencies in the fuel line that was used for the test flight, and the control receiver will be sealed in a fuel-proof bag to protect it against any fuel leakage that could potentially occur within that compartment, due to the routing of the fuel lines from the wing tanks. We don't expect any leaks, but we'd rather be safe than sorry and be able to land the plane safely in the event of any discouraging setbacks.
May has arrived and with it, much new knowledge. We have selected a tentative date near the Summer Solstice (the longest day of the year) to make the attempt. Much later, and we will be facing the Monsoon season here in the Sun Belt. Technical issues and health considerations could present a delay which would force us to consider a launch date in the Fall, but we're hoping that is not going to happen. We have secured the vehicles that will be driven during the event. The main vehicle will be a convertible, and the chase vehicle will be a van (with an on-board GPS locator). We will also be greeted by a motor home about half-way through the trip to provide much needed reprieve from the heat as well as give tired participants (especially the pilots) a chance to lie down and take a nap. Also, we have successfully located a willing Contest Director to oversee the event to make sure we comply with all the official rules of the AMA and the FAI. We have also decided to limit our target distance to somewhere between 700 and 800 miles and now estimate our total flight time to be approximately 16 hours.
A lot has been learned over the past couple of months. A number of revisions have been made to the aircraft, including a redesign of the electrical power generator, realignment of the fuel lines where they exit the wing and enter the fuselage, a repair in the wiring to the wing lights involving the introduction of longer connection lines to the power source, a reinforcement of the tail feathers to reduce vibration and flutter, a replacement fuel mixture control of custom design, and heftier head bolts in the engine.
Since the engine was originally designed for use with glow fuel, the bolts required to secure the head to the cylinder, being very small, were sufficient. However, upon converting the engine to run on diesel fuel, the compression was raised considerably. This added stress on the head bolts was a bit too much, and eventually one of them broke loose. The old bolts were removed, and holes were drilled and tapped into the head and block to accept 4-40 bolts. The head is now bolted securely in place. One problem solved.
During flight testing of the actual Bird, one wing went dark. There was a failure in the wiring to the wing lights where the cable entered the wing due to excessive in-flight stress or chafing, apparently as a result of the cable being a bit too short. This was corrected by having to cut into the wing to repair the wiring. Since any surgery of the wing is somewhat major, a decision was made to extend the operation to correct a potential problem with the fuel lines from the wing tanks, since they were uncomfortably close to the fuselage walls. The fuel lines were rerouted to come in at an angle into the fuselage where is it safer to attach the fuel hoses with no risk of abrasion against the fuselage walls during flight.
Problems with two different commercial in-flight fuel mixture controls led to the development of a much simpler, reliable mixture control of Dave's own design.
Another smaller 2-stroke engine that was converted to diesel before this project began has been a test machine for the power drive mechanism used to drive the electrical generator. After many, many hours of successful flights, the power drive system failed, mechanically. Much information was gleaned from the experience about the stresses and behavior of the mechanical parts and their interaction near the crank shaft journal and the piston rod which has led to modifications in the power drive mechanism currently in place on the Bird. The entire mechanism has been redesigned and re-machined, in alliance with this new knowledge in addition to other knowledge gained from a more recent prototype, and now a highly dependable system is in place and ready to be put to the test.
The entire horizontal stabilizer on the Bird pivots on a single "axle", or metal wire hinge, to provide pitch control of the aircraft. This configuration presented some concern about excessive vibration in the control surfaces, especially in regards to the wiring to the lights inside. Modifications were made to this area to stiffen the control surfaces and reduce potential vibration.
One other minor revision to the aircraft was an extension of the skid plate under the nose. The initial flight of the Bird revealed a number of dents in the wood under the nose in front of the skid plate, indicating contact with the runway on landing. The skid plate was extended forward to provide additional protection.
