Founders Innovation Prize mentioned by Van on front page

I think the idea of the Founders Innovation Prize (FIP) is excellent. However the execution left something to be desired this year.

None of the presentations dealt with the yaw problem of Loss of Control. LOC.

Unfortunately, the entry that should have won was not allowed to present because of some very unusual events. It is a very innovative instrument designed by a friend and former Air Force pilot that was concerned with LOC will before the FIP.

He submitted his paperwork very early in the submission period and received confirmation a few days later. This was done because of a scheduled European vacation at the end of the submission period.

He was contacted while on vacation and told that his submission paperwork could not contain his name (a late rules change). He was not in a position to resubmit until returning and submitting after the close. Did so and was told subsequently twice that the submission was in the hands of the judges. Never resolved and never given any feedback.

Result was no presentation.

This is not idle sour grapes. My friends idea is revolutionary. It as been reviewed by the FAA and they love it. Their issue is staffing to do something with it (as with all gov entities)

The BEST thing that happened was failure of any of the presenters to meet the criteria of the Prize and the decision to repeat the LOC criteria next year.

He will submit again next year.

I was also disappointed. I entered a design that addressed the yaw problem at slow speed. Mine was very simple. I listened to all the design presentations and was shocked to see that one of the 5 that were selected had an idea to wear goggles to fly and mitigate LOC. Imagine that. I was also disappointed to hear mr. Van say that the selection process looked at ideas that were more developed than those that were ideas only, something that was not on the rules.

Oh well, I am not the judge.

How's airball not addressing the yaw?

Latintan said:

I was also disappointed to hear mr. Van say that the selection process looked at ideas that were more developed than those that were ideas only, something that was not on the rules.

Click to expand...

This is not at all unusual.

Lets say we hold an aircraft design competition, and someone submits a design that they say will carry 6 people with 600 lbs of luggage, it will have a non stop range of 2500 miles at 400 kts, and once at the destination will fold up into a crate the size of a large suit case, and it can be flow by anyone with just a private pilots license.

It's proposed capabilities obviously greatly exceed anything currently available, and all other contest submissions.

Does it deserve to win if the submission is just ideas on paper with no proof of new technologies that will make it possible?

This is an extreme and facetious example, but I think you probably get the idea. Any submission that has a more advanced level of development (demonstrating it can work) would typically get some higher level of consideration.