Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'aircraft'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 131 results

  1. neistridlar

    [WIP] Neist Airliner parts

    My vision for this mod is to create stock alike believable parts to build passenger planes with. It is inspired by Airplane Plus, and will be made to supplement it as well as the stock parts. Here is an album with some concept art and work in progress screen shots: https://imgur.com/a/fAViy And here is an album showing up the semi finished parts: https://imgur.com/a/ljyIgIH Parts currently in the mod: Download at: https://github.com/neistridlar/Neist-Airliner-Parts Tweakscale patch by @TMasterson5: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g45l0djvbmypl3e/AABZ033reYyTd_6xV17txTR3a?dl=0 I am pretty new to modding in general, so if you have advise or suggestions you would like to offer, please do so. I do believe, however, that I have many of the skills required. My plan is to use Fusion 360 along with Blender for modeling, Gimp and Inkscape for image and graphics editing. I do know a little C++, python and matlab, which might come in handy, though I have never programmed anything with more than a command line interface, so I expect to have a few things to learn if I want to get into that side of modding. Also I want to set this up so that it is easy for someone else to take over in the case that I should disappear (knowing my self I usually don't stay focused on one thing for more than 1-2 years at a time), so any suggestions as to how to accomplish this would be welcome. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
  2. Airplane Plus Powerful stockalike parts for aircraft enthusiasts. Feedbacks would be helpful. And if you have time, please take the Poll: Click here to vote on what part do you want to be added Download at: Spacedock · Curseforge Want to support me? You can on either of these: PATREON User Patches: Tweakscale Compatibility RPM Compatibility AJE Compatibility F-16 Cockpit RPM Remotetech Config Community Tech Tree Sound Issue Workaround is under "Issues" Below If you want assist in hovering, I recommend this mod I'm using Craft Files (Click Image): Release 22-24: Release 20: Old Files: Extra Images: Old Part Selection Images: -- Collection of Aircraft Photos: https://imgur.com/a/ySFgL Old Album: http://imgur.com/a/6kDLM -- Huey in Action: Machbuster Video: Extra: Demonstration of the Tilt-Rotor function, assisted VTOL landing and New Diagonal Gear Other videos: Latest Changelog: Installation: Remove old folder if there's an old installation. Copy the GameData folder into your root folder. -Included in the pack are AirplanePlus and Firespitter folders. It also packs ModuleManager* *I do not own these mods, I merely packed them in for Airplane Plus to be functional and avoid linking downloads for dependencies. Big thanks to their Authors. FAQ: License: *I only take credit on my parts. Firespitter and Modulemanager which are included in the pack are made by different authors with their own licenses. Most performance configs powered by @Tanner Rawlings Shout out and big thanks to @acc for doing a test run back then. @kiwinanday helped a lot on producing important info in reconfiguring performance, thanks a lot!
  3. 1:1 Scale Replicas Full stock, full scale, full power In a scaled-down universe filled with scaled-down Kerbals, it's easy to forget how big real planes are. I've been building planes to the same scale of their real counterparts, enabling more accurate replicas with functioning mechanisms like swing wings, moving lift engines, and the odd GAU-8 Avenger. Panavia Tornado Fairchild-Republic A-10A Thunderbolt II "Warthog" Shuttle Transport System Northrop T-38 Talon Lockheed L-133 Starjet Yakolev Yak-38 Forger Boeing-Saab T-X Trainer Aircraft Dassault Mirage 2000 North American F-100D Super Sabre Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-200 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 North American F-86 Sabre Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor Dassault Rafale Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Lightning II Republic F-84 Thunderjet Concorde McDonnell Douglas F/A-18B Hornet General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon Grumman F-14 Tomcat (MULTIPLE VERSIONS) McDonnell Douglas / Boeing F-15 Eagle + F-15 ACTIVE STOL/MTD McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II Lockheed NF-104A "Zoom Climber" Sukhoi Su-27M/Su-35 Flanker-E More will be posted as I make them. Feel free to contribute you own scale replicas or suggest new build ideas!
  4. AVeryNiceSpacePenguin

    F-4 Phantom II

    F-4 Phantom II: .CRAFT file:https://kerbalx.com/KAS/F-4-Phantom-II
  5. Brikoleur

