OmegaForce

Members
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

1 Follower

About OmegaForce

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The Swift vs FCS Unlocked match went more one sided then I would of expected. I can see the advantages gained by the Swift's energy retention but also agree the AI settings are a major factor. The Swifts steering is maxed out along with a minimal extend distance this seems to give the Swift an edge in taking control of the dogfight thus putting the Unlocked into a situation where it must react defensively. To overcome this the Unlocked needs settings tweaks to fly more aggressively in my option possibly faster idle, lower distance and high steering factor.
  2. I had tested my plane before the competition against the L-24 Broadhead as it was available on Kerbal X and noticed a tendency for the AI to force the Broadhead into the ground while trying to avoid getting shot from it's six. The overly long chase was most likely caused from the guns overheating on the Cosmic Star Blazer. I had them set to fire in salvo mode so a bust of three 20mm rounds could take out a plane in a single hit. The problem was accuracy, I was going for a stable design but the AI is missing by some distance. Perhaps I should of had the firing distance set shorter with a shorter extend distance and more aggressive turning . However even at close range I'm not seeing the accuracy I would of liked. A different design overall might have been needed. After viewing the other entries in action their are two planes that really stand out the AL-18 Swift and the Agravain FCS Unlocked. The Swift is also on Kerbal X and having done a test flight the performance capability is quickly noticed. The massive all moving surface on the main wings give it a high roll rate with little sideslip probably due to having two vertical stabilizers. The tight turn radius with low AoA needed is ideal. For armaments the 30mm cannons are nose mounted one above the other and set to fire at a close distance of 675 meters. The AI take advantage of these features with a extremely low extend distance of only 100 meters allowing the plane to turnaround and line up on an enemy's tail before that plane starts it's own turn. Once the distance is closed the 30mm's do their job well. The Agravain FCS Unlocked appears to be a standard looking design for a jet fighter of it's time. Once in combat however it's agility, turn rate, and accurate firepower make it a top notch performer . To see this one go up against the Swift should be a close match. Personal favorite though is the IA-34 VIII flying wing. Taking pointers from this design and the AL-23 Boomerang I was able to create my first flyable scale replica of the Ho-229 and learned what is needed for a flying wing to be stable. That's what makes these competitions great always something new can be learned from other builds.
  3. Creating a flying wing that the AI could pilot was a win of itself. I attempted a replica of the Horten X but sideslip was problematic. Tried different AOI settings across the span of the wings and moved the COM around along with many other adjustments. Ended up adding vertical stabilizers to the wing tips and it worked but still I would like to create a true flying wing .Perhaps something similar to the 229 would be a better starting point.
  4. Anything to bring in more people would be helpful as these competitions are at their best when you have a variety of different plane designs and many participants.
  5. Thank you for the AI definitions and the very detailed tutorial. The Stability Derivative Simulation section of FAR is something I never knew how to use till now.
  6. I'm Looking forward to this competition and hopeful we'll have many entries submitted. Hats off to the custom made engine's. I am a bit confused about a few of the settings in the AI. A complete list of definitions for the various parameters would be helpful especially for beginners.
  7. You need to install also Community Resource Pack for MOIST to load.
  8. I remember this mod from awhile ago and thought I would try to get it working again. The fix is simply changing a single line in the cfg files for the colornozzles from: "MODEL_MULTI_PARTICLE_PERSIST" to "MODEL_MULTI_SHURIKEN_PERSIST" SmokeScreen now only uses the Shuriken system that's why they were not working.
  9. I've ran into a problem with modular missiles in KSP 1.6.1 with BDA version 1.2.4.0 I built a a basic two stage missile to fire from surface to surface targets and configured guidance settings to STS/AGM with GPS targeting. Fallowing testing the missile till it's accurate I tried to re-root the missile to create a sub-assembly like how it's described in the MM wiki. Once the missile is saved as a sub assembly it no longer works properly when loaded into another craft and fired. On launch it seems to lose guidance, goes off on a path away from the target it or doesn't attempt at all to change the missiles course. Tried this over many times with different builds and I can't find out what's causing this.
  10. I missed the BAD T IV competition but found this one mentioned in it's thread and thought I might give it a go. Should we be using 1.6 and latest version of BDA or the one mentioned above?
  11. The latest version has the following in the Changelog : Would this make it possible to exclude select parts from aerodynamic failure and if so how?
  12. I haven’t posted in a long time but have been fallowing this thread from the start and was glad to see the conclusion of BDA II. I wondered how the sky rebel would do against the Tytonid if we made it to the finals. Not surprised at the outcome as it was Ferram's own creation but getting to second place was a win in itself. For this competition I didn’t have enough time to tweak and test my design as I would have liked nor was I up to date on how the AI has changed in BDA. However even with further improvements I don’t think Tornbird would have made it to the finals. If a future tournament is held around a WWI theme I have a few suggestions. Planes from that time period were very light so a maximum weight limit might be added to keep designs from using overly strong wings then guns could be limited to lower calibers and still be effective. Armor could be left out completely or greatly reduce the amount allowable to keep the vulnerability factor high. Also full moving control surfaces from B9 procedural wings I feel shouldn’t be allowed along with leading edge control surfaces. Building cockpits out of B9 Pwings works but for those wanting a simpler solution the open cockpit mod would be ideal. https://spacedock.info/mod/1126/MK-1 Stockalike open cockpit ( inline external seat ) Engines could come from the early set in the Airplane Plus mod. They might need some tweaking but visually they fit the era. The mod as well has a bi plane style fixed landing gear we could put to use.
  13. I had similar issues and the only LLL parts I added were the generators. This caused one of the armor panels from SM Armory to disappear.
  14. Are the secondary guns in this picture from this weapons pack?
  15. When I entered Skyrebal I didn't know how it would preform against other planes with the design being radically different from a conventional fighter. Inspiration came from the XP-55 Ascender a unique plane that only went as far as being test flown. As far as flying wings go Skyrebal is not a true flying wing. I haven’t had successes at getting a wing to preform well. Yaw stability and the lack of pitch control being away from the CoM are issues that don't make for a competitive fighter. Still I would pursue a wing in a future BADT if I could come up with a suitable design. For a winner I have to have to go with the Tytonid such a impressive plane. Blohm and Voss produced a similar aircraft but it was a jet/prop combo. I wonder when the competition is over if Ferram would make his craft available for us to learn from.