In addition to information gathered from direct testing of the aircraft and flight systems, we have gathered tidbits of knowledge from other sources that have enabled us to improve on what has already been done. David talked to a man named Allen Heinrich, who was a technical consultant to Ronald Clem in advance of his record-breaking flight. Allen gave us some very insightful information regarding techical considerations that he said Ron did not adhere to or implement. We, on the other hand, are very open to considering all input that may help us improve our situation, which is probably why Allen told David that he couldn't think of anything else to do to improve the system, since David has taken everything he has learned to determine what works best. However, there was one very significant contribution that Allen made to the venture, and that is a special blend of diesel fuel that he makes that uses an aircraft grade kerosene base (as opposed to automotive grade) and burns much cleaner and more efficiently than the stuff we had been using. He also pointed David in the direction of some very efficient aircraft propellers that he is going to evaluate. David has told me that from what he has seen, the props will probably do the job quite well. Allen did not get the mention he deserved from the previous world record event, so we'll be sure to give him plenty of recognition for his contributions to this attempt!
Approaching deadlines and timing of various events, combined with unexpected problems associatedwith the selected transmitter frequency, Dave has opted to select a different transmitter using a digital communications protocol (known as PCM). This is expected to improve our ability to reliably control the aircraft in areas where RF interference may be a problem. The system includes a fail safe mode to essentially put the aircraft in a sort of auto pilot mode in the event signal is lost entirely. This gives us a greater comfort factor and a bit of a safety cushion.
David is coming to visit me on the week of May 14th. We are going to meet our new Contest Director in Phoenix and get the aircraft examined and verified, etc. and arrange any paperwork we need to take care of. Then we will be coming down to Tucson where we will be performing some flight tests in the convertible as well as getting together to just do some night flying. After a year and a half, I finally had my day in the sun (or is that in the moonlight?) and had a very successful night flight with my aircraft. I finally got my system stabilized after a long series of mechanical problems and battery failures. I am using an earlier prototype of David's electrical power generator, but it works just great. I have donated my O.S. .26 Surpass for use during the actual world record flight so that the wear and tear we are putting on his O.S. .26 currently installed on the Bird for flight testing will not be a factor during the attempt. But as payment for putting 16 hours of continuous flight time on my new engine, he is going to set up the engine with the latest, greatest power drive/generator system to date, incorporating everything he has learned from this project, and give it back to me! So then I'll have to build another plane to fly at night. But until then, I'll just have to fly my Goldberg Eagle II with the diesel O.S. .40 FP - which is a blast in itself.
After his visit, I will then be taking a road trip along the route we intend to take for the attempt. The second half of the route, anyway. I will be driving from Tucson, AZ to Texas, travelling in my mother's motor home with my significant other, taking extensive notes along the way. However, during his visit here, we are sure to learn new things about the aircraft and its flight systems, as well as zero in on the final technical (and other) details. Our target date is approaching, soon!
Keep checking in for the latest information
as we continue to put one foot in front of the other...
Back to Top
May 18, 1998: The Bird underwent some additional flight testing. After an overall successful day, we have acquired some additional data on the capabilities and efficiency of the Bird. Earlier in the week, the engine and generator was placed into an Eagle II to test its performance. It performed beautifully, and the speed of the aircraft (keep in mind this was an aerodynamically dirty aircraft compared to the Bird) exceeded our estimations. The Eagle flew at 45 MPH at a casual throttle setting, and the engine was extremely dependable. However, when the engine was run in the Bird, it ran rough, and finding a stable mixture setting was next to impossible. After closer examination, we determined that the problem was related to the fuel delivery from the tank. The fuel line was routed into the engine compartment and had to rise up close to or somewhat above the level of the fuel, enter a fuel filter, then drop down into the carburetor. Air bubbles were collecting at the output of the fuel filter, and once there was enough air to get drawn into the carburetor, it would do so and cause the engine to sputter. The fuel filter was eliminated, and the carburetor inlet was realigned to be more horizontal (more in line with the fuel tank), and the engined sputtering was eliminated.
The compression on a four-stroke diesel engine is determined in a large part by prop loading. The higher the prop loading, the higher the compression. Once the fuel delivery problem was eliminated, we were able to test different propellers. We also did a driving test to get an estimate on the speed of the aircraft. Faced with a 12 MPH wind, the downwind speed was considerably higher than the upwind speed at the throttle setting we estimated we would be using on the attempt. Up wind, the Bird flew approximately 30 MPH. Down wind, the Bird flew approximated 55 MPH. This was with a VERY conservative throttle setting. On one run, David cranked up the throttle maybe another click or two, and when we got the car up to 60 MPH (before we had to stop), the plane was still passing us. Even this was when we had a propeller on the engine that was not quite matched with the engine. A later flight (the last flight of the day, described below) was conducted using a prop with a higher prop loading factor and the performance of the aircraft was significantly improved. Surprisingly improved may be a more appropriate way to put it.
