Payload Challenge 2025
The BMFA University and Schools Payload Challenge (to quote the full title) is now in its 30th year with the initial competition held at Breighton Airfield, near Selby in Yorkshire in 1995. (the original name was BMFA University Challenge).
For the first event only two teams fielded aircraft, but the competition has steadily grown over the years and for 2025 we had 27 teams entered across the 4 classes with the highest numbers in the “Weight” category.
This year’s competition received entries from several Europe based teams, as well as a strong attendance from UK universities, schools and home education groups.
This year there were no Chinese teams competing as we had to restrict entry to UK and European teams only due to visa and operational considerations.
The Challenge was held at the BMFA National Centre over two days, 11th and 12th of June with the 10th provided as a pre- comp arrival and set up day for teams requiring test flights.
The Challenges
The competition has evolved over time with varying payloads and aircraft configurations, currently all classes are electric powered aircraft (many years ago the standard power plant was the Irvine 40 glow engine which one team coaxed into the air with over 9kg of lead as a payload!).
The current categories are: –
Challenge 2 – Cube lift – teams design and build aircraft to transport standard Rubicks Cubes around the course.
Challenge 3 – Distance – teams must design and build an aircraft to carry the specified payload of a large block of balsa around the course for the greatest number of laps in the prescribed time allocation.
Challenge 4 – aircraft are designed to transport the largest number of 150mm diameter polystyrene spheres around the course in the allocated time, the ultimate test of design, innovation and teamwork.
Challenge 5 – the premier class, aircraft are required to carry up to 4kg of water as a payload with scoring based on the largest aggregate of airframe to payload weight, requires innovation in design and understanding of materials and aerodynamics.
Generally, the competition is launched early in the academic year and teams are required to submit drawings 28 days prior to the flying element of the competition which always takes place in June.
Competition Day 1
The Tuesday is allocated as an arrival and set up day with the option to fly for those teams still requiring test flights, this year a number of teams had taken up this opportunity and arrived in good time to claim their spot in the Goldsmith Hangar and to conduct final set up flights (and a couple of initial test flights).
Wednesday was the first competition day and as always started with a morning briefing to all teams to cover the usual safety and housekeeping aspects, as well as competition procedures.
The Hangar was very full of teams and aeroplanes, and it was clear from the beginning that the general standard of aircraft was very good. As always there was quite a selection of aircraft evident, with everything from fairly “aeroplane shaped” composite structures to some rather more…. imaginative designs.
Once the briefings are complete the day one emphasis is very much on getting teams through processing and model scrutineering, and also their presentations to judges.
Competition procedures require teams to pre-submit a set of drawings and reports for their aircraft (the requirements for the lower Challenges are less academically rigorous) which details the aircraft construction and systems. These reports are assessed and marked by our panel of professional engineering judges and form an important aspect of the team’s overall score.
Additionally, teams are required to carry out a 5 minute presentation to the judging panel (led by Chief Judge, Peter Rieden) which describes the design and build process of their aircraft as well as any highlights.
Presentations are usually shared by team members with individuals covering their particular area of design and involvement, the presentations always make for interesting spectating and again represent an important opportunity for teams to gain valuable points towards their overall score.
Final scores are the total of all three aspects of the competition, reports/drawings, presentation to judges, and finally the flight scores.
As soon as teams have had their aircraft scrutineered and have conducted their presentation to the judging panel, they are then eligible to head out to the flightline and commence their competition flights.
Flying Elements
As in previous years the flightline was run by Matt Hoyland (of F3A RC Aerobatics fame) and his team of helpers.
Teams form an orderly queue (usually after a bit of “geeing up”) adjacent to the flightline and are called forward when it is their turn to fly, some teams supply their own pilot who is individually briefed before each flight and some teams use our pilots (Matt Hoyland – Mode 1 and Steve Hunt – Mode 2).
The flight requirements for each competition class vary, but most of them require flight around the prescribed course with flag Marshalls placed at either end to indicate to pilots when the turnaround point is reached.
For the Cube and Distance categories there is a very definite speed element as the score is calculated based on the number of complete laps flown within the specified time period, however there is also a strong teamwork element as the payload needs to be loaded before flight and during the rounds.