    Brikoleur's Guide to VTOL Aircraft

    Level: Intermediate/Advanced: You need to be able to slap together a plane that flies reasonably well before attempting a VTOL. Background reading: Start with the fantastic Basic Aircraft Design tutorial in this very forum. Craft used to illustrate this tutorial: BAK Cyclone BAK Karmilla BAK Drakula BAK Zephyr BAK Bumblebee What's a VTOL aircraft? VTOL stands for "Vertical Take-Off and Landing." A VTOL aircraft as discussed here is a craft that's designed to fly aerodynamically, using lift produced by lifting surfaces, but take off and land vertically. That's what this guide is all about, so we're not talking about VTOL rockets that don't make use of wings to produce lift. We're also not discussing helicopters here, because stock kerbals have not invented the propeller, and stock propellers are a whole big topic of their own. So this guide is about atmospheric craft designed to fly by making use of lift generated by wings, which can take off and land vertically by use of downward-pointing jets or rockets. This guide also applies to STOL (Short Take-Off and Landing) aircraft which do their thing using downward-pointing jets or rockets, because they're pretty much the same thing. Their hoverjets just have a TWR of less than 1.0. Why VTOL? Because they're fun and educational and you can. Next question? No, seriously. Is there a point? There are a few missions for which a VTOL aircraft is ideal. Kerbin has some biomes that are difficult to reach any other way. The same applies to Laythe, although it has gentler topography. Finally, it is really difficult to land a HTOL atmospheric craft on Duna because of the thin air: you'll be going really fast and terrain is really bumpy, so there's a huge risk of ending up as a big ball of fire, whereas it's very hard to land a conventional rocket lander precisely, like when you're aiming for your surface base. On the other hand, atmospheric craft are superb for exploring it for the very same reason – you can scout for the perfect spot for your base, then land precisely there. A V/STOL atmospheric craft built for Duna can drop you on any dime, anywhere on the surface. But mostly, the answer is still "because they're fun and educational and you can." The BAK Cyclone hard at work on Duna. It's a flatbed freighter suitable for shuttling base modules to and from the surface. The cargo is near the centre of mass, but because it can shift, it's important to adjust the exact balance by tuning the power on the nose hoverjet... The basics At its core, a VTOL aircraft is a plain old aircraft, with downward-pointing jets that produce a TWR of > 1.0 with the vector centred on the craft's centre of mass, and some way of controlling its attitude when it is hovering, because control surfaces do nothing at an airspeed of zero. Getting all of this into one craft is a pretty intricate business, however. In particular, there's one constraint that needs special attention: centre of mass, and the invariance thereof, as you burn fuel. In other words, your fuel tanks need to be placed symmetrically around the centre of mass so it doesn't shift as the tanks dry, and you need to get your vertical thrust vector exactly aligned with said centre of mass. Regular HTOL aircraft can afford to be a bit sloppy with this because aerodynamic forces will effectively obliterate moderate shifts in CoM -- if your plane gets a bit more tail-happy as the tanks drain it's no problem, as long as your CoM stays ahead of your CoL. Mostly anyway. Not so with VTOLs: if the CoM shifts, you're not going to be able to land vertically anymore. Here's how you go about building a VTOL under these constraints. Build yourself a plane. However, don't put any fuel tanks on it yet, and empty any fuel-containing parts that you are using. Switch on the CoM and CoT overlays. Set the thrust limiter on your main engines to zero. Your CoT vector will disappear. Add enough downward-pointing jets to lift the plane, as symmetrically as you can around the CoM, in a minimum of two pods (fore and aft). (You can add more pods to the sides if your body plan permits it.) Adjust the thrust limiter on the fore (or aft) hoverjets until the thrust vector lines up with the CoM. Add fuel tanks symmetrically around the CoM. Add RCS jets to the bottom of the craft, at the nose, tail, and wingtips. Don't forget the fuel – Vernors need oxidant, the others need monoprop. (If you're building a very small craft, you can just use a reaction wheel instead. But that's less cool.) Set up your control scheme: one action group for toggling the hover jets, another action group for toggling the main jets, plus yet another one to toggle the hover jet bays, if you're using them (as you should). There, done. Simple, eh? Hoverjet design The first challenge you're likely to hit is choice of hoverjet. The second one is likely to be aerodynamics – if you just stick on some downward-pointing jets, you will find that they produce a lot of drag, which is going to be really inefficient. Your plane will be slow and have limited range, or you'll have to make it a lot bigger to brute-force your way around that limitation. The solution is to house the hoverjets in a cargo bay of some kind, with the doors opening downwards. That way you can tuck them away for normal flight, and expose them for hovering. There are lots of ways to make this work, but here are some designs I've used successfully: Juno in a Mk 1 utility bay. Stick it inside the utility bay, rotate it to point towards an opening, move it until it's completely inside. These are easy, pretty light, and you can add more of them – within reason – for more lifting power. Array of Junos in a Mk 2 cargo bay. This needs scaffolding: you need to put something in the cargo bay that lets you attach the Junos to it. A short Mk 2 bay will fit an array of 9 Junos, and a long Mk 2 bay will fit 18. That's a lot of lifting power – three Wheesleys' worth in the bigger bay! Also a lot of parts. I hope you have a fast computer. For rocket-powered hover, use Spark, Aerospike, or Vector (if you really need a lot of hover power). Terriers will also work on Duna. Sparks will fit in Mk 1 utility bays, the bigger ones will fit in the bigger cargo bays (Mk 2, 2.5m utility bay, Mk 3). Giving them air Air-breathing hoverjets need intakes. At this point you'll probably need to go back to the plane design you started with, because air intakes are dry mass and will shift the CoM as you add them. Hint: The engine pre-cooler and engine nacelle are fantastic air intakes, and they can be mounted in-line or combined with other elements. You don't have to use their fuel capacity – you might want to leave them dry if they're not symmetrical to the CoM. Hover control The main challenge for hover control is to keep the craft horizontal. If it starts tipping in one direction, you're really likely to flip over and crash dramatically, like a tree