Mars-Bound Hokie

When you hear the words "flight simulator," the first thing that pops into your head would be: machines that look like arcade games - and in some cases are arcade games videogames such as MS Flight Simulator or X-Plane that need extra hardware to work or computers with said hardware that you'll often find in brick-and-mortar flight schools or museums or similar venues. computer programs like Google Earth or GeoFS which are great for cheapskates and/or those short on space 90 years ago, if someone interested in flying heard those same words, odds are they'll think of the Link Trainer (also known as the Blue Box) Historic footage of a student pilot learning to fly in a Link Trainer with an instructor checking his progress (both student and instructor unknown). Picture taken six years before the Second Imperial Wars broke out. This came in real handy when the war did happen, as Heinkel's enemies in the air were experienced "flying blind" - giving them an advantage. Now imagine listening to this in the voice of the guy who narrates those old black-and-white PSAs: The Link Trainer and the instructor’s desk on display in the SPH. It was difficult deciding what motors to use and in what order, and I had to look at my old swept-wing jet to figure out how to set up the action groups. In the end, I managed to set up the motors to obey the main steering control inputs. Since the pilot would be flying in complete darkness, I disconnected the cockpit lights from the main light button. The two small lights on the fuel tank in the opposite corner are just for decoration, which means they’re also disabled. In summary, the only working light is the overhead instructor desk lamp. I used two grip strip to mimic a conduit connecting the trainer itself to the instructor’s desk, since two smaller I-beams would have been too long. I put a motor under the instructor's chair to mimic a swivel chair. The J and L buttons spin it. Although I don’t expect much use out of this apart from decoration (and bragging rights for me, since nobody else has made a KSP replica of the Link Trainer), this craft has 2,650 charge units. Another picture of the real thing and the instructor’s desk. This time, it’s in the WWII Gallery (Hangar One) of the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, OH. Photograph taken by me 10/9/2022. Jeb Kerman stepping out of the Link Trainer in utter disappointment, talking to his friend, Bill Kerman. When Jeb heard that the first flight simulator - or at least an operational model of it that survived - was coming to the Space Center, he was first in line to try it out. Of course, until then, he didn’t know what it looked like. Although Bill did know what the Link Trainer was, he lined up along with Jeb because he wanted to see it in action up-close and personal. The daughter of the engineer sent to demonstrate how this worked started filming their conversation. Granted, she was filming anyway for her upcoming video "Modern Kerbalnauts Hop On Ancient Flight Simulator." She ended up keeping that part because it was funny. JEB: Why didn’t you warn me that this simulator would suck? BILL: What do you mean? JEB: For starters, it has no computer screen or heads-up display - not even with 4-bit graphics. It also has no sound effects, nav system, or onboard radar. Oh, and I can’t find the music settings. BILL: Obviously none of those things were available when the Link Trainer was made. By the way, why were you looking for the music? JEB: Because the simulators in Basic had those. BILL: They did? Val never said anything about music. JEB: I also can’t find the cockpit light switch. The only source of light I have is from the crummy glow-in-the-dark instrument panel. BILL: It doesn’t have a light switch; the whole point was to get you used to flying in total darkness. By the way, the instrument panel was brighter back in those days, but the original material had to be replaced recently because it was radioactive. JEB: You fly it then if you know so much about it. That was when Bill immediately acted as the "instructor" for the next pilot in line, an unnamed rookie from Nye Island. Surprisingly, he flew it very well on his first try. When asked how he did it, he replied (with a heavy accent) "The arceed I went to as a lad had a Link Traina. I yesed ta (used to) play on it all the time when the lines to the cool games were too long." And indeed. At the time the pilot in question was a child, Nye Island's local arcade had an operational link trainer used as a game - and it still does. Although the Link Trainer is at the Museum, it's not on the checklist so it doesn't count as a tally; I already have three Hangar One entries anyway. I thought I'd build this replica since nobody else has, so it was a fun challenge. It's still in my museum replica hangar, since I put in a bit of time and effort to make a functional replica - along with the instructor desk. Replicas Remaining: 226 WHERE ARE THE LINK TRAINERS NOW?

That's pretty impressive, but is that all you got? Last week, I made a replica of a C-141 Starlifter (American military transport plane that was retired in 2006). Given the amount of command seats I was able to squeeze in the cargo bay, it can easily function as an airliner on KSP1. Here's a brief summary of its performance: C-141 Starlifter (KSP Replica) Test Run Performance Stats Crew Capacity 4 pilot + 60 passengers (Passengers in command seats) Powerplant 4 x J-33 “Wheesley” Cargo Capacity 52 (7 loaded + 45 empty) Landing Gear Configuration Tricycle Tailfin T-tail Cruising Altitude 7.9 km Cruising Velocity 260 m/s Expected Range 3,250 km For more details, check out its showcase post from my National Museum of the United States Air Force replica collection.

No, it didn't. It was separated quite distinctively from the other hangars, as seen in the screenshot below. There was no hangar number assigned to the Missile Gallery, and it was separated by a thick black line. It was its own section on the list. Maybe I should have been a little more clear at first. Revealing information like my initial and weather were blocked in this shot.. Regardless, since there were only eight possible craft (seven now) one could make from the Missile Gallery, they're now wildcards that can be used as either a Hangar Three or Four entry. I can't wait to see your (non-wildcard) Hangar Three entry, though. It shouldn't be too hard. Either way, you're qualified for the All Four Hangars Badge. If you're in or near west Ohio (or are visiting someone there), or don't mind the road trip from somewhere farther away like Cleveland or Louisville (KY), it's definitely worth checking out. For those who cannot make it and/or haven't visited recently, here's the current general layout of the museum. As you can see, you have to go through the Missile Silo if you want to get to Hangar Four. I mentioned people who haven't been there recently because Hangar Four wasn't built until 2016, so they may not know about it or what's in it. Depending on when they last visited, they may not know about Hangar Three either. Source: https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Portals/7/documents/maps/nmusaf_map.pdf Technically, I already have a replica hangar - just not for all of the craft on this thread. All the craft in it are mine, as in I built them. Nobody else's craft is in it. It includes the F-35, which is not in the museum, and craft from: The Incredibles movie (IG99 - the plane Mrs. Parr flew to Nomanisan Island in) Phineas and Ferb (Doofenshmirtz Evil Incorporated) The album cover of Club Ninja from Blue Öyster Cult (That freaky-looking space station) The guitar-shaped UFO in Boston's album covers So, basically, I include copies of not only real planes (especially ones not in the museum), but craft from album covers and movies/TV shows. Side note: I tried making a model of Star Command from the Buzz Lightyear of Star Command show, but the rocket kept failing before breaching the atmosphere. You're right, maybe I should start a KerbalX hangar for the replicas in this thread (the ones that are even on KerbalX, that is) - including the ones not made by me. -------------------------------------------------- UPDATE: just started one: https://kerbalx.com/hangars/167846 Doesn't have my Apollo 15 capsule or shuttle because I never posted them on KerbalX since making them was far too lazy. By the way, if I am going to post a shuttle replica, I'm including everything else that comes with it.