For Challenge 4, Quantity, the emphasis becomes focussed on good design and efficiency of team operations.
Aircraft are designed to carry a payload of 150mm polystyrene spheres, not heavy, but an awkward payload, the flight score is based on the total number of spheres transported around the course in the prescribed flight time, so teams have an interesting decision to make early in the design process, a sleek, fast airframe that can carry a small number of spheres and get round the course multiple times, or something that can perhaps carry a larger number of spheres but as a result is likely to achieve significantly less laps.
There was a mixture of each method, but teams had predominantly opted for the “stack em high” approach with several aircraft designed to carry a large number of spheres.
This led to some entertaining flying as aircraft were right on the performance “edge” and struggled around the course to the accompaniment of applause and cheers from the spectators. One of Loughborough Universities’ aircraft piloted by Payload Challenge “veteran” John Newton actually collided with one of the pylons but was effectively repaired by the team and flew in later rounds.
Where large number of speres are carried it places an additional emphasis on the team aspect, as loading and unloading payload becomes a co-ordinated activity, all a great test of innovation and organisation and great fun to watch.
Challenge 5 has always been regarded as the “premier class” and always attracts the highest number of entries each year.
This year saw quite a mixture of approaches with a diverse range of airframe designs from traditional open structure construction to fully moulded composite structures, and also a good range of materials used, again, from traditional wood through to carbon fibre and 3D printed components.
The flight score for Challenge 5 is based on three flights, a qualifying empty flight (no payload), a flight with 2 kilograms of payload and a final flight with 4 Kilograms of payload (the payload for Challenge 5 is water).
Scoring is based on the aggregate weight between payload and airframe which can lead to fairly fragile airframes and in particular, undercarriages always seem to present teams with a challenge, 4 Kg of payload is a great airframe integrity test.
One of the great joys of the Payload Challenge is seeing aircraft that look like they shouldn’t fly being coaxed into the air.
Sponsors
The Payload Challenge benefits from support and sponsorship from a number of organisations. The lead sponsor is the Royal Aeronautical Society with support from BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, Royal Airforce Engineering, Royal Airforce Model Aircraft Association and 4Max Model Aircraft Supplies.
For 2025 the Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS) brought their single seat glider simulator which proved very popular with the students at the event and provided an interesting diversion to the competition activity in the Hangar. The RAeS also had personnel at the event to talk to students and guide them on possible careers within aviation and engineering.
Our thanks to our sponsors for their support of the Challenge.
Volunteers
As well as the sponsors the competition benefits from the support of a significant number of Volunteers who make it all happen, right from the initial organising and writing rules, to the judging of reports and drawings and of course making it all happen on the day.
It’s a large team so not appropriate to list everyone individually but the support of all team members is appreciated and of course key to the success of the competition.
Summary
So, a great competition all round, and a very successful and enjoyable few days at the National Centre hosting some fantastically enthusiastic young people.
The competition closed with awards and prizegiving on the final day, we were joined by BMFA Technical Director, Simon Vaitkevicius to present trophies and say a few words to close the competition.
As ever the students and helpers were extremely enthusiastic and closed by giving the volunteers the noisiest round of applause which was great.
We look forward to doing it all again next year.
Take a look at the Images Gallery to get the full flavour and range of aircraft at the 2025 Payload Challenge – https://payloadchallenge.bmfa.uk/2025-gallery-ready-to-view
Results
Well done to all those who competed, top placing teams listed below and full results – https://payloadchallenge.bmfa.uk/2025-results
Challenge 2 – Cube
1st – Aer0nauts – Time and Space Learning
Challenge 3 – Distance
Joint 1st place
1st – Phoenix – Manchester Grammar School
1st – Aer0nauts – Time and Space Learning
3rd – Team Peryton Penguin – University of Surrey
Challenge 4 – Quantity
1st – Liverbird 4 – University of Liverpool
2nd – Loughborough Quantity Team – Loughborough University
3rd – Liverbird 2 – University of Liverpool
Challenge 5 – Weight
1st – Akamodell Stuttgart – University of Stuttgart
2nd – CTU Aerolab – Czech Technical University in Prague
3rd – Lambach Aircraft – Delft University of Technology (TU Delft)
MW