This is not the first aircraft produced from the club, sadly the others have been lost to time and this is the oldest one we have in the shop, as well as the oldest one we have documentation of. The other aircraft images throughout the website are most likely previous years aircraft. We believe the T-tail on the home page was used to carry a large banner.
This is the aircraft that led to the team name "Coppertails". One of the first, more "polished" aircraft to come out of our shop. It is a built-up model using balsa stringers and wrapped in Monokote, with a 3D printed nose cowling. Early prototype Aero models were most likely made with simple foam cut wings and empennage, but maintained the built-up fuselage.
This dual propped aircraft flew in Wichita, Kansas in the 2021-2022 competition yea. The main missions consisted of a flight carrying numerous syringes and releasing medical syringe packages out the back mid-flight onto a target. They scored an 86.77/100 on the report and finished 8th in the competition.
This aircraft was the first major attempt our club has done for composite construction. It is a carbon-fiber lay up around a mold for the fuselage. The wing and empennage are foam core also covered in carbon-fiber. The prototype Aero model was foam cut pieces with a fiberglass layup over them.
This single prop aircraft flew in Tucson in the 2022-2023 competition year. The main missions consisted of an electronics package weighted flight and a flight carrying a PVC pole on its wingtip as if it were a jamming antenna. The weight and pole length were decided at the teams discretion, with the selection effecting the scores. During a flight the ESC overheated leading to a crash, but with a quick repair job back at the hotel, they were able to get the aircraft back into the air the next day. They scored an 83/100 on the report and finished 7th in the competition.
This aircraft was an attempt at a balance between the built-up and composite methods. The fuselage, wing, and empennage all use the built up technique for construction. This leaves the control surfaces, which were a foam core composite, and the front cowling which was made with carbon-fiber. Early prototype Aero models were foam cut pieces for the wings, but maintained mostly the built up construction.
This single prop aircraft, fitted with a 20 inch propellor, flew in Wichita in the 2023-2024 competition year. The main missions consisted of a medical cabinet weighted flight and a passenger flight to carry the most passengers in a humane manner. The weight and number of passengers were optimized by the team, with the selection affecting the scores through the given scoring equations for each flight. The flights were all constrained by a twenty foot takeoff limit to further challenge teams and their pilots. They scored an 86.28/100 on the report and finished 8th in the competition.
This aircraft was the first major incorporation of 3D printing into major aircraft components. It used a carbon-fiber infusion method in a negative mold for the fuselage. The wing and vertical stabilizer are foam core covered in carbon-fiber. The horizontal stabilizer is a 3D printed core covered in fiberglass. Additional 3D printed pieces include the internal and external pylons, internal mounting components, the motor mount, glider release mechanism, and the entire glider. The prototype Aero model was made from foam cut pieces with a fiberglass layup over them, and flew 40 flights before a receiver loss issue resulted in its crash.
This incredibly light, single prop aircraft, at about 12 lb without payload, flew in Tucson in the 2024-2025 competition year which was based around the X-1 supersonic flight program. The main missions consisted of a detachable fuel pod weighted flight, and a mid-flight glider release flight, where upon release the less than 0.55 lb glider autonomously maneuvered towards a target on the ground. Through optimization and testing, the team decided on a 13 lb payload, and managed to create a 0.33 lb glider. For this competition year, AIAA implemented a new grading scale for the total report score which combined the proposal and report score. They scored a 73/100 on the proposal and an 82.52/100 on the report. This gave a total report score of 81.04/100 and they finished 15th in the competition.