A wise man once said "A good soldier never leaves a man behind." Not only does following this mantra reduce the amount of manpower and equipment wasted, but it's great for morale. If you end up wounded, lost, or captured, you can count on your brothers-in-arms fighting tooth and nail to bring you back; sometimes it means fighting their own superiors. In the unfortunate event you do lose your life, they'll still fight to bring you home. Don't expect all the higher-ups to be as eager, though, but that's another story I'd rather not share in a forum for spacefaring game-players and flight enthusiasts. I do not intend to start now, which is why I built this replica of the C-141 Starlifter. The C-141 Starlifter on display in the SPH. I included "Hanoi Taxi" in the craft name since it's the most famous C-141 used (as far as I know). If any aviation or history enthusiasts are looking for the Hanoi Taxi specifically - or just happen to come across it - it would make it easier to find on KerbalX. For those who don't know, the “Hanoi Taxi” (serial number 66-0177) is a C-141 used in the repatriation of American POWs from Vietnam during the conflict's closing days. The plane in question is currently on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio. The fuselage is nothing but cargo bays with external command seats inside arranged in four lines - each fifteen seats long. This is to maintain the image of a real-life empty fuselage with seats installed, just like with the real-life Hanoi Taxi. It also looks way smoother than a cargo ramp that leads up to four Mk3 passenger modules - and given that I ended up with a passenger capacity of 60 as opposed to 64 (plus the 4 crew in the cockpit either way), that’s not a bad trade. It also has a ladder leading up to the back door of the cockpit from the "passenger cabin" (or cargo bay, depending on how to look at it) so kerbals can get in and out of it If you want to modify this plane to carry nothing but cargo, feel free to remove the seats as necessary. Although I wouldn’t say no to this being used as an airliner either - especially one with no class division. Everybody rides coach, after all. This plane has multiple separate SEQ-3C Conformal Storage Units lined up in the fuselage. Most of them are empty, but the two units in the rear each have four EVA kits and large work lamps. The cockpit has eight repair kits and a couple of small work lamps in the highly (opposite of) unlikely event the plane takes damage during its mission. Historic photograph of recently-released POWs in a Starlifter before taking off. Just like this photograph from Earth’s historic records. Although the photographer was competent at his job, he often had trouble keeping his camera still while the plane was moving. Especially with a plane not designed for comfortable rides. Nobody named Jane was on board this time - mostly because all the plane’s passengers and crew for that mission were men. Ladi… um, gentlemen, before we begin our safety presentation, please rise and salute the flag for the playing of our National Anthem. Why wouldn't I put that flag there? The Starlifter doing its best to stay at cruising altitude and speed. At first with MJ aircraft autopilot on, it was bouncing up and down a bit. Eventually, it managed to keep straight and level. Whatever you do, DON’T time warp. Otherwise, your flight will get bouncy (at least mine did during the warp) and you’ll waste fuel. Rare footage of the Starlifter with its cargo door open mid-flight and its bay empty. The Starlifter flying over the ocean to bring POWs back to their home region. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 7.9 km (~25.9k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Velocity: 260 m/s (~582 mph) Flight Time: 3 hours, 30 minutes Expected Range: 3,250 km DO NOT fly over water when this happens More details on how I calculated the range in the spoiler below. If you're not interested, feel free to skip it. The Starlifter landing on Kerbin's grasslands with the reverse thrusters on. I don’t know if the real-life Starlifter had reverse thrusters, but I wouldn’t be surprised since reverse-thrust systems were invented before the C-141 was introduced. Even if it didn’t come with any, I thought it would be cool to have on a KSP replica. @swjr-swis, Well, technically the missile silo isn't part of any hangar - just between Hangars Three and Four. Since there are only seven left in that category (eight counting the one you just did) and to avoid further confusion, I'll specify in the OP that, for the purpose of qualifying for the All Four Hangars badge, Missile Silo entries are (ultra-rare) "wild cards" that can be either a Hangar Three or Hangar Four entry depending on what you lack. So, for everyone else, use it while you can. I'll also add a "One wild card per person" rule so nobody hogs them all (or tried to "cheat" by having two wild cards to fill in the Hangars Three and Four slots), but I might end up lifting it later. In a nutshell, you've earned the All Four Hangars badge. I'll also put your name in the Hall of Fame. If you want to continue making replicas, go ahead. I thought about calling it the "Wall of Honor," but you (kind of) have to be dead to qualify for something named that. To everyone else reading this, now you have something (high) to aim for. Replicas Remaining: 226 FLY, FIGHT, WIN

First of all, that is not a Hangar Three craft. That's from Hangar Four, which contains the Space Gallery. Second of all, I did say that: any and all parts, including DLCs and mods, were fair game. the vehicle has to be functional unless whatever was displayed at the museum could not move on its own. so if just the capsule was there, the functionality requirement would be waived and just a stationary capsule would be fine (like with my Apollo 15 capsule replica). the craft has to look as close to its namesake as possible - and you nailed it. So it's not really cheating so much as it was seizing the chance at an easy shot at a replica. Speaking of easy shots, third of all, Hangar Three has a lot of planes that look easy to copy - like the F-15 (or its Russian twin the MiG-29), U-2, or the A-10 to name four. I'll also (technically) accept another F-86 since the showcase grants an exception to the "no claiming any duplicates" rule for craft that appear more than once throughout the museum (e.g. F-82, B-29). So if you go the F-86 route, as long as you're the one who made it there should be no problems. Its Soviet ripoff, the MiG-15 Fourth of all, great detail you put into this - even down to the display stand. And nice story to go with the mission photo gallery too. Though you got the hangar number wrong, thanks for checking this off the list. As for me, I'm testing a Hangar Four replica as I type this post. It's been airborne for over three-and-a-quarter hours now, and it's already past the third-quarter point around Kerbin. So start packing your footlockers, because the plane arrives tomorrow. Replicas Remaining: 228

