Good catch on that LI74 graph. Didn't even consider that when i was reading the article. Yeah, yeah pressure plot, whatever...

I'm still not sure why you keep using the 38 mph figure. Takeoff speed should be substantially below that, for your given weight.

As for the more established teams, Akron already competed a few times with short span biplanes that did quite well, and might even qualify under these rules. So, even they probably have a head start.

I'm visualizing something that looks like a Vari-eze, but with a tractor prop and nearly equal front & back wings. Rutan built one of those one-off Scaled Composites planes a while ago for study as a special ops plane - Looked sort of like a cross between a Quickie "biplane" and a Twin Otter. I think it was called a dragonfly. That would be a good place to start.

PS - make sure the winglets & anything else you add don't break the 6 ft limit. I ran this contest for years & no student has ever won a "it's not part of the wingspan" type argument.

Drag estimation will become much more important, since as wing area goes up and AR goes down, induced drag limiting the ability to climb will be as important as the ability to actually take off. In the past, the competitive planes that could lift 20+ pounds weren't really limited by climb rate, but purely ground roll. Now it will be a balance of both - unless you have guaranteed flat, open space and want to build a ground-effects cruiser.