Jump to content

Raptor kerman

Members
  • Posts

    95
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Raptor kerman

  1. Make your own NRO-esque KSP mission patch. As you may well know the NRO makes some rather sinister but nonetheless totally badass mission patches. The aim of this challenge is simple, to make your own Kerbal-esque patch in the same style. Think about the Kraken, lithobraking, rapid unplanned disassambly, explosions... Here is some inspiration to get you started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NRO_launches ______________ To keep things simple, post one patch per reply. Most liked patch gets bragging rights. If you don't have Photoshop, GIMP is free, Pixlr is very good as an online tool and so is Logo maker Good Luck and happy designing!
  2. remember your not at sea level. Adding your sea level altitude component to the radius of kerbin and calculating circumference from there might be of slight help.
  3. cheers, just fleshed out basic operational requirements, and I'm looking at a a cruise speed of 2100 m.s^-1 among other things. While I have previous high-alt, high-speed experience, this is completely new for me. I'm wondering if I've bitten off more than I can chew.....
  4. No visible difference between 1.8 and 1.8.1 on the controllability side but some (not all) planes appear to behave slightly better when it comes to pitch responsiveness. This is mainly related to blended wing bodies and ultra high speed (+1500 m.s^-1) aircraft. Which is what I'm concerned about as it's what I make the most. Although this could be a false positive as I played around with control surfaces and angle of incidence on those aircraft. Also it seems the atmosphere is much thicker than before. Could be the unity change as you say.
  5. Okay, I'm mounting a serious attempt at this challenge. I have spent an incredible amount of time making 1600 m.s^-1 ULR aircraft. But I haven't done circumnavigations in a LONG TIME. Question: what is the distance to travel the full circumference at the equator?
  6. Realised my mistake, asked the mods to remove the post. The post was based on the old kerbin (air breathing) circumnavigation challenge where the record was at around 37 minutes. Bear in mind, I saw this thread and didn't read the posts.
  7. Two ways of approaching this. Make it accelerate hard enough that it reaches its design speed and slows back down again before heating becomes an issue. To do this with air breathing engines, you're going to need some sort of lite™ heat sink. Even a properly designed rapier missile in my experiences can't get past 1500 m.s^-1 before a. running out of athmosphere b. running out of acceleration for this to be the case That is unless you're copying Brad whistance and strap ~40 rapiers to one fuel tank. The second, more viable option is to design the plane for maximum heat resistance and minimal drag. Heat shields are out of the question unless you do stuff to them. In my many experiences (mach 5+ planes are my fav' design challenge) your best bet is this: -minimal aero surfaces, they're the first to go bang from heating. Big-S wing strakes are a good idea as they carry a lot of fuel so you can make a smaller fuselage. No need for loads of flaps, elevators etc. 3 control surfaces max. period. If you can work out a solution for roll then 2. (don't rely on thrust vectoring), powerful reaction wheels are worth looking into. -tiny fuselage. Go drone. If you need a kerbal for the challenge, go command chair stuck in 1.25m payload bay. (plus's include better heat resistance and free airbrakes!). Put drone core or kerbal as far back as possible for heat protection. Do you need all that fuel? Heck no. Get it right and a few mk0 tanks work fine. Go Mk1 size fuselage, anything else has too much drag. If you can just get rid of the fuselage by using wet wings. -tiny wings. Strakes are the way to go, you're going so fast and high you won't actually need that much lift. Strakes have enough lift for take off, but have low drag. Minimise size, it is possible to just slap one rectangular wing thing, centre it and call it a day, but this is hard. Cause: higher drag. If you're not using wet wings use a pre cooler instead of a normal intake. it works amazing at high speed and carries fuel as a plus! -heating. THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE. Think of the whole thing as a battery that accumulates heat. Not Just, heat resistant nose as a shield and that's it. Medium sized landing gear are a good way to go for the nose, just remember to remove it from the action group. Long and thin payload bay nose is a good idea, or stacking 2 or 3 short and stubby ones. Test at high speed and see which parts are the hottest and deal with the problem. Engine and nose tend to be the hottest, auxiliary parts such as batteries are usually the first to fail. First thing to look at when selecting parts is max heat. Any important part that's under 2200k is nope. That or above, heating can be manages. And remember: Remember part clipping is a thing!