As seen in the previews, here's our entertainment for the night. Presenting the X-4 Bantam. The X-4 Bantam on display in the SPH. Since this is an experimental plane, it comes with a parachute in case the test pilot was dumb enough to forget his own. The ailerons weren’t any help in me getting off the runway; they kept moving in the opposite direction, in fact. Even when I pitched down on the controls in an attempt to get up, it got airborne for almost five seconds before it went on an irreversible dip. To give this plane some pitch while maintaining the look of a wingless experimental aircraft (that turned out lame), I hid canards near the front ends of the wings. Subsequent testing proved successful, and you can barely notice the clipped canard. At least the plane’s functional, but (just like in real-life) don’t expect much. I was split over using the standard SPH shot angle or recreating this photo from the X-4’s Wikipedia page. In the end, I decided to maintain uniformity. Finally, a successful takeoff. Seymour Kerman, when he tested this (would-be failed) prototyped a long time ago, decided to fly north. Though it was procedure then to fly west to see if aircraft would go over Alt Test Mountains, Seymour had expressed concerns beforehand that the Bantam would not make it that high. The X-4 cruising north, with this shot looking just like the picture of the real-life X-4 on the runway. Surprisingly, though the plane’s altitude and cruising speed aren’t that good, it was able to maintain a straight-and-level flight path. Seymour having to break cruise to go around the mountains up north - kind of like a trench run. For a plane that was an experimental transonic tailless fighter, it’s got quite an impressive range if it can fly over Kerbin’s north pole. It’s also a nice shot of the northern lights. A notable moment in aviation testing history was when at the time this plane crossed this point, Seymour Kerman’s mother ran into the ATC room and screamed to warn her son about something. WOMAN AT ATC: "Seymour, your plane is on fire!" SEYMOUR KERMAN; X-BANTAM: "No, mother, it’s just the northern lights." Nighttime or daytime? Around here, who knows. 7.26 units of fuel left, and Seymour is halfway around Kerbin after nearly 2 hours and 20 minutes in a polar flight. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 4.5 km (~14.8k ft) Velocity: 230 m/s (~514 mph) Expected Range: ~1,880 km The plane was flying on fumes when it reached the halfway point around Kerbin, so it's best not to push it. When it comes to gas-powered prop engines, I agree. Besides aesthetic, making replicas of old aircraft, and making something for your KSP fanwork-verse (both of which would relate to the "aesthetic" reason), they have no real purpose. Who even needs helicopters to fill out land survey contracts on Kerbin, anyway? Electric-powered rotors, however, do have their uses. Like flying around Eve, circumnavigating Kerbin in the air (possibly) for days without end, and propelling boats, to name three. They don't require an air intake or refueling stops/craft/ISRU, so they're good for any planet with an atmosphere. Making a craft for Duna will be tricky due to the thin atmosphere. @swjr-swis, I will admit that I'm still struggling to get your C-47 replica to cruising altitude and speed, but thank you for providing a replica that works. At least knowing the general concept of the structure, I (and others) will know what to aim for when making larger old planes. That's three hangars now you have under your belt. Only one left from Hangar Three before you qualify for the All Four Hangars Badge, and those planes look very easy to copy on pure stock. And don't worry about me stealing something you want from there, since my next target is something from Hangar Four. You'll find out what and why when I post it. After that, if I ever master making helicopters, my target after that will be from Hangar Two. If I can't do that, then I'll bite the bullet and copy something from Hangar One. Thank you all for helping out. Replicas Remaining: 229

This is mainly for @swjr-swis, but this also applies to everybody else too. I call dibs on the X-4 Bantam since I managed to get a working prototype on KSP1. I just need to post it on KerbalX (after sleeping, eating, working, and exercising IRL) before I show it on this thread tomorrow. Below is a sneak peek of what to expect. You'll all get full details of this aircraft's performance tomorrow. So, if anyone feels guilt-tripped about making more replicas, at least let me have this one please. I'd rather not my work turn out to be for nothing because someone had beat me to it while I was busy. I mentioned swjr-swis specifically because he made the most planes from the Research and Development Gallery - and I mentioned the X-4 in a post replying to him earlier. Thank you all very much, and fly high.

Yes, thank you very much. I also liked the part where you copied Yeager's dive in an attempt to breach Mach 1, but could only achieve it during that short a period (just like in real-life). Also, where did the G-limit warning come from. I don't have it on my sandbox save. It's great that you've been dabbling into the experimental planes, even though they turned out failures. Guess I shouldn't expect much if I attempt to copy the X-4 Bantam - again. However, if you want this cool badge to add to your signature (see my OP for the larger version), you'll need at least one plane from all four hangars. You already have something from Hangar Two, so all that's left to qualify is a plane from Hangars One and Three. Replicas Remaining: 231

I made a replica of the B-52 Stratofortress and posted it in the National Museum of the United States Air Force replica thread. My replica on display in the SPH. Due to the engines being connected to the aircraft’s structural pylons via a M-1x1 structural panel, they’re cut off from the fuselage’s tanks and have to rely on the cylindrical Mk. 1 tanks entirely. In other words, any fuel I put in the fuselage’s tanks is dead weight and my range is reduced. The B-52 flying west at night. In hindsight, I should have waited until sunset to take off. For this test, since the real-life B-52 was a subsonic bomber, I decided to leave the afterburners OFF. I could go faster and fly higher if they were on, but it would probably come at the cost of range. 12 fuel units left per engine, leaving 96 usable fuel units left, and I need to land. I had to use the exhaust to see if I was over land or not, and I was lucky to have been over (I think was) some peninsula. Like I said earlier, the fuel tanks in the fuselage were no good (except for moving the CoM), so all I could use were the eight Mk. I Lf tanks - with one per engine. I had to right-click on one of those tanks to accurately see how close I was to empty. Right now, there’s only 3,200 fuel units usable when ready. The other 750 units in the back are the dead weight. When I turned on map view after landing, I noticed that I was halfway around the world. After further testing with the MJ rover autopilot, I then realized that I've been calculating my aircraft ranges incorrectly the whole time. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Afterburner: OFF Altitude: 9.9 km (~32.5k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Velocity: 220 m/s (~492 mph) Expected Range: 1,885 km Assuming it can still fly that far when loaded with ordinance, if it’s a two-way bombing mission, you’ll need to half that expected range if you want to land at that same airfield - with some fuel left to spare since you’ll be shedding weight after you blow up some enemy bases. The real-life B-52D can fly 13,419 km unrefueled For reference, the circumference of the Earth is approximately 40,075 km Photograph of Amelia Kerman, Jeb’s (late) mother, doing a pinup pose on the nose of a B-52 bomber. Another flight test. This time, the bomb bay doors were open - but the plane itself is unarmed. Although this replica meets the criteria to be accepted in my replica collection (looks like its namesake and functions), I disappointed by its performance stats - especially its range. How can I get the eight engines to connect with the fuselage tanks while maintaining the B-52 look, and can I still use the structural panels or are they a no-no? I think it might have also killed my range in my Jetstar replica. As for my range problem: Thank you in advance for your help.

