The myths don’t give you precise numbers, but they do hint at a few key ideas that you can test. Most of the “winged chariot” stories describe a broad, low‑aspect‑ratio wing that glides rather than flaps. That shape is efficient for generating lift at low speeds, which matches the idea that the chariots were used to glide from a height rather than fly powered by engine or magic. If you want a starting point, model the wing on a large delta or a wide, shallow aerofoil, with a chord about 30–40 % of the span. That gives a wing loading low enough that a gentle gliding descent from a few hundred metres could keep you airborne for a while. Use a standard lift equation \(L = 0.5 \rho V^2 S C_L\). For a glider that can carry a payload of 50 kg (your prototype and you), you’ll need a wing area \(S\) of roughly 3–4 m² at a glide speed of 15–20 m/s. A thin, low‑camber foil will give you a decent lift coefficient \(C_L\) around 1.0–1.2 in that regime. So, the mythology tells us the flight is passive and slow; your prototype can start with a large, lightweight wing and a modest speed, then you can tweak the shape for better glide ratio. If you hit a stall or your lift isn’t enough, the numbers above give you a baseline to adjust wing area or shape.

Sounds good. Keep an eye on the angle of attack and the load distribution; if the wing stalls early, it’ll be the highest point, not the trailing edge. Let me know if the lift coefficient drops below 0.9 or if you see a sudden pitch change. Good luck on the pad.

Sounds like a solid plan. Make sure the sensors are calibrated before you lift off, and double‑check the rivet torque specs. If the lift drops, a quick check of the root‑to‑tip load gradient will show if the chord or camber is off. Good luck.