  8. Has anyone else noticed that planes, even rockets behave very differently, much more sluggishly in the Kerbin atmosphere to the point that it rives me crazy. Even my supermanoeuvrable aircraft and rockets act sluggish, no matter how much I play around with cog/col, wing area, control surface authority limiters etc... It feels like forces are applied perpendicular to the CoG and any control surfaces placed (say at the far back of the plane) no longer create a torque, or at least a visible one that I can feel and react to. Nothing rolls with any particular speed or responsiveness, planes that could previously sustain an AoA of ~45° now only ~5°. Yaw doesn't seem to be affected but pitch ALL my creations don't pitch about the CoG anymore. When I apply pitch they simply increase in climb rate while staying flat as a pancake. Great if i want a flying wing, not so great if you build anything else. Sidenote: flying wings require serious work to get right, I doubt they've been unaffected either. Even my U-2 look alike plane which is one of my successful designs (40 m.s^-1 lift off, 24 000m cruise altitude, 20° max AoA, 1200m.s^-1 cruise speed [for a glider with an engine!]) fly's like a winged brick carrying a particularly obese blue whale. Even the vertical speed is gone. I'm not much of a rocket scientist, but I've made working ICBM's with working MIRV warheads that impact Kerbin ~1600/2000 m.s^-1 and they don't work anymore either. For rockets this is less of an issue but the same sluggishness is found in most of my designs. And max AoA seems to have been at least halved in most designs. Is anyone else getting this or similar? Is this something that has been mentioned in patch notes? Has it been changed but NOT mentioned or is this a bug? Genuinely would appreciate as many answers on this to try and build up a picture of the wider community. I'm not much of a rocket scientist, but I've made working ICBM's with working MIRV warheads that impact Kerbin ~1600/2000 m.s^-1 and they don't work anymore either.
  9. Don't know if this has been talked about, but aerodynamic behaviour has change majorly, and not in a good way. All my craft are now sluggish as hell. Even the ones specifically designed with aerodynamic instability which could hit over 40g while turning. Can someone enlighten me on this?
  10. Will it be mac compatible? HOLY excrements. MULTIPLAYER.
  11. Work has been postponed until further notice on my MIRV project, new warhead, ABM and Center-X replacements. I am working on a project that until now was a fun tangent. It will blow your mind (no pun intended) and unless I am mistaken has not been done before in this format in KSP. While I can't give an exact date as I can't open KSP every day, this should take about a week or two to develop, test and release.
  12. The Fiocci variant has been removed because while it had mind blowing acceleration and was satisfying to fly. 50+ G acceleration coupled with powered warheads makes intercepts basically impossible. Also probably because my laptop couldn't handle screen recording and KSP. However I have begun work on a new short range missile with ABM capabilities, think of a shotgun style approach so the missile only has to be near the ICBM for an intercept, in real life this would be comparable with the russian A-135 system (probably the only ABM system in the world which actually works in a real environment and not just tests) and certainly not THAAD or Sprint missiles which is what the Fiocci was. Mobile road launchers would present a fun challenge and are definitely on the to do list although I want to finish a full range of working ballistic missiles and a new warhead as the current one has many limitations (it is my first working re entry vehicle after all) mainly drag, mass and thermodynamics.