Ladies and Gentlemen, boys and girls, live from above the jungles of 'Nam, the B-52 Stratofortress. The B-52 on display in the SPH It has the basic look: eight jet engines, long swept wings near the top of the fuselage, a bomb bay, and a conventional tailfin. Due to the engines being connected to the aircraft’s structural pylons via a M-1x1 structural panel, they’re cut off from the fuselage’s tanks and have to rely on the cylindrical Mk. 1 tanks. In other words, any fuel I put in the fuselage’s tanks is dead weight and my range is reduced. I didn’t add any bombs - or anything to act as ordinance - to this one. I didn’t have BDArmory (anymore), and I wanted to see how well it would do without that extra weight. If you want to modify it to carry weapons, go ahead. If you know a way to maintain the B-52 look while allowing the engines to use the fuselage tanks, I’d like to hear about it please. Thank you in advance if you do. The B-52 flying west at night. In hindsight, I should have waited until sunset to take off. For this test, since the real-life B-52 was a subsonic bomber, I decided to leave the afterburners OFF. I could go faster and fly higher if they were on, but it would probably come at the cost of range. Without Kerbnet, I couldn’t really see what was underneath me, which meant it would be hard to find a suitable landing spot when I was very low on fuel. Which is why I should have waited until sunset to take off for a westward flight. 12 fuel units left per engine, leaving 96 usable fuel units left, and I need to land. I had to use the exhaust to see if I was over land or not, and I was lucky to have been over (I think was) some peninsula. Like I said earlier, the fuel tanks in the fuselage were no good (except for moving the CoM), so all I could use were the eight Mk. I Lf tanks - with one per engine. I had to right-click on one of those tanks to accurately see how close I was to empty. Right now, there’s only 3,200 fuel units usable when ready. The other 750 units in the back are the dead weight. When I turned on map view after landing, I noticed that I was halfway around the world. After further testing with the MJ rover autopilot, I then realized that I've been calculating my ranges incorrectly the whole time. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Afterburner: OFF Altitude: 9.9 km (~32.5k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Velocity: 220 m/s (~492 mph) Expected Range: 1,885 km Assuming it can still fly that far when loaded with ordinance, if it’s a two-way bombing mission, you’ll need to half that expected range if you want to land at that same airfield - with some fuel left to spare since you’ll be shedding weight after you blow up some enemy bases. The real-life B-52D can fly 13,419 km unrefueled For reference, the circumference of the Earth is approximately 40,075 km Photograph of Amelia Kerman, Jeb’s (late) mother, doing a pinup pose on the nose of a B-52 bomber. Picture taken by her boyfriend, Jebediah Jeb Kerman (Senior), after they snuck into a hangar for a daring date. Eventually, the pair would get married and have two kids, Vanessa and Jeb. Unfortunately, while Jeb (Junior) was only a baby, Amelia and Vanessa died in a plane crash caused entirely by Amelia’s utter disregard for flight safety. Jeb Senior kept a framed poster-sized copy of this picture at his house in Baikerbanur, in a small room he turned into a memorial for his wife and daughter. Another flight test. This time, the bomb bay doors were open - but the plane itself is unarmed. Wow, my first Southeast Asia section entry. Maybe I should learn how to make helicopters for my next one*; we shall see. If you want to join my quest to replicate the entire museum, which I repeatedly stated I couldn't do all on my own, that'd be awesome. I promise to have a badge ready for you by the time of my next entry here. And if that's too hard, I could always stick with the simple jets. As for my range problem: Replicas Remaining: 232

I built another private jet to succeed the Embracer. After witnessing what it can do, it has earned the throne of WinterOwl's ultimate private aircraft. Not to be confused with any spaceplanes it would build, since this craft is designed to stay within the atmosphere at all times. The Lexie with its cargo inventory on display in the SPH. I was originally going to name it "Lexington," but it didn't really sound like a cool name for a private plane (a ship, maybe). So, I shortened it to "Lexie." The first and most important thing I did was switch the Embracer’s Wheesley engines with Panthers and the air intakes with those more suitable for supersonic speeds. After that, I installed airbrakes, removed the antenna (and the thermometer this time), and programmed a flaps action group. Other than that, everything else on the plane remained the same. Only 5 minutes of flight down, and the Lexie is flying at over Mach 2 at an altitude of 19 kilometers. Pretty neat glow, isn't it? The Lexie flying high over Kerbin after settling at a cruising altitude. It was also at this point where the aircraft had left the dark side of the planet and entered the sunny side. POV: you’re flying so high up you can see Kerbin’s curvature from the cockpit window. And just like that, the Lexie is back in the dark side of Kerbin. Too bad I didn’t get a nice glow shot. The full HUD on when the Lexie has 50 fuel units left (and perfect timing with the shot, too) and requires an immediate landing. The aircraft is less than 100 km from the KSC and I was very high up, so I can get away with gliding the rest of the way. If I had to use engines, they would be in subsonic mode. I didn't log Kerbin's full circumference in the expected range in order to account for pilots who aren't as willing to glide on fumes the rest of the way. Podnand Kerman checking out the moon after landing at 2-7 KSC, and with only 43 fuel units to spare. That was extremely close. Had he spent less time trying to settle for a cruising speed and altitude and bouncing around, he could have spared more fuel and end up with a longer expected range. Lexie Test Run Performance Stats Crew Capacity 1 pilot + 2 passengers Powerplant 2 x J-404 “Panther” Cargo Capacity 12 (6 loaded + 6 empty) Landing Gear Configuration Tricycle Tailfin Dual tail Cruising Altitude 18.9 km Cruising Velocity 775 m/s (Afterburners ON) Expected Range 3,690 km (Able to perform a full circumnavigation flight if the pilot doesn’t mind gliding at the end) And that pretty much describes what WinterOwl Aircraft Emporium's ultimate private aircraft is capable of. Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/Mars-Bound_Hokie/Lexie

