panzerknoef

Members
  • Content Count

    515
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

298 Excellent

2 Followers

About panzerknoef

  • Rank
    Airplane Tester

Profile Information

  • Location Flying over the Misty Mountains

Recent Profile Visitors

1,779 profile views
  1. So this thing is entirely dead then? Shame that I'm late to the party, I would've loved to give it a shot... Nobody planning on doing a reboot either?
  2. If you decide to go with a review system anyway, I'd suggest a take one leave one system. Otherwise you'll probably have to come up with a fancy and fair point system. On another note, I'm just about to start my exams so don't expect any reviews from me for a bit.
  3. Test Pilot Review: @KenjiKrafts's - Fae Aeronautics: HSC "Fairie" Figures as Tested: Price: 90.712.000 Fuel: 2760 kallons Cruising speed: 1350 m/s Cruising altitude: 15000m Fuel burn rate: 2.35kal/s Range: 1500km Review Notes: When we first saw the Fairie we thought we weren't seeing it right, that maybe there was an optical illusion, but no... The plane has a single massive landing gear up front and a handful of medium ones in the rear. This extraordinary setup means that the plane sits on the runway at a fairly high angle, making getting aboard a bit of a challenge. Getting up in the back and walking up is a great exercise for the leg muscles though, can't deny that! The other thing that really stood out on this aircraft was the use of Mk 2 crew cabins, a type which we rarely see. Flight behavior is an interesting mix. 4 Whiplashes make for massive thrust and torque, allowing the plane to accelerate very quickly then to get up to cruising altitude equally quickly while breaking mach 1 vertically. So yes, it's fast, but how does it turn? This is where it gets a bit weird. Fae Aeronautics have decided to go with FAT-455 control surfaces, these allow the plane to make very tight pitch curves, however these control surfaces are quite slow. The result of that choice is an odd delay between roll movement and pitch movement which certainly at first lead to some very dangerous situations where we couldn't pull up as fast as we thought we could. Yaw performance is as good as nonexistent, so any course correction has to be done by rolling and pitching. Thanks to the weird landing gear setup the plane is capable of taking off at around 50m/s with any input at all. However, this weird setup does make landing very hard! Not striking the tail is a case of exception on this aircraft, though we're already happy that it destroys itself on landing, that's just a tad safer than on takeoff. The usually handy airbrakes have the weird side effect of sharply pulling the plane towards a random lateral direction which is also fairly unpleasant. The craft also isn't capable of withstanding the G's it can create itself, this does coincide with the brochure, nonetheless it's a fairly unpleasant experience to try and pitch down at cruising speed and next thing you've got no wings. Comfort is pretty reasonable. The Mk2 Cabins are renowned for their incredible comfort after all. Strapping a whole lot of air intakes to them kinda undoes that though, still they can be considered to be about as noisy as a standard mk1 cabin, which is all but bad. The 4 very loud and very screamy engines are placed somewhat away and behind of the cabins, which means that their noise has very little impact on the noise levels in the cabins. Vibrations of the engines will hardly be noticed at all. The planes cruising altitude is just a bit too low for the passengers to be capable of using the Mk2 cabins upwards windows for stargazing, so they're fully reliant on the in-cabin systems for their pass of time. The price though, is rather high. Costing 90.712.000 - more than mentioned in the brochure- it's a very expensive bird to acquire. The part count of 97 is very high as well, combine it with 4 engines and you've got a plane which is exceptionally expensive to maintain. Then there's the fact that it guzzles fuel like nothing else, which drives the maintenance costs up even higher. Should we mention the fact that we have to replace the tail after every 2 flights as well? Then there's pilot training, it'll cost a lot of money for pilots to get accustomed to this aircraft and even then there will be tail strikes. All in all, it's very expensive. The Verdict: Flies weird (and not far enough), looks weird and is more expensive to run than building and maintaining a city. The only positive point is reasonable comfort. The board didn't need a lot of time to decide that this aircraft is not one which we want to add to our fleet.
  4. Test Pilot Review: @neistridlar's - Neist Aircraft Company: Slinky 40s Figures as Tested: Price: 19.061.000 Fuel: 1350 kallons Cruising speed: 950m/s Cruising altitude: 1500m Fuel burn rate: 0.32kal/s Range: 4000km Review Notes: We were quite pleased to hear that there were more members of the Slinky family to be tested, and when this plane rolled out of the hanger, we were still pleased. No flaws can be see on the exterior, no weird design choices, just a good normal and decent looking plane. We put Jeb in the pilot seat and watched him crank open the throttle and accelerate away. The plane took off right around the 45m/s point that it was supposed to take off at. After taking to the air the first thing that stood out was just how agile the plane was. It can fairly easily fly in circles around the VAB! Impressive to us, sickening to the kerbals who volunteered as passengers. Flying in a straight line for a bit we picked up some speed, but we also discovered that the winglets at the back were tuned back to 50%, we -of course- cranked them up to 150%, made a turn, pulled 20G's and lost the wings, point made, having them at 50% is good. After having fished up the wreckage and reassembled everything we took off again, for a more serious attempt this time. Flying up at a 20° angle we got up to 15000m quickly enough and started speeding up. Once again the plane was fairly fast to reach the described 920m/s (which we couldn't keep, so we cruised at 950 instead). While cruising the plane still steered very easily, and it was quite fuel efficient. There's really no bad remarks when it comes to the flight behavior of this aircraft! Comfort does have some pretty major drawbacks though, but nothing can be perfect, and especially not for that price. First of all there's an inline engine, which means vibrations and noise. One can argue that both of those would be a bit dampened by the part between the engine and the cabins, but that's an air intake, so instead it creates vibrations and noise of its own. The result is a ride which can best be described as "an experience", while not saying it's an experience you really don't want. Half the cabins does have a proper view out the windows, the other half sees a wing, so nothing really special there. Price is once again good news though. 19.061.000 is cheap for a supersonic aircraft, and 18 parts is so few that maintenance will pretty much be for free. Not to mention that except for the engine, all parts carry over to the other Slinky aircraft which we've already bought! Despite it flying quite different to the other Slinkys, we don't expect a lot of pilot training costs, simply because of how easy it is to fly this aircraft. The Verdict: We've decided to just give the passengers free headphones and call the vibrations "massage chairs". There's simply no saying "no" to an aircraft that flies so well, so far and so cheaply. We'll gladly take the negatives it has (though if a more comfortable version would be made, we'll definitely look into it). We're ordering an initial set of 16 with an option for 12 more should an improved version be made.