falling over. If additionally you can give it a controlled tilt and hold it there, then it'll start accelerating in that direction, like a helicopter. This can be most helpful when transitioning to or from level flight. Option 1: RCS RCS will get the job done nicely, and looks cool to boot. You will need more jets at the nose and tail than on the wingtips, as there will be more forces on pitch when transitioning to or from level flight. Your choice of RCS jet is the Place-Anywhere or the Vernor. You may need to add several on bigger craft. Option 2: Reaction wheels Reaction wheels will balance smaller craft just fine, but are probably insufficient for bigger ones. Managing centre of mass One of the most finicky problems with VTOL craft is managing centre of mass. In principle it's simple – just place your fuel symmetrically around the dry CoM, and centre your vertical thrust vector on it – but... how? Use wing-mounted engine pods on pylons. Engines are dry mass. Mount them on pylons on the wing, and it's easy to move them forward and back to fine-tune the CoM. Put fuel tanks outside your main stack. Wing-mounted tanks, wingtip tanks, drop tanks, and side-mounted tanks flush with the body all work, as long as they can be moved backwards and forwards relative to the dry CoM. If you don't mind a bit of clipping, you can even make the latter look pretty good by clipping them a bit in the body. It makes no functional difference, but if you consider it cheating, don't do it. Use a long, light tail section. Long tails are good for stability anyway. If you make a long, light tail, you can adjust the balance of the craft by making it slightly longer or shorter without adding a lot of weight or making big design changes. Body plans I've found a few body plans to be especially amenable to conversion to VTOL. They have in common that it's easy to tweak the balance by moving things around, rather than having to add or remove pieces. Twin-boom The twin-boom design is one of my favourites, largely because it looks cool. In a twin-boom design, you have one hoverjet at the nose, and one in each of the booms. Light craft have a single engine at the rear of the fuselage. Larger ones have additional wing-mounted pods. The BAK Karmilla. This one is balanced with reaction wheels. It uses six Mk 1 utility bay-mounted Junos for hovering. The BAK Drakula. A bigger twin-boom design using two arrays of 18 Junos on each boom and a single array of 9 on the nose. Twin-Pod A twin-pod design is similar to a twin-boom, except that it has a conventional tail extending from the fuselage. The hoverjets are housed in the big wing-mounted pods. The BAK Zephyr, a rocket-powered VTOL craft designed for conducting science missions on Duna. It is entirely powered by Terriers. The absurdly big wing and control surfaces make it highly economical for high-altitude supercruising. The BAK Cyclone, delivering a station module to Duna. Note the landing area markers. The Cyclone uses Aerospikes for propulsion. Rockets are much less efficient than air-breathers, so it needs to be much bigger than a Kerbin-bound craft performing the same mission! Control schemes and flight To fly a VTOL craft, you need to be able to perform the following actions, which must be bound to a an action group: Toggle the hover jets Toggle the forward jets Control attitude If you have full RCS control, you will additionally need control for that, and if your hoverjets are inside pods, you will want a control for toggling them too. Taking off The procedure for a vertical take-off is as follows: Hoverjet pods OPEN Forward jets OFF RCS ON SAS ON Hoverjets ON Throttle MAXIMUM When off the ground at a sufficient altitude to clear obstacles, main jets ON When at sufficient speed for aerodynamic flight, hoverjets OFF, pods CLOSED, gear UP The procedure for a short take-off is the same, except that forward jets and hoverjets will both be ON from the start. The craft will lift off once generated lift + hoverjet thrust overcome its mass. Landing To land a VTOL aircraft, approach the landing zone as you would with a regular HTOL craft, until on final approach. Then: Hoverjet pods OPEN Gear DOWN Throttle ZERO Main jets OFF Hoverjets ON Keep pitching up as you approach stall speed. When you're close to it, INCREASE THROTTLE until your rate of descent nears zero. Your airspeed will also fall. When your airspeed is low enough that aerodynamic control is getting sluggish, RCS ON, SAS ON. Control your vector primarily with pitch, and your descent rate with throttle. When your airspeed is near zero and you're above your landing spot, reduce throttle until you start descending. Touch down, CUT throttle, CUT engines, BRAKES ON. You've landed. ...and that's it really! I hope you've found this short tutorial useful. Have fun with your S/VTOL craft – and don't forget there are more ways to do them as well, including helicopter-like things that don't fly aerodynamically at all. My first VTOL craft was the Bumblebee, and it's still one of my favourites!
  6. Applies to KSP versions: 1.0.4 - 1.5.x TL/DR: Among other things, this post explains why your reentering Space Shuttle replica and other winged craft can be unstable even though you built it with Center of Lift (CoL) behind Center of Mass (CoM). It also explains how you can improve general stability of any winged with Angle of Incidence (AoI), while at the same time making the craft very SAS friendly, and able to fly straight without SAS. The difference between CoL and Aerodynamic Center Longitudinal Stability, the ability of the aircraft to self stabilize, is attained by having the Aerodynamic Center+ behind CoM. +) The wikipedia explanation for how to calculate the Aerodynamic Center for an aircraft is in the spoiler below. I find it useful to imagine the Aerodynamic Center as an arrow that pulls backward in your craft, relative to it's movement, while the CoL pulls perpendicular to the direction of movement. Lift influences the Aerodynamic Center because, among other things, lift creates drag, but it is only a dominant part while the craft is pointed near prograde. When the craft points away from prograde other types of drag become dominant. CoL actually has less effect on stability, than either Center of Drag and Aerodynamic Center. The CoL actually needs to move to be able to control the craft. To pitch down it needs to move behind CoM. To pitch up the CoL needs to be moved in front CoM. Left and right for roll. And that is exactly what control surfaces do*. You can see this in action in the SPH. Create a simple aircraft mockup, with a handful of structural fuselage. Select the root part and Shift+S, to give it a little AoA, because that's needed for the wings to create lift. Add a couple of small wing panels with control surfaces in mirror symmetry as elevators, either at the front or back. Turn on CoM and CoL and add a couple of larger wing panels with control surfaces in 2x