I made a business jet using the same airframe design as my Beachcraft. Keyword: jet. The Embracer with its cargo inventory on display in the SPH. I started with removing the prop engines from the Beachcraft (and the cones behind them) and replacing them with jet engines. The Beachcraft was for short-range pleasure flights, and the Embracer was for getting serious. On a related note, the thermometer’s still there in case you want to take thermal surveys (mostly because I forgot to remove it). If you wish to upgrade your Embracer with other scientific instruments, go ahead. After that, per @Hotel26's advice I raised my wings’ AoA by 5 degrees and then rearranged my landing gear in a tricycle configuration. I mean, how many jets do you see with a tailwheel sticking out? I did the same thing with my wings for Plane Prime V4, which I forgot to post on here about. The Embracer turning around and climbing soon after takeoff from KSC. Like the Beachcraft, I had a pretty low liftoff speed. As predicted, I was able to clear Alt Test Mountains with ease. It was just a matter of how to cruise around afterwards. Some time after flying west in the dark (literally), the Embracer is seen flying towards the sun. That was also when I decided I needed to install some more lights after this cruise was done. If one didn’t know the heading, s/he would assume the plane was flying towards the sunrise the whole time. However, it’s technically a setting sun; it’s just flying faster than 175 m/s, which is the speed that sunlight moves west along Kerbin’s surface. After a few hours in-game (and several IRL; time moves slower in KSP with warp off, and I didn't want to risk running out of fuel while on autopilot while I was folding laundry), I took this thumbnail shot of the Embracer flying west high over Kerbin. And surprisingly, at a higher altitude and with a better range than the fourth Plane Prime (though not necessarily a better speed). On the other hand, while the Embracer only has to carry 3 people plus a light cargo load, that other plane has to carry 20 with a larger load. The full HUD on when the plane has 50 fuel units left and requires an immediate landing. Here, one can see: Cruise altitude and velocity. How far away I am from the KSC. In this shot, I am flying TOWARDS the KSC since I’ve already passed the halfway point around Kerbin. How long I’ve been airborne. Whether or not I’m over water, which is real handy if flying at night. Kerbnet was on because, when I started flying the Embracer, I didn’t know if I would need to land in the dark and would therefore need to see if I was over water or not. Of course, it would be hours (both in-game and IRL) before I would get to that point - and it was on the sunny side of the planet too. Jeb Senior (Jeb’s dad) stepping outside after a bouncy yet otherwise successful landing. He had managed to fly 3 hours and covered 3,350 km before he needed to land By the time he was rich enough to buy his own Embracer, WinterOwl had already stopped producing them. Fortunately, he managed to locate a used model that was well-maintained by its previous owner and purchased that one (and at a lower price than what he originally expected). Jeb Senior didn’t want to buy anything supersonic due to his son’s (and late wife’s) history of reckless piloting and he couldn’t risk tempting him with something fast. Embracer Test Run Performance Stats Crew Capacity 1 pilot + 2 passengers Powerplant 2 x J-33 “Wheesley” Cargo Capacity 12 (6 loaded + 6 empty) Landing Gear Configuration Tricycle Tailfin Dual tail Cruising Altitude 9.4 km Cruising Velocity 300 m/s Expected Range 3,350 km Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/Mars-Bound_Hokie/Embracer By the way, is there a website like this one (https://www.mapdevelopers.com/draw-circle-tool.php) in which I can enter a radius and origin point - including the KSC - and see the circle plotted on Kerbin (or any other Kerbol System planet or moon, for that matter). It would be great in determining what places my vehicles can reach if it doesn't have a range greater than 1,885 km, especially if it's electric and there's no sunlight available. That website is great, but only if you dream about flying your KSP creations on Earth.

My sincerest apologies for not posting earlier. Two weeks ago, the museum turned 100 years old and opened its Centennial Exhibit to the public. It showed how the museum evolved from an aviation engineering showcase in 1923 to the largest military aviation museum we all know and love today. Feel free to check out the post I made below for some more details. https://www.ideastream.org/2023-05-16/national-museum-u-s-air-force-100th-anniversary - News article placing the date of the museum's actual 100-year anniversary on May 16th, which fell on a Tuesday. Of course, I already knew this since I had talked to someone working at the museum months prior. Other related media: Now that the warm-up act is over, on to the main event. If you joined the Air Force before 2009, you'll remember having to train in a T-37 Tweet. Also known as the A-37 Dragonfly. The Cessna T-37 Tweet on display in the SPH. I am aware that the real-life counterpart had a crew capacity of 2, but I went for manufacturing simplicity as well as looking like its namesake. The few replicas of the Dragonfly I found on KerbalX look a bit hard to make and messy. Since my KSP headcanon would have this plane be a pre-Famous Four jet trainer, this didn’t have a probe core. Later variants, especially those equipped with modern avionics, would have those. Installing a fly-by-wire would require a longer nose, so I went with a regular nose cone with a retracted antenna sticking out of the end. "WHO IN GOD'S NAME AUTHORIZED JEB TO SET ONE TOE IN THAT COCKPIT?!" Jeb buzzed the tower after taking off at a mere 40 m/s. Understandably, this ticked off everyone in the tower. Jeb flying away from KSC after tuning out ATC (while they were chewing him out for that stunt he pulled). Instead of flying west towards Alt Test Mountains, he chose to fly northwest. "Hey, if it can get over 5 kilometers altitude, it has a decent shot of going over the mountains." Apparently, flying northwest would come with its fair share of beautiful sights. After 45 minutes of continuous flight, Jeb managed to fly 600 km before he needed to land. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 8.55 km (~28.1k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Velocity: 230 m/s (~515 mph) Takeoff Speed: 40 m/s (~89.4 mph) 77.8 knots for you IRL pilots Range: 600 km The real-life T-37B could fly 1,046 km Jeb running away before he could be caught with the plane. When local police found him not long afterwards and dragged him to the KAA to face consequences for his tower buzzing, he sure got in a lot of trouble. When the plane was recovered, it had 5.71 fuel units left - and not a scratch on it. It started out with 145 fuel units, and was burning at a rate of 0.05 (later 0.04) while cruising. Any and all help in completing the list would be nice. Perhaps I should make a badge for those who contribute to this thread, with a fancier-looking one for those who add at least one plane from each of the four hangars. I need to know how to counteract the rolling so I can make stable single-engine prop planes, by the way. Replicas Remaining: 233

