(ENDED but please don't delete yet) U.K.S.A.F. F-10_______ Procurement Competetion

[TMasterson5]

Scoundrel thanks for the info. That's cool to know!

Bob Saget there will indeed be more of these challenges. I will make a new thread for them. Though it will probably be at least a month or so. June is crazy busy for me.

Dman all of the requirements remain the same. And just attach radial decouplers onto the aircraft somewhere basically.

[Maverick221]

I've just made an internal weapon bay, but it could only store 4 AMRAAM

Is it still count as internal weapon bay?

[ExplorerKlatt]

F2B Talon-Add countermeasures, fix ladder(it is deployed and unselectable), your engines hit the ground on sharp takeoff so move your wheels back, and the plane gets starved for air at high altitude

Hmmm... It had countermeasures last I looked at it. I believe they were on the wings. And the ladder should be tied to the gear action group so it retracts and extends with the gear. I will have a look at the engine and intakes for ways to improve performance. Moving the wheels back causes a longer takeoff roll.

Looking forward to the next competition it is quite fun. If you ever have need of an ultra fast interceptor, have a look at the original f-2 talon. It can do Mach 2 at 100m. (Yes that is supposed to be 100m)

[TMasterson5]

ExplorerKlatt it might be tied to the gear. But the problem is that when you try to take off the ladder is deployed so it drags along the ground and messes with the aerodynamics of the plane. And with the countermeasure I didn't see them but they might be that so my bad on that if they are there. And with he wheels yeah it helps take offs but sadly if the engine hits the ground it can't takeoff like a fighter should be able to. And the intakes were fine until about 12000-135000 and then they start to choke themselves out. And it's only one engine if I remember correctly so turning the thrust down doesn't help it because then it doesn't have enough to maintain flight.

- - - Updated - - -

Maverick221 that works. As long as it is carries something internally. Also good job getting amraams in there they are tricky. Just make sure that they can deploy out of the bay and actually fire. Also test it with sidewinders to make sure that they will work as well.

[Hodo]

F119 Akula-I didnt like the way it looked, I dont like nose intakes sorry, a rapier engine is really practical as this is only for low atmospheric flight, engine hits ground on sharp takeoff, and it tends to pitch nose downward slowly during flight.

No problem about the looks, the craft is one of the oldest in HARM industries fleet. It is also the most basic of the craft, and cheapest. Unfortunately you did not test the craft in the atmosphere it was designed for, a realistic atmosphere (FAR), so you didn't get the full potential of the Akula in your test. As far as most bang for your buck, the F-119 Akula would be your choice, but seeing as you are going with more "exotic" designs that would be expensive losses when faced against the F-119C Akula that is your choice.

Its a shame really because there is a twin engine fighter currently under development by HARM for most nations twin engine cheap multi-role SSTO combat aircraft needs.

[TMasterson5]

Hodo the challenge specifically said stock aero so that is your fault. If you wanted to have a shot in this you should have made a jet for this challenge. And it is for a modern fighter jet so yours didn't really meet the appearance for that. If you had one under development that fit the role why didn't you submit it?

[ExplorerKlatt]

ExplorerKlatt it might be tied to the gear. But the problem is that when you try to take off the ladder is deployed so it drags along the ground and messes with the aerodynamics of the plane. And with the countermeasure I didn't see them but they might be that so my bad on that if they are there. And with he wheels yeah it helps take offs but sadly if the engine hits the ground it can't takeoff like a fighter should be able to. And the intakes were fine until about 12000-135000 and then they start to choke themselves out. And it's only one engine if I remember correctly so turning the thrust down doesn't help it because then it doesn't have enough to maintain flight.

Thanks for the tips. I'll be fixing it sometime today hopefully. I not sure what to do about the intakes without ruining the look of the craft. Depends on how you feel about clipped intakes.

[TMasterson5]

Just try different placement and kinds sometimes all it takes it moving the intake a bit

[nestor_d]

KFS41BD-Add countermeasures, your front canards dont move, they are impacting the wing and being prevented from moving, replace stock hardpoints with BD Armory adjustable missile rails, try to get an AMRAAM inside that weapons bay, and the vertical fins on the wings that are used for Yaw look kind of weird. Keep the planes speed though, the thing is stupid fast and handles well.

Hey Tyler, just have a couple of questions about the new specifications. First are you positive the forward canards don't move? I've never had that problem during testing, even in the video you can see that they move, but if they definitely don't work for you, it's an easy fix. The other question is about the fins, I guess you mean the ones on the wing roots, but just want to make sure you don't mean the ones on the wingtips. Also, it wouldn't be the first time I forgot something but I was sure there were countermeasures on the plane, anyway I'll check that to make sure they're actually there!

[TMasterson5]

Yes I tried moving them and they wouldn't. I did actually select and reattach them on your plane during testing and then they worked fine so it might have just been a weird bug thinking about it now.

For the fins yes the ones on the wing roots. I actually kind of like the way the ones on the edges look. It makes yours stand out a bit appearance wise from the other too.

If they are there I didn't see them but I might have missed them also.

Best of luck for the next phase!!!

[Dman979]

Finalists you now have until 2359 Easter Standard Time on May 28th to fine tune your designs and make any changes you feel are necessary(the list of things that the UKSAF pilots and engineers pointed out is below.) Remember, the aircraft you submit for the finals MUST resemble the original design. This period is for final tweaks only. you may switch out small parts or even large parts if they keep the appearance of the plane the same. You may also add any new features that you wish to. You must re comment on this thread with your final design by 2359 EST on May 28th to be considered. Good luck to all of you!