radial symmetry, and place them so CoL is on top of CoM. Using the Rotate Gizmo you can now directly see what really happens to the CoL, when control surfaces move, by rotating them slightly up or down. *) I'll ignore yaw for now. It doesn't contribute to CoL in the same way, because it's a vertical surface. In the SPH yaw is shown as a rotation of the CoL marker. As long as the Aerodynamic Center stays behind CoM, designing your craft with CoL in front or behind of CoM doesn't change aircraft stability much, even in KSP, it just changes how much control input you need to apply, to fly straight. And keeping the Aerodynamic Center behind CoM is the hard part. We can't see the Aerodynamic Center, and for many designs it is close enough to CoL, because large control authority can move the CoL to CoM, so that the CoL works OK as a stand-in for Aerodynamic Center, during design. But the closer then CoM is to the rear of the craft, the worse it gets. The Aerodynamic Center is now significatly in front of CoL. So even if CoL at design time is behind CoM, the Aerodynamice Center might be right on top of CoM or in front of it. This is why most people believe CoL needs to be behind CoM. And with the available information it is the right thing to do. Except it's not always enough. This is also one of the reasons why Shuttles in KSP are so hard to get stable, even when the CoL is far behind CoM. If the Shuttle isn't built to account for the invisible Aerodynamic Center, the mass and wings are often concentrated in the back, but that long fuselage, with lots of drag, pulls the Aerodynamic Center in front of CoM. The result is a lawn darting shuttle, because of CoL too far back, which at the same time spins out of control, because of Aerodynamic Centre being in front of CoM. This has led people to accuse the aerodynamics or the cargo bays of being bugged. Which is understandable given the information available at design time. Angle of Incidence (AoI) Most of us were taught how lift works with pictures like this.Pictures showing lift from cambered wing profiles without Angle of Attack. It's not completely wrong, but it's missing a big part. Most of the lift comes from Angle of Attack, not from the cambered shape. But because of how we were taught, we all have a tendency to imagine wings mounted parallel to the fuselage. On top of that KSP defaults to wings mounted that way. When really we shouldn't. And to make things even worse, KSP does not model wings as cambered profiles. Which means wings in KSP always need Angle of Attack to provide lift. By giving the wings "built-in AoA", Angle of Incidence, the craft can be pointed prograde while still creating lift. That reduces fuselage drag greatly. If you mount wings with no Angle of Incidence, then the fuselage has to point away from prograde (the direction of movement) in order to get the wings to create lift. This creates a lot of drag. In real life even cambered wings are mounted with incidence, for the same reason. There is no one AoI that works for everything and it isn't necessarily most optimal to have the fuselage pointed directly prograde, because the fuselage can also contribute to lift (not just Mk2). But in my experience it is always better to have at least 1° AoI than none. Personally I use between 1-5° Angle of Incidence on my designs. I don't have any set rules, but fast craft and/or big wings, needs smaller AoI, and high altitude needs bigger AoI. For SSTO spaceplanes, I've had good experiences with designs that can fly at 0° pitch, without losing or gaining height near sea level at 350-400 m/s. My Solutions Until KSP is able to show the Aerodynamic Center, I use the rule of thumb, that CoM of the craft needs to be as close as possible to midway between nose and tail, and never closer than 2/3 of the craft length towards the tail. Not a very accurate solution and doesn't work for all designs, but it has worked OK for me. Additionally, I design my crafts so the forward most wing has more Angle of Incidence than those behind it. That works effectively as if the elevator has built in pitch, which you can use to move the CoL on top of CoM, without compromising stability. Here are some examples. A stable conventional design (craft file) The conventional straight wing design with CoM forward of the middle. It's a breeze to get stable with CoL on top of CoM, because the Aerodynamic Center is most often behind CoL. Nonetheless, this design has 2° AoI on the main wing to reduce fuselage drag, and no AoI on the tail plane. A stable canard design (craft file) Canard designs, the most prevalent type in KSP, probably due to the way engines are massed in KSP for the LEGO™-modularity and gameplay balance. CoM is often way behind the midpoint, which means the Aerodynamic Center will most likely be in front of CoL. If the CoM isn't too far behind, you might get away with initially designing it with CoL a good bit behind CoM, using CoL as a stand-in for Aerodynamic Center. Once you've tested that it flies stable, you can then add a little more** AoI to the Canard than the main wing, to move CoL up to CoM. If the CoM is far behind the midpoint, see the Shuttle designs. It will now be possible to fly the craft without you or the SAS having to constantly apply pitch-up. It won't reduce drag, but it will make it easier for you or an autopilot to control the craft. The shown craft has a fixed canard with 4° AoI and the main wing has 2° AoI. **) Only very rarely will it be required to have more than 2° difference between main wings and tailplane/canards in KSP. An unstable shuttle design A stable deltawing design (craft file) Shuttles and other pure deltawing designs, are the hardest to balance and require great care taken during design to make sure the CoM doesn't fall too far back. If the CoM is far behind the midpoint, you may be forced to redesign it. It might not be possible to stabilize it without adding dummy weights near the cockpit. Moving the fuel tanks forward might help initially, but instability could re-emerge when the fuel is spent. If the CoM isn't too far behind, you might be able to do something similar as with a Canard designs, by initially designing it with CoL a good bit behind CoM, using CoL as a stand-in for Aerodynamic Center. Again, once you've tested that it flies stable, you can then use the Rotate Gizmo to prebake the elevons with some pitch up, to move CoL up to CoM, to get the craft to fly without you or the SAS having to constantly apply pitch-up. The deltawing jet shown here, has 2° AoI om the main wing and the elevons have been angled up 2° from their default attachment angle. Additionally, the big wing strake has also been angled up 1° more than the rest of the wing. Test showing increased stability with AoI Edit 2016-03-01: Fixed some grammar and clarified a few sentences. Edit 2016-11-03: Added applicable KSP version. Edit 2016-12-01: Added AoI image. (source)
  7. Scarecrow