I made another Plane Prime. Although it was a bit slower than the last one, it surpassed the cruising altitude and range. Not to mention it has a larger cargo and passenger capacity. Plane Prime V3 on display in the SPH, along with its cargo inventory. Some backstory regarding preliminary designs. I tried four Wheesley engines along the wing like with V2, but it didn’t fly so well. Best-case scenario, it would crash at or before Alt Test Mountains. I then tried four Wheesleys IN THE BACK and a larger T-tail, and that seemed to work. Although I got up to a higher cruising altitude than V2, the speed was lower than V1‘s. Of course, an outcome like that is to be expected when you have the same thrust as V2 but have to deal with a heavier load. Even so, this was unacceptable. So, I included two more Wheesleys along the wings. I still got a slower cruising speed than V2 (but better than V1), but V3 beat its cruising altitude and expected range. And some more backstory, but regarding balancing. If all the tanks were loaded, the CoM would shift so far back that the plane would be literally dragging its tail during takeoff. Even if it managed to get into the air without damage, the pitch might get problematic and the plane would have extra weight to deal with at first. So, the tanks were drained in such a way that the plane would rest on all its wheels when being launched. Judging by the outcome of the test flight, that strategy is highly recommended. Plane Prime V3 starts with 4710 units of fuel, even though it technically has a capacity of 9685. It still has quite an impressive range and a better cruising altitude than its predecessor. The third Plane Prime flying at a heading of 270 degrees. This picture was taken 1200 km away from the KSC (as far as V2 went before having to land), after nearly two hours of continuous flight and almost 3/8 fuel left. More specifically, it had 1675 units of fuel left. Quite impressive, and yet it still has a long way to go. Plane Prime V3 (RETIRED) Performance Stats Crew Capacity 4 crew + 16 passengers Power Plant 6 x J-33 "Wheesley" Total Empty Cargo Capacity 20 (9 loaded + 11 empty) Landing Gear Configuration Tricycle Tailfin T-tail Cruising Altitude 7.4 km (Can go higher) Cruising Surface Velocity 260 m/s Expected Range 2,960 km 815 km from the KSC heading towards it and 3 hours and 9 minutes of continuous flight, and Plane Prime V3 has 200 units of fuel left. It was time to land it, and it went so well. A historic photograph of Deputy Prime Minister Lynson Kerman being sworn in as the new Prime Minister of Kerbin. Earlier that day, his predecessor Kennedy Kerman was shot dead by a then-unknown sniper. Here, the newly-widowed Jacqueline Kerman is seen standing next to the man who would succeed her dearly departed husband. As if the conspiracy theories attempting to answer who was the true mastermind behind Kennedy Kerman’s assassination, including many placing the blame on Lynson Kerman, many who set foot in this plane have claimed to have heard and/or seen ghosts. SCAM (Super-Cool Aircraft Museum) chief engineer Edtrey Kerman pretending to be the Prime Minister after completing a showcase flight at the Kerbal Space Center. One of the guests of honor to fly in this plane was former Prime Minister Bush Kerman Senior, who claimed to have clearly heard sobbing during the flight - even though everybody else on board swore none of them were crying. The strange thing is that no audio was ever released of Jacqueline Kennedy crying, although there were witness testimonies saying that she did. Also Bush Kerman Senior himself was in no position to have heard them himself that fateful day; he was in Krakopolis. So, how was he able to hear crying he could not possibly remember from a past event? On the other hand, an unnamed SCAM tour guide heard the name "Lynson" being yelled in what she described as Kennedy Kerman’s voice. She was far too young to have heard Kennedy Kerman when he was alive, so obviously the only way she would have recognized his voice was from audio taken from that time. However, an extensive web search found no instances where Kennedy Kerman yelled Lynson Kerman's name; in the few times he did mention Lynson, he was rather calm. Feel free to download my craft file and try it out for yourself. I'm in for another busy weekend IRL.

I made Plane Prime V2. For aesthetic and lore purposes, although this plane would perform better than the last one, I didn't expect this to be a suitable transport plane for Kerbin's Prime Minister - at least not forever. Right now, this is the current Plane Prime (V4 or V5; I haven't decided yet). Plane Prime V2 on display in the SPH, along with its cargo inventory. It originally had a conventional tailfin. However, after some crashing during test flights, I noticed that the last Plane Prime had a T tail and, by definition, raised elevators. I then decided to raise the elevators of this plane, although I wanted a different look for it besides the engines. Just like its predecessor, it barely made it over Alt Test Mountains. This is the plane flying at my finalized cruising altitude and velocity Plane Prime V2 (RETIRED) Performance Stats Crew Capacity 2 crew + 4 passengers Power Plant 4 x J-33 "Wheesley" Total Empty Cargo Capacity 9 (7 loaded + 2 empty) Landing Gear Configuration Tricycle Cruising Altitude 5.9 km Clear Alt Test Mountains? YES Cruising Surface Velocity 290 m/s Expected Range 1,200 km Takeoff Velocity 100 m/s Rare footage of Plane Prime V2 landing off-road with its reverse thrust activated. Color photograph of Prime Minister Haparnold Kerman, who once served as an army air corps general, standing in front of Plane Prime after disembarking. According to aides, Prime Minister Haparnold was still drowsy after just waking up from his nap when the plane landed. He had said that "I thought I’d get more time to sleep when we stopped to refuel for the last leg." Since all the (propeller-driven) transports he used to fly in during his military career couldn’t fly farther than 500 kilometers, he was surprised Plane Prime didn’t have to stop halfway through. He later made a point to "…listen to my wife more and actually go to sleep earlier." And that was what kickstarted research into ways to fall asleep faster without resorting to medications. Feel free to download my craft file and try it out for yourself. I'm in for quite the busy weekend IRL.

Look no further, for I happen to have a tourist transport capable of taking up to seven kerbals to the surface of the Mun OR Minmus. You can land on one and orbit the other with it, but you cannot land on both. Tourist Transport Mk. III on the surface of Minmus Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/Mars-Bound_Hokie/Tourist-Transport-III I know that the craft file was uploaded months ago, but that's because it's been buried in my career save files for years and I haven't touched it until recently during a cleanup. Even then, I only edited my craft to correct misaligned engines. After using this to successfully complete tourist contracts in my career save over four years ago, I started a challenge for better tourist transports. Maybe you can use one of those. Hope this helps. Link to the (completed) challenge can be found here:

May 16th, 1923 - 100 years ago today, the Engineering Division at Dayton's (now-defunct) McCook Field started a small aviation engineering study collection. Long story short, that collection was eventually moved to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and grew to become the largest military aviation museum in the world. The museum I'm referring to is famously known as the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio. Birds-eye view of the museum that was taken recently (found on museum webpage) From left to right: Hangar 1 (adjacent to main entrance): Early Years (smaller section) and World War II (larger section) Hangar 2: Korean War and Southeast Asia War Hangar 3: Cold War and Other Aircraft Missile Silo Hangar 4: Space, Research and Development, Global Reach, and Presidential Gallery And to celebrate the museum's 100-year anniversary, it will open the Centennial Exhibit on Sunday, May 21st, 2023. You can bet your stabilizers that I'll be there bright and early that day. Will you? Sources: Email correspondence with museum personnel: https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Upcoming/Events/ - Museum webpage listing upcoming events. In case there's any confusion, the Centennial Exhibit opens on Sunday, May 21st. I first thought it was the 20th, since that was what earlier news articles stated (including one from the museum website itself) but a phone call with someone from the museum cleared that up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Museum_of_the_United_States_Air_Force - Wikipedia page that also contains a detailed history of the museum before it became the multi-hangar site that it is today. UPDATE: this came out early this morning as I was asleep. Turns out, the museum really did start on May 16, 1923. Thanks for the heads-up, Mr. McLaughlin. https://www.ideastream.org/2023-05-16/national-museum-u-s-air-force-100th-anniversary P.S. If you feel up to the challenge, I have a (KSP1) Spacecraft Exchange thread devoted specifically to replicas of aircraft on display in the museum. Any and all help completing this would be nice, thank you.