All the flights of the day were performed using a 4 oz. tank. On a normal, high-revving, nitro-burning glow engine on an average model aircraft, this would equate to about five minutes of flight time. The first flight of the Bird lasted 34 minutes and left nearly two ounces of fuel in the tank when the flight was completed. This was with a sputtering engine. The second flight lasted nearly 45 minutes and left about 1.5 ounces in the tank. This was after performing some driving tests and adjusting the fuel mixture (using David's in-flight mixture adjustment) and doing some flying with the throttle open a bit (i.e. using more fuel). The last flight of the day began just after sunset when there was still brilliant colors in the sky. A prop with an even higher loading factor was installed on the engine, and the Bird was flown at a relatively constant throttle setting, approximately where we estimate to be flying on the actual event. This flight lasted approximately 65 minutes. Everyone involved was amazed that the plane could fly for 65 minutes on 4 ounces of fuel. But the truly amazing part was when we discovered there was half an ounce of fuel remaining in the fuel tank!
Unfortunately, this final flight ended in a crash landing. When the engine quit, there was only one opportunity to land the plane. And it was dark. The lighting system worked flawlessly, but the flight characteristics of the Bird are so clean, that the plane did not want to come down. It was difficult to judge the runway, and the plane overshot the the target landing zone (passing the pilot), making it difficult to see from behind. The Bird made contact with Terra Firma a bit hard, bounced up sideways, catching air under the tail, making it swing around on its nose before it finally came to rest. Fortunately, damage was minimal. There were three cracks in the fuselage and two places where bulkheads separated from the fuselage sides, but there was no damage to the wings or to the tail.
As of this writing, the damage has been repaired, and we have plans to test the main fuel tanks on Wednesday, May 20. We will be going out early in the morning, filling the fuel tanks to capacity, and launching the aircraft for an estimated 15-hour flight. This flight will give us a lot of important data that will help us determine our plan of attack and to select our final destination point. It will give us the parameters for setting the engine's fuel mixture across the extreme temperature range of the desert, as well as provide some real numbers as to what the Bird can realistically do (i.e. how far it can go). If we survive the day in the desert sun, there will be yet another section added to this page in a couple of days.
Wednesday, May 20, came and went. Our intention was to fill the main tanks with fuel and send the plane into the sky for a long, long flight to test the performance of the aircraft as well as the stamina of the pilots. As it turned out, the Bird never got off the ground. It was a bit breezy that day, however, and almost as soon as we got there, the wind picked up one wing off the table and threw it against a bench, putting a dent in the trailing edge and cracking a rib. This was not a good omen.
While we were working out some logistic details (i.e. trying to figure out how to get the fuel into the main tanks without spilling it or flooding the fuselage in the process), another club member, showed up at the field. We were hoping not to encounter any other flyers in the afternoon, but as it turned out, this one brought only a lunch. We think he was sent to us, because it turned out we needed a third pair of hands. His name is Mike, and he was just stopping by on his way home from work to see if anyone was at the field. In his words, he didn't expect to "stumble onto a science experiment."
We had no idea that fuelling the aircraft would be such a big deal. We figured out how to connect and route the fuel lines in such a way that they would not be kinked or pinched off, and we began pumping the fuel into the wing tanks. This process alone took nearly an hour. Holding the wings in the wind while pumping fuel into them and assembling them and attaching them to the fuselage required three people. It was an experience not easy to describe, but we all wound up fairly wet with diesel fuel and smelling like ether. We managed to get the plane filled and assembled, then David took it for a trial run. Unsure of whether it would carry the fuel (the plane weighed about ten pounds at this point), a quick physical run into the wind to get a feel for the lift of the aircraft revealed positive results. It appeared that the plane would fly. However, fuel delivery problems haunted us. A vent line was venting fuel out (instead of letting air in), and ether bubbles were forming in the main line to the carburetor. Apparently, if you have any piece of metal in the line (there was a small brass tube connecting two sections of fuel line) - anything that presents a temperature or pressure difference - ether bubbles will form. We were unable to resolve the problem, so we knew the Bird would not fly this day. The ether bubbles made it impossible to adjust the carburetor for a stable fuel mixture.