    F4 Phantom

    Welcome to my semi-scale F4 Phantom. Not intended to be a true scale replica, but hopefully giving the feel and flavour of the legendary Phantom, this version is easy to fly and completely stock. Only 2 action group keys to remember : 1 toggles the afterburner on and off and 4 toggles the ladder. That's it. Once launched on the runway, turn on SAS, throttle up and stage the engine. With no further user input, the Phantom will take off at around 110 - 120 m/s. What could be easier? Download the craft file from KerbalX
  8. I have seen one other suggestion topic about this before and it was abruptly closed and not re-opened again. Really my question is why don't we have propellers yet and what might the chances of us getting them be? (And yes, I'm aware of mods, but I happen to like playing games stock)
  9. The_Cat_In_Space

    Mk1 Drone Core?

    Hello! I have built many craft with Mk1 sized parts, but I find it annoying how there is a Mk2 Drone Core, and yet nothing for Mk1. Sure, we have the CH-J3, but that is not capable of controlling a craft. I suggest a Mk1 drone core, maybe it could be a long nosecone, or like the Mk1 cockpit but with the windows covered and replaced with wires or panels. Thoughts about this?
  10. Serving no specific purpose, and with a relatively short range, depending on engine mode used, this is an easy to fly aircraft with no vices. Turn on SAS and throttle up, and this plane will happily take off on it's own with no further user input. It's also easy to land with a gentle glide ratio that only needs a nudge of back stick to settle it back on the runway. Download craft from Kerbal X - Foxtrot
  11. Carrier Vessel eXpansion You can Download it here! Album: https://imgur.com/a/L3mph Images: Videos: What is CVX? CVX is a low parts mod that allows you to build a Nimitz class Aircraft Carrier. The mod currently contains 5 parts: 1 screw, 1 rudder, 1 hull, 1 radar tower, 1 bridge tower. The idea behind CVX is so players can explore Kerbin while carrying aircraft and not have to worry about having enough fuel, or... You just want an aircraft carrier without worry about tanking your cpu with parts count. What is Included? 5 parts: 1 rudder 1 screw 1 hull 1 radar tower 1 bridge tower Why only one carrier? More ships are on the way. Soon I'll be releasing a Wasp-class LHD, Essex-class CV (for recovering the Kapollo) and an Admiral Kuznetsov CV (for all you Krussians) in the first phase. The second phase is experimental carriers such as a submersible carrier and a helicarrier. Why are there no weapons or radar? There are already mods covering that, and a list of recommended mods are further down the page. Where can I get that F-14 craft? The F-14, made by GrandAdmiralJon, can be found here on KerbalX. Recommended Mods: BDArmory (Continued) [1.3] (maintained by pappa_joe) SM Marine [1.3] [SpannerMonkey(smce)] BoomsticksRev3 [1.3] [SpannerMonkey(smce)] Master Tech Weapons [1.1.3] (TMasterson5) Blue Hawk Industries [1.1.3] (TMasterson5) MalFunc Weaponry [1.1.3] (Themorris) North Kerbin Dynamics [1.1.3] (harpwner) Never Enuff Dakka Redux [1.3] [SpannerMonkey(smce)] Kerbal Attachment System [1.3] (maintained by IgorZ) Kerbal Inventory System [1.3] (maintained by IgorZ) Hanger Extender is helpful for building very large crafts. Hanger Extender (recompiled for 1.2/1.3 by Alewx) The following is for placing the carrier in water. VesselMover Continued [1.1.3] (maintained by pappa_joe) Boat Launch Central [A channel marker buoy made by SpannerMonkey(smce)] For use with Kerbal Konstructs. [1.2.1] Hyper Edit [1.3] The following is for keeping the massive vessel together. Kerbal Joint Reinforcement [1.3] Arrester Cable and Hook, By Flywlyx Aircraft Carrier Accessories [1.3] Bugs and Issues: The big glaring bug this mod has is the Boat Kraken in 1.1.3, this is where the vessel is flung into the atmosphere, caused by a floating point error. The release of KSP ver 1.2 fixes this so there is nor more the need for either use FAR or AirPark but both are excellent mods, try them anyway. The new current problem is the stock joint system, where even rigid attachment will allow parts to separate, KSP's attachment nodes weren't designed for such heavy masses. I recommend using the cheats for both inserting into the water and operation until Kerbal Joint Reinforcement is updated. Change Log: Version 0.13.1: 1.3.1 Compatibility Update: -Dependency Update Version 0.13: 1.3 Compatibility and Fixes Fixes: -Fixed Fuel Capacity in Nimitz Hull -Fixed Engine Thrust Added: -Added Reaction Wheel to aid in turning -Added Support for USI Life Support -Added Support for Aircraft Carrier Accessories (Nimitz Catapult and Toy Box Catapult [for Future Top Secret Vessel] -Added Pre-made Craft Files -Updated Dependencies 0.12: Various fixes and adjustments: -Models and Dependencies updated to KSP 1.2 -Model recompiled as a second attempt to fix the Light Dim Bug. -Added normal maps -Added new hull textures -Added new resource, KSteam -Adjusted screws (still not perfect, still goes too fast for a carrier, 40m/s, but hey this is a game.) -Adjusted Buoyancy, hull rests at waterline. -KSP 1.2 has better floating point so no more boat bounce -Fixed phantom forces with rudder, but is as useful to steer a carrier as a fly swatter. Hopefully a solution coming soon. 0.11: fixed issues with rudder settings. 0.10: Initial Release Additional Credit: Snjo and RoverDude: for FireSpitter (*.dll Packaged with C.V.X.) RoverDude: for Community Resource Pack (Also packaged with C.V.X.) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
  12. Huge thanks to @Azimech, whose incredible advice made this craft pososible. This craft is a full stock, 1:1 scale replica of the Boeing Pelican Ultra, a cargo ekranoplan/aircraft. This Colossus would have carried massive amounts of military hardware long distances, primarily across the sea to maximize fuel efficiency. However, it never made it past the concept stage, and now only exists in the form of vague specifications and inconsistent artist renditions. Having taken 5 months to complete, being composed of just under 3,000 parts, weighing in at 1.8 kiltons, with a wing span of 150 meters and being 120 meters in length, this craft is by far the largest and most ambitious project I have ever undertaken. The craft is also full to the brim of stock mechanisms. It utilizes 4 of my T-4650 stock turboprops, which together produce nearly 19,000 kN of thrust. The craft’s entire nose section rotates upwards to reveal the cargo bay, this is made possible with what is perhaps the largest stock joint ever created. The joint in question is made up of an orange tank that is held within a fairing precisely tuned to its diameter. It also features a ramp, which is incredibly mundane by comparison. All this work on to ensure that the craft could feasibly be used to transport payloads would have been for naught if the craft didn’t actually have any payload capabilities. Fortunately, this craft can easily carry payloads of well over 1000 tonnes, although it’s exact upper limit is as yet unknown. To get this beast into the air, a huge number of hidden control surfaces are used. The center of lift is also placed in front of the center of mass to ensure that it flies nice and easily. Download: https://kerbalx.com/Kronus_Aerospace/Kronus-Pelican-ULTRA (<-- As well as additional screenshots) Part Count: 2857 Irrelevant Information (AKA Gloating): -You could play a full sized game of Football (Soccer) on this craft’s back across its wings. -The cargo bay is so large that you could easily fit a 747 inside. -With full payload this craft is both larger and heavier than the Saturn V. -This craft produces 24 times the thrust of a 747. -I think you get the point.
  13. Kerbal Aircraft Corp requests your specifications! Post specifications of the aircraft you want and have them delivered within one week if the engineers find the time. We will reply with a craft file once complete. At Kerbal Aircraft Corp, it is our aim to make sure your aircraft needs are fulfilled with quality and humor.
  14. The Ministry of Space (Aeronautics Department) (MAD) proudly presents it's first product! No dependencies, but works well with FAR. Uses stock mk1 IVA. Download Parts: Known bugs: Options: Planned: If anyone has any suggestions please let me know. Licence: LGPLv3