Mk2-Try to do more with the internal weapons bay, try adding more space for weapons and other stuff in there.You need to figure out a way to mount an external fuel tank(decouplers) to the aircraft. Also it is slightly slow to turn so try to add some more control surface area.

Ok. So, I can either add more control surfaces or move the main wing (and thus CoL) slightly forward. If I add control surfaces, I run up against the weight requirement. If I move the CoL, they plane becomes too maneuverable, and will spin out at High-alpha, and will lose too much energy in regular turns. Which one do you want?

The EFT goes inside the weapons bay. It takes the spot of 2 bombs, so two bombs total instead of 4. The bay gave me a lot of trouble, especially with the ARAAM- they like to blow up. As far as I know, you can only use it for bombs (all three types), the EFT, or low-altitude stealth Kerbal insertion- see James Bond. I think that it can also be used for ground refueling, too, if I put a docking port in it. Again, it's main function would be ground attack, as the missiles don't like the 1.25 adapter.

Are there extra points if the entire thing is ground-refuel and rearm-able? Say, EFTs and hardpoints attached to docking ports? (Will definitely turn up the weight, tho.)

Dman all of the requirements remain the same. And just attach radial decouplers onto the aircraft somewhere basically.

Are there points for in-air refueling?

[CptNinja]

Thanks for the helpful input i will look into to them and i will try to make some more adjustments where i think necessary.

[nestor_d]

Ok, I'll check everything later this evening and submit the tweaked version, thanks!

[TMasterson5]

DMan-For the finals there is no points system. It is simply a "whole package" judging type of deal. I will look at and fly it very thoroughly and test every aspect of it to determine the winner. Including dogfighting and such. Don't bother with in air refueling. I won't end up using it so it's not worth your time honestly. Cool idea though! Also I would t bother with the ground reapply thing. As you said it will mess with the weight a lot and will certainly mess with the aerodynamics of the plane also. As for he weapons bay. I assure you it can be done to get them to work because I have a bunch that I have build that both missiles work with. It just takes some time to get it to work right. Don't forget you can set up missile drop times and decouple speeds by right clicking on the weapons also. If you want an example check out Nestor's original submission. His works really well.

- - - Updated - - -

Nestor/ninja you guys have two more days or so left so take your time

[CptNinja]

hi i was just wondering if i can submit 2 planes one is the everyday combat patrol and the other for combat takeoffs for immediate threat to the base. As for a threat to the base you would not need drop tanks?

[Dman979]

How do you plan to test the dogfighting? With BD? BD's autopilot is cool, but it can't do some of the things a human can, like scissoring or slightly letting up in a turn and making the opponent shoot past you.

From what I've tried, it will always go to the most maneuverable plane or the one with the most fuel. I've had fights where I had two planes turning for hours on end, and no dice either way. Also, the flare system needs work.

[TMasterson5]

ninja no you can only submit one plane per person sorry. Just make it so that they are detatchable instead.

DMan yeah it would be nice if the flats actually did work correctly but the amount of coding that requires is probably ridiculous so. And yeah I was going to do it against bd AI

[CptNinja]

no what i mean is the same plane but 1 that has the drop tanks removed so it is easier for you when testing. sorry for any confusion that i caused you.

- - - Updated - - -

Here is my updated plane i have added an internal weapons bay you do need SAS to fly will lift off on its own around 135-40 m/s and go in to combat maneuvers be gentle with the controls when lifting of as it can become uncontrollable like you have noticed to fix that don't hold S. Hope you like it. Needs the same mods as last time QuizTechAero,Firespitter and Mechjeb 2. http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=74376943838295277975

[TMasterson5]

Okay I look forward to flying it!

[Hodo]

Hodo the challenge specifically said stock aero so that is your fault. If you wanted to have a shot in this you should have made a jet for this challenge. And it is for a modern fighter jet so yours didn't really meet the appearance for that. If you had one under development that fit the role why didn't you submit it?

I am not upset or hurt. To be blunt I find it refreshing that my craft wasn't considered. It means others have stepped up their design game, and that is good. But as for stock aero, that is a joke even with the new system. If I were to take a real aircraft and put it in the stock KSP aero system it wouldnt fly. If I were to take half of these craft and put them in FAR they wouldnt fly let alone perform well at all.

The only reason I didn't submit that other craft is because I haven't loaded KSP in a week to finish it. So I submitted a craft that is over 2 years old that is still more combat capable than half of these craft. Oh and it is a SSTO.

[TMasterson5]

So much butthurt.... Look man I'm sorry that yours didn't win. I didn't like it and there were better options. Like I said before there will be more of these challenges so feel free to submit craft to those and maybe you will win those. And I wasn't even looking for an ssto or far craft so I'm not entirely sure why you keep bringing that up as a reason why yours is better. Better luck next time.

[Hodo]

So much butthurt.... Look man I'm sorry that yours didn't win.

I stopped reading right there and just reported the post. No need for insults.

[TMasterson5]

Okay? Thanks for the update.

[Dman979]

DMan yeah it would be nice if the flats actually did work correctly but the amount of coding that requires is probably ridiculous so. And yeah I was going to do it against bd AI

May I be so humble as to suggest a method?

Try it 3 ways:

A) All autopilot, at various altitudes, no input from you, each plane vs. every other plane.

You vs Autopilot, various altitudes, you fly each plane against every other plane.

C) You vs Autopilot, various altitudes, making full use of action groups and such, using the tactics recommended by the manufacturer. (i.e. Hit and run, high altitudes, low altitudes, head ons, etc. This will you allow you to test each craft in its design envelope.)

[TMasterson5]

DMan that's a good idea. I will do that!

So for you guys in the finals make sure you add what tactics your plane is best at for shoot downs!