Jon144

This is just the beginning, I have a much improved version on the way If you so desire, you can replace my original submission with this version, if you don't want to review both. Kerbatros Dash-5A Download: https://kerbalx.com/Jon144/Kerbatros-Dash-5A Specifications and details within the spoiler.

My stock prop development program is really starting to pick up speed. https://kerbalx.com/Jon144/Kerbatros-K4F-Scimitar Really made a lot of progress after looking at some other designs. Mostly integrating fairing technology into my own personal low part count bearing designs.

Sorry to double post but... But I got a corsair inspired plane up to 200 m/s+ at sea level that's also rather maneuverable and pleasant on the eyes, without breaking a part count of 110.

KERBATROS AEROSPACE Dash-4C Electro-turboprop (Stock) Details and download in spoiler.

I would like to call this one the Kerbatros Dash-4C. A fully stock propeller-powered airline. Unlike other planes others and I have made, this uses two AeroFuel M2-100 engines that are powered by fuel cells that consume liquid fuel and oxidizer rather than thermoelectric generators. This feels like a slightly more realistic compromise to infinite range engines, and are slightly less weight despite lugging extra fuel around. At full power they have an endurance of around 2 hours. They are much more fuel efficient than regular jet engines. Each engine contains just 50 units of liquid fuel each and the plane has a range well beyond 1500km. In testing when I replaced these engines with stock jets, I struggled to get 800km range out of the plane with the same fuel load. No speed records will be broken, but this plane's cruise speed of 145 m/s at sea level is still impressive. https://kerbalx.com/Jon144/Kerbatros-Dash-4C Update: I also have a new smaller engine thats more powerful and aerodynamic, able to propel basic planes up to 180 m/s.

Have been working on some more electric propeller planes.

My engines are under 50 parts each, that's probably where the difference is. Was able to do some pretty cool maneuvers too.

Can get up to 60 M/s in level flight with my engines. It's under 400 parts now as well, slightly more part efficient. 9 Is the hotkey used to disable torque on the motors so you can set the trim without having the plane roll away on you. Here you go if you want to work off of this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/s57ghj0cjvgsdah/B-17E-2.craft?dl=0

Sounds like a fun challenge.

I might only get time to later this weekend. Of course I wouldn't plagiarize your work, i'm just curious to see how it works. I have plenty of my designs that are on Kerbal X that i've never uploaded outside the forums lol.

You should look up how propeller pitch works in real life, just like changing gears in a car. Lower gears like lower pitches in KSP create more thrust but also create a lot of drag. Higher pitches like higher gears will allow higher top speeds for the aircraft it's attached to but will take longer to accelerate. So what I and others do is use variable pitch propellers. Maybe you can experiment with these.

Here are the motors I've been using. Feel free to take a look and use them yourself if you'd like. If you follow the directions and make sure to reattach all the internal struts, they should end up rotating very smoothly, smoother than most designs I have seen here.

I would like to present two of my electric motors that I've been building stock biplanes with. These are two of the simplest, robust and compact versions built by myself. Not the most powerful, however. I wanted to share them to help those who are new to building stock propeller vehicles, and to see what the creative minds of the forum could accomplish with them. Feel free to use them in your own craft with or without giving credit to me. Both are capable of achieving 80 m/s top speeds with lightweight aircraft. AeroPuff M1-80 (80 SAS Torque Motor) The AeroPuff M1 has a slim, long profile perfect for smaller airplanes like those pictured in the spoiler. Due to the use of the smaller SAS modules, it's less weight efficient than the AeroSpin series, but still very compact. Download: https://www.dropbox.com/s/e8qipt7ujmket37/AeroPuff M1-80.craft?dl=0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AeroSpin M1-50 (50 SAS Torque Motor) The AeroSpin M1-50 is much more weight efficient, half the weight compared to the Aeropuff M1-80 while not half the power. This is because it uses the larger SAS units, so while being more efficient is much larger. Download: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d3uqctj0hzme6gd/AeroSpin M1-50.craft?dl=0 DISCLAIMERS: 1. Loading the sub-assembly may lead to the struts inside the bearing to detach themselves, even if they still visually appear to be connected, they physically aren't. For safety, please zoom inside the bearing and manually replace the strut connections to assure the smoothest functionality after loading in and attaching the engine. ^^^ Failing to do this might cause instability ^^^ 2. The default propeller setup comes with an action group [0] which toggles propeller pitch, using the action group will enable a slow speed/high thrust mode for better climb and takeoff performance.

