OmegaForce

That was a first... It's as if both pilots cooperated together for a suicidal ram.

Congratulations to @Alioth81. I figured the Vulture was going to get the win it's more maneuverable over all and the Thalo is too fragile to take more then a few hits. Much time and effort must have gone into this. Very enthused to try out some biplanes with these parts.

The Vulture's maneuverability was the deciding factor here and though the N-46 couldn't get in much offense it was able to take a beating thanks to the redundancy incorporated in it's design.

Honeybee had the turning advantage and accuracy needed to break down the Krakenhound mostly through loss of control surfaces. Krakenhound however wont be forgotten with that savage death blow at the end making a final statement.

That may very well have been the most intense dogfight of this competition yet. The La-9 is a a capable fighter but the Krakenhound is a beast of durability even with multiple control surfaces gone they kept in the fight and out lasted their opponent . Only thing I'm a little confused about is the ground crash's had fuel ran out?

A WWI competition has long been discussed but would of been more difficult in the past with part count limitations. Now however we have auto struts, the open cockpit mod and the ability to make a single procedural wing section wide enough to use as a fuselage. In regard to engines what about the early set of props in the Airplane Plus mod? Also included in there is a bi plane set of landing gear that could be useful.

back engineering The Thalo came about from recreating/back engineering Ferram's Tytonid somewhat accurately . Their was many issues encountered with an asymmetrical design and more of a trial and error approach was taken to get a flyable aircraft. The GLOC problem though was probably on account of not knowing what the G limits of the pilots would be. I would also say after seeing the match accuracy could be improved upon as the 30mm's were more of a late design change. If anyone would like to take a look at this design here's the craft file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ijw62pnd1r8te62/AFC-88 Thalo.craft?dl=0

Flying with half a wing gone...impressive. Getting a kill on a fully functioning plane in that state....a whole nother level.

[@OmegaForce's A.F.C Cosmic Star Blazer and @Me1_base's Agravian FCS Unlocked: ] No surprises their the Agravian FCS Unlocked is far more maneuverable then my Cosmic Star Blazzer. I expect by the end of this tournament Unlocked will come in second overall with the Swift taking 1st place. [IA-32 VIII and @dundun92's IV-5Mk_IVa:] Entertaining dogfight with several cinematic moments. Nice to see the wing holding it's own also noticed how accurate some of it's shots can be very impressive.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.