Not all was lost, however. Knowing that the Bird would not fly, we took the opportunity to measure the fuel capacity by draining the fuel from the wings into an empty container. We found a one-gallon jug in the trash and proceeded to detach the wings from the fuselage (and from each other), which again was a three-person job. Draining the fuel was actually quicker than filling the tanks, since we were able to use gravity to allow the fuel to syphen out. Once the first wing was emptied, we had our first real estimate of the fuel capacity. The one-gallon jug was over one-third full! We estimated there to be about 45 ounces of fuel in that wing, so multiply that by two and we figured we had about 90 ounces of fuel on board! Later measurements revealed there was actually 51 ounces of fuel in the wing, bringing our total fuel capacity to 102 ounces - not including the four ounces carried in the auxiliary tank! The numbers were there, and we were convinced that the plane would easily go the distance.
Speaking of measurements, Mike just happened to live not to far from the flying field and he invited us to his place to take a look at some RC equipment he had recently acquired. It also just so happened that Mike has a scale. We were able to measure the weight of the Bird and the fuel. Empty, the Bird weighed 4 pounds, 12 ounces - lighter than David thought. With a full load of fuel, the Bird weighed just over 10 pounds (we weighed the fuel separately). This meant the fuel weighed more than the aircraft!
Our day finally ended, and we went home with some RC equipment, parts and pieces that Mike gave to us, and we still can't figure out where Mike came from. Like I said, I think he was sent to us.
David remained in town much longer than planned so that we could work out the final details on the Bird and do the one major flight test that remained to be done. Thursday, May 28 became our new target date for launching the aircraft with a full load of fuel. The wings had been reworked during the previous eight days following fuel venting problems encountered on May 20. Also, the 4-ounce auxiliary fuel tank was eliminated to make room for a fuel pump that would serve to eliminate the vapor lock problem, as well as the leaky fuel tank vent line that was troublesome the week before.
I got out of bed sometime after 6:00 a.m. David had already loaded everything into my truck. After various delays, we were on our way. It was about 9:00 a.m. before we arrived at the field. And there were several flyers there. We did not want to contend with the potential problems associated with other flyers present, so we decided to take a hike through the desert looking for anything of value. We managed to find many model aircraft crash sites scattered between the palo verde trees and the cactus, but we found nothing of value. The closest I came was finding a battered and bent allen wrench.
By the time we returned to the ramada, everyone was gone. We had the field to ourselves. We proceeded to prepare the wings with new fuel lines and then began filling them with fuel using a new procedure that we decided to try. It worked, but not without difficulty. It took about an hour to get the tanks filled with all the finaggling we had to endure. I don't know if it was the reworked wing tank vents or the procedure used in filling the tanks, but we had miniature diesel fuel gysers spouting fuel out through vents in the top of the wings. The fuel began to eat its way into the wing film covering (Econokote) just to piss us off. We also discovered much later that there was an internal leak in one tank, allowing fuel to spill into a compartment that was not intended to carry fuel.
There was no wind on this day. And the aircraft seemed to favor having more fuel in the left wing than in the right wing, so we kept having to tilt it to the right to let the fuel even out. This was not a positive sign, but it seemed to be a result of the way we were manipulating the aircraft during the fuelling process. Much later, we realized how that could have been a real problem in flight if one wing became heavier than the other if the plane flew in any position other than level for a length of time (due to a cross wind or other factors), which was quite probable. The fact that there was no wind on this day turned out to be a problem, since we had no head wind to launch into to help give the Bird some lift. It was also getting quite warm, which meant the air was getting thinner, so we had that much less lift to begin with.