  15. Low Altitude Mountain Race. The challenge: Go to: 8 degrees, 9’ 12” S, 179 degrees, 6’ 14” W Fly the route outlined on the map below (and demonstrated in the video) at the altitudes indicated as fast as you possibly can. Scroll down for the rules and details. This is almost due west of the Desert Runway. Start anywhere behind the ridge shown in the video. The course runs in a sort of loop inwards into the mountains. You begin with an altitude restriction of 2700 meters. That gives you a bit of leeway at the start. That restriction continues until the 3600 marker on the map (shown on the video as well) where you have a ridge to cross. Keep at 3600 until you make a 90 degree right turn and then you can ascend to 3800. Stay at 3800 until you after you cross the penultimate ridge and need to make a nearly 180 degree turn. Fly over the last ridgeline and then fly back to your starting point by whatever route you wish. The altitude restriction changes all occur in level areas between ridgelines, so you can adjust anywhere between the ridgelines. I threw together this video which I hope clarifies the route. It is a combination of flights since I did not have the best camera perspective all the way through one flight. I also had a few crashes. If anything is not clear, please ask in the comments below and I will try to clarify anything you are unsure of. The Rules: Run this route in as fast as you possibly can, keeping below the altitude restrictions. 1. There will be two classes: Modded, and Stock Craft . Kerbal Engineer is fine for either class as of course are any mods that do not affect flight (environmental, etc.). 2. No VTOL, angled engines, reverse placed engines, reaction wheels or inline stabilizers (aside from what is already contained in the cockpits). Reverse thrust is fine (eg Wheesleys) as are any quantity of airbrakes. Drag chutes may be used for landing, as long as you are not actually landing vertically with a chute. The spirit of this is about good flying and good aerodynamic design. 3. Style points for flying the whole thing with stability off. 4. Even more style points for flying this whole route as low as you possible can. Except for the last ridge in the 2700 section, every ridge can be crossed at least 100 meters lower than the stated restrictions. 4. If you break an altitude restriction, add 15 seconds to your time. (this might need changing, it is an arbitrary number I came up with. I am open to suggestions). If you do break it, you must get down below as soon as possible. If you are above the restriction for more than 5 seconds, you are disqualified. There is no way to police this. Really, just do this in good faith. No taking a 15 second penalty and then just flying at 5000 meters the whole way. 5. You must begin the race landed at a complete stop, takeoff horizontally, and must land horizontally and come to a complete stop. 6. Time will be determined by subtracting your start time from your end time. Therefore, take a screenshot just before you power up and just after you have landed and come to a complete stop. 7. You may make as many attempts as you like. If you have the Mission Builder, you may launch from that and save yourself having to fly all the way. It is also not too far from the Desert Runway (due west). Once you have arrived, save the game, so you can quickly reset if need be. 8. If you do not have the Mission Builder and have to fly, you can bring drop tanks, carry your plane under a larger craft to save fuel, edit scripts or do any other background cheats to shorten the trip, whatever. This is about the race, not about how you got there. Infinite fuel is fine for either class as well. 9. If you can, post a video of your run. It would be fun to see some good flying. 10. This race works on the honor system. Fly fast and fair. 11. No prizes. Just do it for the glory. MORE PHOTOS under the hidden tab.
  16. The challenge: build an aircraft that can take-off, land and fly in either direction. * Extra credit: Try to build an aircraft that can successfully change directions mid flight. RULES: 1. You must have a pilot. 2. The craft must take off horizontally. No VTOL. 3. No additional reaction wheels (and bonus style points if you can fly yours with SAS off and all internal reaction wheels turned off) 4. It can be a palindrome aircraft, meaning it is symmetrical front and back, but that is not a requirement. Otherwise, anything goes. However, this challenge is about design, not about getting around rules. I'm sure I forgot some detail, so just bear that aforementioned in mind. I built this one a while ago and had a play with it today, as well as took this footage. (I still have not figured out what I am doing for @Triop's Temple rally, so this was a fun distraction). It is certainly not my most fun plane to fly, but it more or less works. I created the challenge because I am keen to see how others solve the problem.
  17. [LOOKING FOR HELP DEVELOPING THIS MOD AND UPDATING TO 1.2. PLEASE EITHER POST IN THIS THREAD OR PM ME IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN HELPING OUT. MODELLING, TEXTURING, OR CONFIG WRITING EXPERTISE GREATLY APPRECIATED] We at Instell Incorporated pride ourselves in customer satisfaction. We wish to give our customers only the greatest and most fashionable ways to ride their reusable ICBMs. Our engineers are ready and eager to work on any project that can get them close to the liquid oxygen again. Here at Instell we have only the best of experimental technologies, because finished products are just too mainstream. Why spend precious funds on testing when the customer can do it for you? At Instell we believe in shooting for the moon, and even if we miss, our craft melted on the way up. SCRAMJET ENGINES! New from Instell, the Semi Combustible Ramjet. Have you ever thought that stuffing air and fuel into a tube until it exploded was a bad idea? We did, but we kept trying anyway until we figured out that shoving more air in makes it explode out the back of the tube! [WARNING - Sharp edges, high temperatures, and ludicrous G forces may cause death, dismemberment, and or hallucination] We at instell incorporated are proud to offer a selection of two wonderful scramjets: XE-101 and the XE-202. Both are scramjets and are built to propel your spaceplane to hypersonic speeds. They become more powerful and efficient the higher they are and the faster they go. Advantages of scramjets: Very efficient at high speeds/altitudes Very light Can function at very high altutudes Is the physical representation of acceleration Does not require intake hogging However it poses a couple of challenges: Must be going past mach 3 to function Engines have a tendency to cause other parts to overheat due to atmospheric heating. Engines are more efficient in the upper atmosphere ELECTRIC ENGINES! Introducing the XE-303/E electronic turbofan engine! This engine is considerably more simple to use than our Scramjets. This engine is excellent for subsonic crafts, especially those on other planets. Since it doesn't rely on combustion to power its turbine, it will run in any atmosphere. It's perfect for aircraft transports on other planets! Advantages: Can run in any atmosphere Small onboard battery supply Cheaper than a traditional basic jet Very quiet Makes for a great air conditioner in a pinch Disadvantages: Cannot go above Mach 1 Can only be radially attached A bit bulky PULSE DETONATION ENGINES! Introducing Instell's latest work of mad science: The XE-404 Pulse Detonation Engine! This engine is the perfect companion to the XE-101 and 202. It has a maximum speed of mach 6 and sounds like a mosquito screwing a dragon. Despite using the most advanced coolant systems that Jeb could find in his junkyard, this engine still has a tendency to overheat, so watch out! Advantages: Can easily take a SCRAMjet up to the required speed. Has a speed ceiling of mach 6. Operates well in the same flight conditions as a TurboRamJet. Can cook a burger in 6 seconds flat. Disadvantages: LOUD!! Cannot reach as high of an altitude as the XE-101 and 202 Can overheat easily ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ To-do list: Get G.O.N.A.D.S. working properly Cool fuselage parts Better model for Casper better (stockalike?) textures better models in general more engines, the more experimental the better Changelog: v1.6.1 Repackaged for 1.0.5 v1.6 Added XE-404 "Jackhammer" Pulse Detonation Engine Added XF-35B SuperBullShark to demonstrate XE-404 Added F-38 Mako just for fun v1.5 Added RI-01 Hypersonic Intake Added Mk.1 Battery Fuselage Remodeled XE-303/E XE-303/E no longer needs IntakeAir to function, but does need to be in an atmosphere. XE-303/E takes way less electricity to run. Removed G.O.H.N.A.D.S. until I can get the damn thing to work. Added new parts onto IX-102 and IX-201 v1.4 RETEXTURED ALL THE THINGS! Tweaked G.O.H.N.A.D.S. to actually do the thing that it was made to do. Added XE-303/E Electric Turbofan engine (Thank you firespitter for your wonderful plugin) Added IX-201 to showcase the new engine Added fairings to XE-101 v1.3 Added G.O.H.N.A.D.S. (Gunkworks Oxidizer-augmented Heat Neutralizing And Dumping System) Updated IX-102 with new part, can now survive more abuse! v1.2 Added IX-203 (X-43 style aircraft) Edited IX-102 spaceplane Lowered thrust of Houdini to 70 Lowered thrust of Leech to 35 v1.1 Added particle effects nerfed engines slightly v1.0 release Download (KerbalStuff): [instell Incorporated is not liable for crafts melting or disintegrating from heat or acceleration, warranty void if engine exposed to fire.] License: This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.