  13. As a cool present here is a flag to slap onto all your missiles so people know you have the best ICBM's out there!
  14. Tenex MRV capable ICBM This is my first attempt at a heavy lift ICBM. As a result it is slightly oversized, but it carries 4 standardised warheads which can only be released simultaneously. While the Tenex is MRV (multiple re-entry vehicles) capable. It is not MIRV (multiple independent re entry vehicles) capable as of yet. In the future I will definitely either upgrade the Tenex with a new payload bay for MIRV capabilities or straight up create a new platform with MIRV capabilities. The Missile is highly optimised for short to medium range sub orbital flights hence the elongated aerodynamic parts for shallow climb angles. It is fuelled to roughly 40% capacity and could easily take medium sized payloads to Duna and beyond. Modifying the fuel loads is not recommended for stability and the same 2000-2200 m/s speed bracket applies. Simply put the SAS in prograde mode for staging and 2nd stage and change the navball to surface mode below 70km altitude on the re-entry. In tests, the optimum altitude for releasing the warheads is below 65km but above 50km. Tests show that re-entry angles below 35° will slow the warheads far more than I'm comfortable with so keep re-entry angles above 45° if possible. download: https://kerbalx.com/RaptorWorKs/Tenex-MRV Remember to stay M.A.D
  15. So for a while now I've been playing around with ICBM and ABM in stock KSP and here are some of the results. New arrival: Tenex MRV (https://kerbalx.com/RaptorWorKs/Tenex-MRV) Most popular system: Center-X (https://kerbalx.com/RaptorWorKs/Center-X-launch-system) Next system: new short range missile with ABM capable fuselage List of systems: - Center-X LGM - Tenex MRV LGM - Standardised warhead (not available for individual download)
  16. Presentation: E606 Kite. Disclaimer, this aircraft is not currently for sale, and will be released to the public shortly. Supersonic aircraft, tend to be poster aircraft, the face of an airline, often driving ticket sales, a passenger's dream, an economist's nightmare. Few SST's make money, even fewer generate meaningful profits. The Kite Project, which will use the E606 denomination in service, aims to change that. This highly optimised aircraft will help you on the way to monopolising the airline industry. The E606 project was designed from the ground up to make money, featuring almost endless attributes aimed at increasing passenger yields and lowering operating costs. We believe this is the first aircraft Kerbal express Airlines can use a flagship money making machine for these reasons: -Extremely long range makes it ideal for hub to hub trunk routes -Extremely high speeds in the ballpark of 1500 m/s for more daily flights with less cycles. -Extremely low fuel consumption in the region of 0.7 in the cruising bracket lowers the cost per flight to below that of non SST aircraft. -High density cabin for increased pax count of 120 puts it on par with aircraft of comparable size and weight. -Two engines instead of four, greatly reduces fuel consumption, weight and maintenance costs. -Innovative nose and wing design allows the airframe to cope with higher temperatures for longer periods, reducing the number of airframe losses due to heating, reduces long term operating costs due to next of kin suing the company. -Easy taxiing due to steering in the nose AND main landing gear. -Reduced size with the use of the double barrel cabin setup allows use in smaller airports and gates. To summarise, the E606 Kite is an extremely optimised aeroplane designed to make a maximum amount of money, due to its long range, high capacity and extremely low fuel costs. Our analysts predict a colossal 18% increase in daily flights on trunk routes, 43% decrease in ticket costs, putting an economy class ticket on this SST at the cost of a premium economy ticket on a legacy aircraft, a 20% increase passenger yield leading to 17% more fully booked flights on said routes. Due to the Kite being four times faster than a comparable jumbo jet, trans continental routes like KSC-desert airfield can be served four or even six times a day compared to two. This is THE aircraft for YOUR airline. Place your options today! The makers of the E606 Kite refuse to acknowledge test pilot and engineer reports and testimony of extremely high fuel consumption during take-off to cruise periods, woeful low speed pitch sensitivity, excessively sensitive roll controls throughout the flight envelope. The makers of the E606 Kite also refuse to accept the existence of extremely slow take offs and potentially deadly climb outs and transitions from cruising at extremely high speeds and altitudes to medium speeds and altitudes. They also refuse to accept the danger of using yaw controls or developing a working auto pilot to remedy said problems.
  17. Yeah, a rapier stage halves the DV requirements with minimal mass. If you get it right you can get another 300 m/s out of them. Making the speedster much more efficient.
  18. Ok, so I've come up with a design that should work, still a LOT of optimisation to do and I might be going off on the wrong track... Mk1 parts only, rapier booster to half DV requirements on the stage doing the speeding, nuclear speedster stage or aerospike... you don't need that much power, lifting surfaces are control surfaces, tests will show whether i need a downforce 'floor' like in F1. Bruh. This could be huge, 3km/s below 30km... SHOULD be possible.
×
×
  • Create New...