After I uploaded Plane Prime V1 onto KerbalX (the first version of Kerbin's Prime Minister's official plane), I flew around with one of my old planes from 3.5 years ago: the Aerial Transportation Vehicle. I wondered how well that would serve as a Plane Prime. At the time I made the ATV (aerial transportation vehicle), I just built it as a low-capacity airliner. I didn't plan for anything serious with it, nor did I (realistically) believe I would ever fly it again. Picture of the plane in the SPH This was taken December 2019, before I added the modifications today May 2023 modifications include Autostrutting everything while removing the strut connectors (per @IMLL1's recommendation from years ago) A Kerbnet action group, which would come in real handy when flying in the dark So you can see if you're over water or unsuitable mountains An action group for the ramp, which I had neglected to activate when I first made this plane (UNAVAILABLE IN 2019) Nav and beacon lights, as well as some cargo in the passenger cabin This is the plane flying at my finalized cruising altitude and velocity (see chart below) Although I can fly way faster than 815 m/s, I would rather not scare my passengers by having their aircraft engulfed in flames the entire time And for military veterans and/or fire or plane crash survivors, looking out the window would definitely cause some panic attacks. Aerial Transportation Vehicle (CURRENT Plane Prime) Test Run Performance Stats Crew Capacity 4 crew + 16 passengers Power Plant 4 x J-X4 “Whiplash” Total Empty Cargo Capacity 20 (9 loaded + 11 empty) Landing Gear Configuration Tricycle Cruising Altitude 15.3 km (Can go higher) Clear Alt Test Mountains? YES Cruising Surface Velocity 815 m/s (Any faster and the plane catches fire) Expected Range 3,400 km Takeoff Velocity 110 m/s Landing ~319 km SHORT of the KSC. I flew almost 3,300 km before switching off the autopilot and looking for a place to land I had 500 units of fuel left, but I was over water* so I had to fly around until I found a suitable land mass I wouldn't have known if I was over water or land had I not switched Kerbnet and the auto-refresh on Rare footage of Prime Minister Bush Kerman Junior wearing his old flight uniform. Here, he is standing next to his wife, First Lady Lauren Kerman, in front of Plane Prime. Feel free to download my craft file and try it out for yourself. Also, if you're interested in some Kerbal aviation history, be sure to check out my Plane Prime V1 as well.

If it will help, I have a hangar full of early-to-mid-game craft on KerbalX. I don't know how well they'll work with Planet Jam 2, but they should be a good start. https://kerbalx.com/hangars/163740 I also have a fleet of several SSTOs ready for takeoff (that I have you to thank for helping me design, by the way).

With my old motors, the problem with that was the propeller blade length. My solution: use a smaller motor with smaller blades. And I won't have to sacrifice thrust, either. The latest Mk. I prototype was reduced to 15% power (60 kN) per rotor, while the EM-32S standard rotor has a thrust of 70 kN at 100%. Which is why I not only did gradual turns in my test run, but I switched the front nose cone with Type Bs. I also added rear horizontal stabilizers to the Mk. II along with horizontals, although I don't plan on flying this thing on its own. When it's on Laythe, it's not going for a speed record or turn-heavy action; just an exploration cruise around the water. Here's the latest variant. I added retractable solar panels to decrease recharge time for when this thing is stranded. As I said before, after the water test was complete, I added solar panels on the exterior. The center hull and floats were based on my Amphibian, which worked so well in the past for what it was designed for. When the front nose was digging into the water a bit, I replaced it with a Type B. The nav lights are there to make it easier to see in the dark, although it's probably smarter not to go swimming at night due to not only lowered visibility but the lack of solar power to reduce (if not cancel out) the rate at which power is drained. Though the boat is still a bit nose-heavy, it was nowhere near as bad as Mk. I's was. For best speed on the water, set blade angle to 15 degrees (AND NO MORE). To my surprise, I went faster on props than the Amphibian did on Panthers. You can still go at max speed at just 2/3 throttle. I made it to the abandoned airfield right as the sun was rising. After that test run was over, I decided to put gear on the front and rear tips so that the wheels can have a better grip on the terrain should it get too steep. That was when I increased the blade angle and pushed forward at maximum throttle. Air time. So, anyways, thank you for all your help. Now that the preliminary test runs are done, all I need to do is copy this into my sandbox save, slap it on a rocket to Laythe, send it there, see if it survives re-entry, do a test sail, and then I'm all set for my career save. If anybody has any questions/concerns/comments, please let me know. Again, thank you.

I'm designing an electric amphibious vehicle to send to Laythe whose design is based on my years-old Amphibian. The jet engines were replaced with Breaking Ground props, the passenger capacity was reduced to make room for scientific instruments and reaction wheels, the fuel tanks were (95%) emptied, and the pontoons were replaced with a lot of batteries. Image of the (second-to-latest) prototype. I named it "Saltrider" since the only way Laythe's waters can remain a liquid at below-freezing is if it has a high-enough salt concentration to make it have a significantly lower freezing point. The latest one had wing connectors (and control surfaces) in the back holding up the engines, although it did not make a difference in the outcome of the water test. I'm going electric so I don't get stranded in the middle of the ocean forever when I run out of power. It has retractable landing gear on the side as an anti-crash measure in case it tips over. Solar panels not included, as I need to conduct a successful water test before deciding the placement. Though the land tests looked promising - and I was probably going too fast (85 m/s at a 17-degree propeller blade angle) - the water test was not so much. It was nose-heavy when I got in, and when I tried turning right to I literally went belly-up. I brought back the engines to try and balance things out, but it didn't make a difference - structural pylons or wing connectors. Could you please tell me what's causing the boat to get all nose-heavy and how I can fix this? Here's the craft file if you want to mess with it - https://mega.nz/file/zaAGyIpD#62WNRZzcqXpyO-ipP2ISX5W25pZinpWrzQUbe17sUyI Thank you very much.

Unfortunately, no. I had to disable that action group (I typically use the R button for flaps on aircraft) when the Elevon 3s between the fuselage and the engines deployed in the OPPOSITE direction. How can I correct the flap deployment direction without it affecting which way those control surfaces go in regular (no flaps on) flight. Flaps typically point downward when deployed, they pointed upward. How do I do that on KSP at such a precise angle, or is it pure guesswork? Also, won't this affect the way my engines are pointed too?