  18. So someone recently challenged me to make a replica of the Quinjet from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It is a cargo VTOL aircraft with a similar purpose to Boeing's V-22 Osprey. I wanted to make my replica unique, so I decided to make some stock electric/jet powered propellors for the VTOL function. But I've never really delved into the world of stock propellers before. So I was wondering if any of you had any tips on building them, or which design would be most appropriate (are high TWR propellors even possible)? Preferably they need to be relatively low profile, although I acknowledge that I may have to lose some aesthetics for functionality. The design for the aircraft will probably use MK3 parts although I could switch to MK2 for lower mass. Any help/criticism is welcome!
  19. We've seen the cockpit and structure mods like Airplane plus、Aviation Cockpit、AoA tech、Quiztech、Nice MKseries Body,and we have the B9 procedural wings and procedural part to make more available room for editing. With the AirplanePlus' raptor engine、the QuizTech's VTOL engines and by editing the .cfg file myself, the thrust system is also not problem. However, even with these classical good mods, during my aircraft building process i still encountered some problems. The biggest ones are: Blended Wing Body、Curved wing edge、Curved(Hook) Surface. And with the famous mods that i already have, i have no idea how to make it better. So i'd like to ask veterans for help, about any mod that possible would be helpful for make the aircraft building closer to the there topics above. 1. The Blended Wing Body (smooth transition between fuselage and wing)is a big problem when we build those gorgeously shaped 3rd-generation fighter jets like Su-27 family、F-16 and more extreme examples like B-2 、Boeing X-48. We can make other jets(like mig21、typhoon) more real (because they have comparatively less smooth transition, like almost a cylinder fuselage with a wing ) by simply using the normal structures and wings parts, and F-22、J-20 can also be real (because the stealth planes all have simpler shape without that much curved lines and surfaces) . But it's really hard to make the transition smooth in su-27 and f-16. 2. The Curved wing edge: First only the WWII planes use elliptical wing like spitfire, and we have some mod for that cute little one. But many other planes also require round tips of the wing, i remember that in the old Procedrual wings(not B9 procedural wing), we have round editable wing, but that mod doesn't seem to fit in KSP1.4.x. I know that this is easier than the blended wing body transition, because by modifying carefully we can make the straight lines together look like smooth line, and that's exactly what i've been doing all the days. However there are some real "monsters", even harder than the SU-27's strake wings, for example, f-18: I tried a lot about f-18's strake wing, and failed. I also tried to search others' good design on the kerbalX, and failed. All of them didn't make the beautiful curves good enough. It seems that straight lines can't be made up to that kind of curve line. 3.Curved(Hook) Surface: Well i know this is too much and hard for KSP, the game's operation principles requires the mod makers themselves to build the 3D model and texture, so making a procedural curved surface is too difficult. But still i'm holding some hope that someone may know any mod with some "hook surface" part or even function. Let's take my old crafts for example, these are almost the limit that i can reach: The blue one's curved lines are made up by many adjusted procedural wings, and when i look closer i feel really unsatisfied. (The J-20's curved line is between the canard and main wing)
  20. Due to a major financial scandal, Kerbin's main supplier of prop engines can no longer deliver. The timing could not be worse as KSP is launching a new Duna programme, with a focus on exploratory aircraft that can deliver good science. Plans are afoot for serious fuel mining and processing infrastructure, but this is still costly in time and resources. Creating multiple fuel stations around the planet is not viable at this time. They need an aircraft with range. The challenge: Build an aircraft for Duna, and fly it as far as you can with the fuel you are carrying. The winner is the one who flies the farthest. The only rules are: 1. It must be rocket powered. No props or Kethane-powered mod jets . 2. It must carry a Mobile Processing Lab. 3. It must not go into orbit. Ceiling is 16,000 meters. 4. No drop tanks. Too expensive to replace and/or recover. 5. It must be a real plane, meaning it has lift and could take off and land multiple times. 6. Mods are fine, but the engines must be stock. Details: Cheat or Mission Builder yourself to any location on Duna. Fly your plane as far as you can, and when you land, hit F3 to show your total distance traveled. Any mods (other than mod engines) are fine except infinite fuel or anything that breaks the spirit of the challenge. Mods and stock parts will be two different categories. A plane is considered stock if it has no modded parts. Non-parts mods have no bearing on that. Your plane can be as big or small as you want it. It can have tons of stability enhancements or none at all. It can be piloted or probe cored, but you must have a full science crew in the lab. I suppose a really keen person could build a flying fuel processor and go forever (and serious kudos if they do), but the spirit of the challenge is single flight range and that is what you will be judged on. This idea came about while I was tooling around in Mission Builder, modifying a plane I built for Kerbin to see what I could do. I got a fair distance (well, for me, anyway) and I thought it would be cool to see how others solve this problem. Partly this is selfish; I want to learn from you all :-) On my to-do list for work is to get upskilled in Adobe Illustrator. It may take a bit, but I will create a badge for this challenge. My first attempt with the lab. Okay, but needs a lot of R&D.
  21. A fully operational carrier hull and bridge. As opposed to Eskandre's excellent Nimitz, this one has a ski-jump. It's not actually based on any real-world aircraft carrier, but it probably most resembles the Russian Navy's Admiral Kuznetsov. The lifts and hangar are fully operational. The mod is actually just a single part that comprises the hull, deck, lifts and bridge. It generates its own power, but it's meant to be used along with other ship mods for engines, radar, antennae, defence systems, etc. [MOD - Download link removed due to missing license - sumghai]
  22. Ok this is somthing i think is IMPORTANT for KSP, being able to trim you planes Have you ever made and airplane and started flying it around the world (or just a long distance) and had the plane slowly start pitching downwards? If u just left the controls alone you would eventually crash right. Well this is why i want AIRPLANE TRIMMING please help me notify squad and get this to be a feature ingame because its so frustrating doing long straight flights on kerbin. So please help me notify squad about this If you want more info on what trimming is just read this little bit of info its fairly simple: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/164/what-does-the-term-trimming-most-commonly-mean-in-aviation You can also find videos on yt on how trimming works and its uses! To squad: please add this its much needed. You could make it like and optional clickable button when u right click on a probe or a cockpit but man would this be useful. Besides real airplanes use this in pretty much every airplane today so why not add it in ksp?
  23. Dr.Narwhal