I'm planning on a circumnavigation attempt using one of my stock electric biplanes. I know flying is against the rules, but the plane i'm going to attempt to fly cruises around 70-80 m/s. It's going to be a durable little bush plane that I can land frequently to plant flags, and some rovers are probably faster. It kind of contrary to the challenge, but it's the closest circumnavigation challenge I can find since the plane will be flying so slow. Especially since I will have to fly it in real time to prevent the bearing from breaking, requiring several days of flight. Even if it doesn't satisfy the challenge I might just post updates in this thread since it will be a herculean mission in of itself. Can at least make an electric boat of sorts that I can use to do a legit attempt.

I find that each plane needs its own propeller pitch for maximum thrust efficiency, and this changes during flight. I like to have a hotkey that deploys the control surfaces so I can have a low speed and high speed setting to work with. So for takeoff I can have low speed high thrust and then switch the engines over to high gear for higher top speeds. Also depending on how much SAS torque your motors use, more propeller surface area might be necessary. For instance, with my last biplane that used a 50 SAS torque motor, I needed 8 of the small control surfaces to get optimal thrust efficiency (4 clipped inside of 4 for aesthetics). I might be interested in getting my hands on the craft file and replacing the motors with mine.

Looks like you might have the blades pitched too far forward. Try decreasing their angle of attack. Higher pitches mean faster top speeds with mediocre low speed thrust. The opposite is true; high thrust at low speed.

Yep, Just 2 round tanks to form the actual bearing supported by solar panels. A new twist on the old stayputnik bearings that used to be popular. There is a download link here:

So happy people are into propeller planes again. Still working on perfecting my biplane. Have a 50 SAS torque motor powering this guy to 80 m/s at sea level.

Thanks! That means a lot from you

Thought that I would try and re-join the club I think i'm the only person going back in time with these designs rather than forwards!

I'm happy to present my newest creation, my first published electric plane. I've seen the forum take a huge interest in electric powered flying contraptions, many poorly miniaturized. I decided I would fix this, with one of my smallest and lightest planes to date. I took inspiration from an ancient popular vehicle, MajorJim's biplane. Yet unlike this, an authentic biplane needs a proper propellar! So I developed a new, very compact electric motor and bearing to use! It's quite a fun little bird to fly, and excellent to explore Kerbin with if you can tolerate its slow speed compared to jet aircraft. I have much faster electric planes in the work, but none are as small and aesthetic as this! I love old school aviation and WWI birds in particular, which is where I got most of my inspiration. I might release the motor/bearing as a sub-assembly for people to toy with in the future for small, slow birds. Directions After decoupling, trim settings should be used to power up the motor using alt+e. The propellers also have variable pitch settings. To toggle between low speed mode and high speed mode, switch to the propellers and press 0. Low speed mode will generate more thrust at low speeds. High speed mode will allow higher top speeds but with less acceleration. For tight maneuvering, switch to low speed mode. Use this like gears on a car or a bike. To land, switch to the propellers and hit alt+x to reset the trim and disable the motor. The plane has no brakes and instead uses a tail skid. Download: https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0ozbkm0olis51j/Kermens Korsair S_Ia.craft?dl=0 Weight: Approx 4 tons. Top speed at sea level: 80 m/s 178 mph

I agree with no roleplay as a kerbal. Its a rule that makes sense for the forum given the complications it could pose. When I spent time in the rocket builders I had a hard time understanding when someone was being legitimate or not. It's unfortunate but makes sense and should probably stay. Could always go on some private forums and do it where people won't get confused. The problem is a collaboration thread like the rocket builder's can't exist without some sort of assigned roles and hierarchy... Like... so and so... build this by this deadline... etc. even if it doesn't have to do with roleplay. A simple solution could be to just keep these discussions through private messages or emails while later posting progress on these projects in the threads themselves. This sort of thing is already possible on the spacecraft exchange. The problem though is that in a high volume scenario a lot of stuff gets pushed off the front page of the forum if you have people repeatedly posting in these rocket builders megathreads. If you had like 12 of these threads going on at the same time with a continuous presence on the front page lots of personal showcase threads would be pushed off and not many people would get to see them. That's why it would make sense to make two separate sub-forums in this event in my opinion. It only works as-is now due to the much lower traffic compared to the peak days. Just my 5-cents.

Absolutely. I'm more-so suggesting that better rules would be implemented going in to prevent such things from happening again after witnessing what happened to the original. Keeping the rocket builders as a subforum for collaboration and only collaboration to compliment the spacecraft exchange for showcases. It might be a pipe-dream but we have a right to dream. Of course there's no point to do such things now given the loss of traffic as you've pointed out. It's all hypothetical given that a KSP2 may never exist.

This was the first mun lander that I made back in 2013. Note the old smooth surface it used to have...