I made a plane similar to the Beechcraft Model 18 - also known among military aircraft enthusiasts as the C-45 Expeditor. The Beachcraft on display in the SPH. This was meant as a recreational short-range aircraft and not to be used for any serious survey missions. The thermometer was mostly for show, as one would like to know the temperature of the landing spot while on vacation. Due to the tailwheel landing gear configuration, I had to tilt the aircraft upward a bit to reduce bouncing when it first gets on the runway. Its cargo bay is loaded with EVA repair kits and some science kits, although I do not recommend using this plane for any survey missions unless they're within 340 kilometers of the KSC. The lights are for personal use when you're on vacation or something, like on a beach. You'll be running on fumes at 330 km, so you might want a decent altitude before you start landing at a VERY low throttle. The thermometer and antenna were for show, as: If you're going to go on vacation and/or sightsee, wouldn't you want to know the temperature of where you're going? A lot of planes (especially older ones) have antennae sticking out of their fuselages. If you're interested in the in-universe story behind it, feel free to read the spoiler below: WARNING: contains spoilers for "A Mystery Beyond Science." After a painless takeoff - I didn’t even need to pitch up before liftoff at 80 m/s - I gained some altitude and turned west towards Alt Test Mountains. Sure, the craft was intended for low-altitude sightseeing, but KSP test pilots love to take their vehicles over Alt Test Mountains. So much so I had to include "Clear Alt Test Mountains" as a question in the performance stats. The Beachcraft clearing the mountains before activating the MJ aircraft autopilot. Although the test run flew at an altitude of 7.85 km, it was able to fly over 8 km for a bit. But in the process of attempting to lower the altitude to 8 km, the pilot screwed up and it got stuck at 7.85 km. Rather than try to fix it, Mission Control allowed the cruise to continue as it was. It had already proven to fly as high as the real-life Beechcraft and twice as fast. 95 units of fuel left, and the Beachcraft flew 331 km west from the KSC in 28 minutes. It had a good flight, but it was time to land. Lucky thing it didn’t overshoot the desert peninsula when the LAND IMMEDIATELY alarm went off, or Val would be in a lot of trouble. Descending at a very low throttle for an off-road landing test along the desert beaches. After a two-wheeled landing (that tailwheel didn’t want to touch the ground for a bit), the plane managed to come to a complete stop in one piece. Due to an unforeseen complication, the hatch was obstructed and Val couldn’t get out for a photo. The ladder was moved several times and the cockpit was replaced, but it was no good. Finally, the engines were moved from the center a bit - and just like that, Val was able to get in and out of the plane. Apparently, the blades were too close to the hatch for it to open. While I matched the real-life Beechcraft Model 18's altitude and go twice as fast, I could barely go 1/6th of its range. After the problem with the hatch was taken care of, the plane was taken for another test run. This time, it was flying south along the beaches near the KSC. Although its original owner, Wynter Kerman the Second, did fly here sometimes, most of her sightseeing flights were somewhere else on the planet. Furthermore, the Kerbal Space Program didn’t exist at the time. After it was retrofitted with a probe core many decades later, it was brought here for a test flight. Beachcraft Test Run Performance Stats Crew Capacity 1 pilot + 2 passengers Power Plant (2 x R121) x (6 x R-25) Total Empty Cargo Capacity 12 (6 loaded + 6 empty) Landing Gear Configuration Tailwheel Cruising Altitude 7.85 km (Can go higher) Clear Alt Test Mountains? YES Cruising Surface Velocity 205 m/s Expected Range 340 km Blade Angle 38 degrees (45 is optimal) Takeoff Velocity 80 m/s Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/Mars-Bound_Hokie/Beachcraft

If you want the context and/or have craft to contribute, here's the showcase thread in question:

As more proof that German science is ze finest in the vorld, allow me to demonstrate the Messerschmitt Me 163B Komet. And I didn't have any Blazing Angels flashbacks this time. The Me 163 on display in the SPH. Pilots are unable to get in and out of there due to the hatch being obstructed. Not that this plane was useful anyway. The Japanese counterpart, which the Germans helped kickstart, was intended to be a kamikaze weapon against incoming bombers. Not a good pitch for a brand-new fighter plane. Without the propeller on the nose, this aircraft could have been pure stock. Apparently, the real-life Komet’s tiny propeller operated as a ram air turbine that provided electrical power. Which is ironic because in KSP, the electric rotor it ends up eating power unless the rocket engine is operating. The original design had Rovemax Model M1 wheels, but each takeoff ended up with fishtailing followed by catastrophic failure one second later. So, I had to resort to retractable landing gear for the front wheels so I can have a stable takeoff. Takeoff at full throttle. The smaller rocket motors weren't enough to get this going, so I had to use to the Dart. Just like its real-life counterpart, I had a very short engine run time. Thanks to the Dart engine, this plane was capable of exceeding the real-life counterpart’s maximum speed and altitude by a wide margin. I even went supersonic for a while before easing on the throttle. However, I could not match the real-life Komet's maximum powered endurance (engine run time). As a result, a large majority of my test flight's time was spent gliding. So, yeah, I wouldn’t use this to chase incoming bombers unless they’re high and very close - which is probably what the Germans probably did IRL. Honestly, if enemy bombers are close enough to the point where you have to resort to Komets (rather than just unmanned ground-to-air missiles), then you have a terrible radar detection system. Even if you had a bunch of available Shūsuis and kamikaze pilots, it's best not to use them due to the Komet's reported combat inefficiencies - not to mention its record is riddled with testing and training deaths. The plane landed safely approximately 130 km from the KSC after 20 minutes of flight - most of which was spent gliding. The hatch was obstructed by the fuel tank, so Dilorf Kerman couldn’t get out for a photo. Tim C Kerman noted that she "... looks just like the chick on the old Heinkelian poster next to the Sturmvogel at the Super-Cool Aircraft Museum" (yes, it's actually called the Super-Cool Aircraft Museum). Although Dilorf looks far too young to have grandparents who were babies in the Heinkelian Empire's final days - let alone be an adult test pilot herself in its mid-to-late years - museum employees and KSC personnel alike agree that the resemblance between the two is uncanny. Tomorrow, which happens to be Easter Sunday, marks one year since my first time visiting the Air Force Museum. I then made six more visits in the year that followed, putting my total at seven. As of now, I plan to make Visit Eight on May 20th for the centennial celebration - and Visit Nine some time later for a company event (that I'm leading). Replicas Remaining: 234