    Military Aircraft

    Hello, this is just an open decision about the design of KSP Military Aircraft. Feel free to upload pictures of aircraft. Feel free to have constructive conversations about these aircraft.
  24. Castille7

    Sanchez Besa

    Sanchez Besa By: K&S Technologies Group To have lived in this era would have been so fascinating to me. That's part of my motivation when building these early aircraft. When I start these projects I look for pictures online and find one that I like, then begin to build it. Then I find myself struggling to build an engine to accommodate the craft. This is where team work helps. Klond once again built this brilliant little engine that's perfect for the craft giving it that real life feel. Engine work by klond The engine is actually two contra-rotating units, totaling 20ish-kN and somewhat of a gas hog. Props are non-adjustable. Engine derived, and very similar to the one on the https://kerbalx.com/klond/tiny-coaxial-turbocopter Craft File Parts: 167 Mass: 5.545t Height: 3.6m Width: 11.6m Length: 7.5m We were enjoying this Three Engine Version and wanted to share it. She's a little delicate but another fun flight with much more power. Three Engine Version An Early Flights Video you may enjoy
  25. Wyleg's Wonderful Workshop Parts for aircrafts. Mk3 HVC cockpit Heavy heat-shielded cockpit for reusable trans-atmospheric spaceships. Provides high visibility for its crew. Holds up to 4 kerbonauts. Now features working RCS! Cockpit is WIP - currently it lacks IVA and there's no cabin illumination. T-10 Air Intake This intake resembles the one used on Sukhoi Su-27 family of fighter jet aircrafts. It also should fit other replicas such as MiG-31 Foxhound and F-14 Tomcat with this distinctive shape with sharp edges and rectangle-ish frame. Intake is designed to fit stock 1.25m cylindrical jet fuel tanks. Changelog Imgur album: link Download: Spacedock W3 Fuselage Texture Custom texture for Procedural Parts designed for aircraft fuselages that fits nicely with stock parts and B9 Procedural Wings. Download: Spacedock