The engine ran flawlessly. The fuel pump was working well, and it also provided a wider range of adjustment for the on-board mixture adjustment. All systems were go. At the time we were looking at it, it looked like we had it made. The time came when we decided it was time to launch. We were both nervous and uncertain about how the Bird would perform, but it was time to press on. David picked up the Bird, and I picked up the video camera. David made a final adjustment on the engine as I framed the shot in the viewfinder. David stood up. I locked on. David began to run. I panned to follow. David was running full speed and gave the Bird a hefty lunge skyward. The plane was airborne. But something was immediately wrong. The Bird banked somewhat to the left, picking up air under the right wing. The left wing fell - and continued to fall - and the rudder was not enough to compensate. Something weird was happening with the air, and the Bird slipped off to the side as if falling off a rock. It came back to Earth, landing hard on the left wing, then pivoting over to bury its nose in the dirt. It hit hard enough to bend the aluminum thrust washer behind the propeller on the engine, which only translated into more extensive damage to the rest of the airframe.
It was a stunning moment, followed by utter silence (with the sole exception of a whispered utterance on my part). I had witnessed the incident through the camera viewfinder, and I could not believe it was all over so quickly and suddenly. We were prepared for a 15-hour flight, yet it was 10:30 a.m. and our day was already over. It also marked the end of our world record attempt. Just like that! Perhaps I neglected to mention, but this was the second Bird of Time that was built for this attempt. The first one was lost in a tragic incident involving incompatible servos on July 4th, 1997. This was the second Bird, and the second year, down a long and arduous road for David. The motivation and the means to continue were pretty well spent, and our June 22nd target date became an impossibility in an instant. It was a sad moment for me, for I had such high hopes.
Perhaps one day we will make another attempt. Unfortunately, it will not be this year, most likely. Fortunately, David was able to recover almost all the fuel from the aircraft, since the wing tanks miraculously survived the crash, so he will have plenty of fuel for flying his other, more relaxing, diesel-powered model aircraft. Which, I suspect, is what he will be doing for the next few months - just sitting back, relaxing, and flying his Eagle II through the sunset.
I get the feeling Dave and I don't like to be normal. I, personally, don't like the concept of normal. To me, normal implies a certain degree of stagnation. But I guess that's what drives people like us to put electrical power generators into model airplanes and fly them at night.
After this world record thing is behind us - whether we succeed or not - we're going to be concentrating on (hopefully) less stressful and more fun projects. And we're going somewhat separate ways. Dave has plans for a killer night flying machine, complete with a lighting system that can change colors and possibly even flash in different sequences and patters, all under his control. He already has the aircraft kit, and now he has perfected a power drive system (and even has an engine and generator all ready to go). I guess he has been working on that in his spare time between working on the Bird and flying his night fly Eagle II.
After the world record attempt, I am taking a bit of a different route. I have recently acquired a computer core module as part of a development system that will act as an embedded computer in a flight control system I plan to develop. I have begun work on the research and design of various sensors that will be used to monitor engine performance as part of the first phase of development, which is data collection. This is a project that is intended to span several years (considering I am doing this in my spare time), with the end goal to set the plane loose on its own to fly from my home of Tucson, Arizona (assuming I still live here) to Dave's home in California. My intention is to have a cellular telephone on board, along with a modem interface to the flight computer, to send telemetry and flight system monitoring data directly to my home computer (as well as alarms and location information in the event of a problem), and possibly even be able to receive new instructions from my home computer. I figure as long as it will take me to do this, most of the technology I will need to make it happen will be available "off the shelf". But it's just for fun and to satisfy my thirst for knowledge and a good challenge.
Recently (the last week in February, 1999), I became aware that the record we were setting out to break was broken on June 14, 1998 by another party - just eight days prior to our target launch date! Had we succeeded, we would have presented quite a dissapointment to that team, for their record would have stood for a mere eight days before being shattered...BY US! I suppose it is only fair to let them hold the record for a little while. We currently do not have our sights on breaking the record (for we are both busy on grand new adventures), but I wouldn't doubt that one day we will return to finish what we started. Also, following the Atlantic crossing of the Aerosonde, we have been filled with inspiration, since we now know we have what it takes to break this record, for David holds the technological secrets to engine technology that would even kick the Aerosonde quite a ways beyond its current 3000-kilometer range! We haven't gone away, that's for sure. And while you're here, check out our adventures in Night Flying!
Images
Click here to see some images.
More information will be presented on this Web page as the time grows closer to this momentus occasion. If you would like to contact me about this attempt, please send e-mail to me at distance@rcnightflying.com. Meanwhile, keep your eye in the sky, 'cause you never know what might fly by.
- William Hubbard