  5. And it only took us like a year or more to get to reviewing it...I was quite surprised by how decent it was despite that oddball design! On another note, yes I'll do some more reviews in the near future
  6. Test Pilot Review: @TaRebelSheep's - Trifekta Aeronautics: Albatross Figures as Tested: Price: 102.632.000 Fuel: 3950 kallons Cruising speed: 280m/s Cruising altitude: 7000m Fuel burn rate: 0.36kal/s Range: 3000km Review Notes: It's a plane, but not as we know it. Gotta say, first time our engineers and pilots laid eyes on this aircraft, their expressions were mostly among the same line, a word which I shall not use here... But despite its extraordinary looks it's not a bad aircraft at all. So, flying... It took us a while to find the flaps because they weren't on the first keybindings, but rather on the latter ones. Once we got a hold of those we powered up the engines and let her roll. First time we tried to actively take off and that ended up giving us a takeoff speed of about 100m/s, too high. However, just letting the plane roll forwards without any control input at all gives it a takeoff speed of the described 80m/s. Still fairly long for a medium regional jet, but totally acceptable. Once in the air we were surprised by the pitch behavior, it's pretty sensitive and the plane can make pretty short loops (to the joy of Jebediah, but our test passengers definitely weren't happy if we can judge by the amount of used barf bags). As expected with a design that has significant weight on the wing edges, the plane has a pretty poor roll rate, combine that with a standard yaw rate and you have a plane that isn't particularly easy to align with a runway. Once you get to cruising altitude (which we guessed would be around 7000m since no numbers were given) it's a very easy plane to fly, you don't have to give any input at all and it'll just fly straight ahead forever, keeping altitude without even the slightest issue. Range was lower than the 3500km mentioned in the brochure, but 2800km of range is still a very respectable number. It also glides exceptionally well, which does compensate for the difficult steering when it comes to airport approaches. With the massive thrust reversers it can also stop fairly quickly. The thing also doubles as a seaplane since it's a piece of cake to land and take back off again from water. Moving on to comfort then. No real complaints in this category. There's no inline engines to cause any significant vibrations, there's no air intakes on or even near the cabins either to do that. The engines are at the end of a very long wing which means all vibrations get absorbed by that and only very little sound makes it to the cabin. Though the high wing does make for a slightly higher sound level in the cabin than you would get with a low wing, but that's about the only complaint we can come up with. Every cabin offers splendid views on the world below, so our passengers will surely enjoy squishing their faces into the windows (should we count window cleaning cost as maintenance?) Finally, price... This is where the Albatross kinda lets down. at 102.632.000 it's an expensive plane, there's no way around it. 66 parts is somewhat above average but not that much, so we don't actually expect a massive amount of maintenance as far as that is concerned. 2 engines also is a fairly standard amount, sure they are big, but once again, no big costs there. The plane does however have a fairly unique flying style and it will take some specialized training for our pilots to get used to this, that's definitely a cost we gotta take into consideration. The Verdict: For such a weird looking airplane, the Albatross really is a very decent craft. Sure it has some bad points in the flight behavior category, but that's nothing that can't be resolved by sufficient pilot training. Comfort is exceptional and it can be used for a wide range of applications thanks to its ability to land on water. The major negative about this plane is its pretty steep price though. Considering everything, we've decided to acquire 5 Albatrosses for use on a wide variety of long haul routes.
  7. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    I've got a craft which can get up to 1700 in no time and reaches mach 1 even before the end of the runway... But it just exploded before it goes anywhere far enough or high enough. I don't think I can beat your record, congrats!!
  8. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    I'd go for mass, going with pure part count pretty much limits the top of the leaderboard to the people with the most powerful computers. Judging on mass allows more people to score high I think
  9. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    Alright that seems fair! I'd say the added planes must have a pilot as well, just for the sake of challenge. A flying probe doesn't count as a fully fledged aircraft to me
  10. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    I've got a little question about the "mothership" challenge thing. Does it have to be capable of carrying those extra planes on top of its full payload? Or can it carry them without the payload? also, @Laie 10:20
  11. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    Yeah I'm already hitting the boundaries of overheating, it's gonna be balancing speed and survival on a knifes edge from now on! Don't even know if I'm gonna be able to beat you... I do think my plane can survive the G forces of a looping at +/- 1400m/s but we'll see... As for the vab killer, just strap some steal beams to the ore tanks and you should be fine
  12. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    Dropping the bombs like that does save a good minute or so of slowing down for a casual bomb run... It's an interesting technique, I'll probably use it on my next run!
  13. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    The OP actually says that there would be different scoring for different plane sizes... As long as those categories aren't implemented it's indeed all about adding more bombs and very little beyond that... Also, 10:43
  14. panzerknoef

    Strategic Bomber Procurement (Reboot!)

    First of all, challenge accepted! Even if it means reaching a few spf! And second I'll do everything to get my F back if you do take it!
  15. panzerknoef

    Asymmetrical Aircraft Challenge

    your remarks have been noted and issues have been resolved!