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

[TMasterson5]

OP here. Yeah sorry it is stock aero only and cannot be a replica of a real life fighter. You can draw inspiration from a rea life fighter and get ideas from it but it cannot be a replica. Hoda yours I will allow because honestly it doesn't really look that much like an actual mig 21 anyways. You do however have to post a craft file to enter! So make sure you edit your post to include a link to the craft file. Thank you again to all of you for your participation and good luck!

[Bilfr3d]

Just a heads up, as per the challenge submission guideline an entry by yourself (the OP) is to be made to your challenge.

Cheers,

[TMasterson5]

There is nothing on there that says I have to post an entry.... Also it wouldn't really make sense for this challenge for me to submit a plane. It is supposed to simulate an Air Force looking to outside sources for a plane. Not itself.

[Hodo]

OP here. Yeah sorry it is stock aero only and cannot be a replica of a real life fighter. You can draw inspiration from a rea life fighter and get ideas from it but it cannot be a replica. Hoda yours I will allow because honestly it doesn't really look that much like an actual mig 21 anyways. You do however have to post a craft file to enter! So make sure you edit your post to include a link to the craft file. Thank you again to all of you for your participation and good luck!

I meant to add it lastnight but forgot when I got home... Been a busy week, I will try and add it tonight.

[TMasterson5]

Only one day left guys. Get your designs in!

[Phearlock]

Just a heads up, as per the challenge submission guideline an entry by yourself (the OP) is to be made to your challenge.

Cheers,

The guideline says the OP should have tested the challenge to see if it's possible. I'd say that since he already posted the link to the aircraft(s) he wants this challenge to attempt to replace that this has been met. And the requirements themselves are hardly excessively strict or unreasonable.

[Noname117]

Just a heads up, as per the challenge submission guideline an entry by yourself (the OP) is to be made to your challenge.

Cheers,

The part of the challenge submission guide seems mostly to prove that something is indeed possible. The limits weren't badly restrictive, nor is this a points based challenge, which means I don't think the submitter's entry is really needed.

[fire219]

Presenting the new FFX-1 "Scythe":

Javascript is disabled. View full album

-Must be in 1.0.2 Yes

-Stock aerodynamics Yes

-All Mods allowed with the exception of tweakscale Only parts mod in use is BDArmory

-Must be a completely custom aircraft(no stock planes, no downloaded from elsewhere planes, no copies of real life planes, etc... Build it yourself from the ground up) Brand new Fire Aerospace design

-Only one entry per person I am indeed an individual, not a collective hivemind

-Must use BD armory In use

-under 15 tons 14.0t without weapons

-under 45,000 dollars not including weapons 41,460

-must have 6+ mounting hard points 8 weapon mounts, 2 for droptanks

-must have at least 1 countermeasure pod 2

-must have at least one main gun(any caliber) and at least 300 rounds of ammunition per gun(stored internally) 2 fixed Vulcans, with 1300 ammo total (650 per gun)

-Must have at least 250 gallons of fuel per engine stored internally 1,160gal total (580 per engine)

-Must have the ability to utilize detachable external fuel tanks that can be jettisoned while inflight without damaging the aircraft 2 mounts ready between fuselage and weapon mounts, but tanks sold separately

-must be able to go 300m/s under 1,000 meters and 500m/s between 5,000 and 8,000 meters Can go 500m/s at 520m and still accelerating

-Must be able to take off at speeds under 100 m/s and before passing the control tower on the KSC main runway Takeoff possible at 70-80m/s and long before control tower

-Must be able to roll and climb vertically immediately after liftoff(so it can perform combat take offs) She'll do it easily

-Must be able to perform short/unimproved runway takeoff and landing(island airstrip off the coast of main KSC) Capable

-Must be able to perform agile high speed and high G maneuvers In testing, could pull 5G constant and 10G peak

-Must be sturdy so it doesn't break apart during high G flight or from barely being hit Survives 30+ G tipstalls without any flex. If it can do that, it will survive a lot

-must look cool(this is a fighter jet after all) I think it looks cool as <kerbin underworld>

Download Here

Edited May 24, 2015 by fire219
Forgot closing spoiler tag

[TMasterson5]

Steamtex please re post your download link. It has to be a link to the download to the craft file not a link to the code for the craft.

[Wolf_rt]

Heres Mine. The KX-10

download KX-10

[nestor_d]

My entry for the procurement contest. All the rnecessary specifications are in the description. http://kerbalx.com/nestor_d/KFS-41-BD

[Hodo]

Updated my post with Download link.

[Dman979]

My entry:

Custom Fighter Mk. 2!

My original design pulled waaaay too many G's, and had two howitzers in addition to the main gun.

Even Jeb hated it!

This one has an internal bay, suitable for an (internal) External Fuel Tank, and can also carry two Mk. 82 bombs internally. DO NOT put missiles internally!! It WILL BLOW UP! The 12- count 'em- external hardpoints are suitable for attaching missiles and bombs. The standard Air-to-Air load-out is (mirrored, from wingtip in): AIM-9, AIM-9, AIM-9, AIM-120 ARAAM, AIM-120 ARAAM, PAC-3 SAM.

It comes in at exactly 15 tons according to the report, and is less than 45,000.

You wanted STOL? I give you STOL. It takes off at ~50 m/s with full flaps and slats, bound to 4 and 5 respectively. Deploy slats only during takeoff and landing.

It is also easy to maintain- no need to intstall tons on mods, it's all stock+ BD.

Try not to go faster than Mach 2, or you'll heat up too much.

Enjoy!

http://www./download/5r0b64krbd5jsme/Custom+Fighter+Mk2+EXT.craft

[TMasterson5]

Okay everyone the submission deadline just passed so I will judge them today and comment later on tonight with he results! Thank you so much for all of your entries and I look forward tonflyingyour creations.

[TMasterson5]

Also just so you guys know the scoring criteria will be as follows:

F-10 scoring chart

Under 15 tons+20

For every 1 ton under 15+1

For every 1 to over 15-1

Under $45,000+20

For every $2000 under 45,000+1

For every $2000 over 45,000-1

6 mounting points-20

Every 2 additional mounting points-1

No mounting points-DQ

No main gun-DQ

300 rounds+10

Every 300 rounds over 300+1

Every 50 rounds under 300-1

No countermeasures-10

Additional countermeasure pod+1

Angel wings appearance+1

250 gallons fuel per engine+20

Every 100 additional gallons+1

Every 25 less gallons-1

Be able to utilize jettisonable external fuel tanks+20

Not able to-10

300m/s under 1000 meters+10

500 m/s at 5000 meters +5

Every 30 over 1000 speed+1

Every 30 under 1000 speed-1

Takeoff speed under 100m/s+5

Under 70m/s+3 additional on top of 5

Combat takeoff capable+10

Not capable-DQ

Short/unimproved runway capable+15

Not capable-15

Able to withstand high g force+10

Not able-DQ

Agility levels

Level 1+5

Level 2+10

Level 3+15

Has airbrakes+3

Has thrust vectoring+5

Internally stored weapons bay+15

Has 2 engines+5

Has Ram air intake+8

1 to 20 points will also be awarded for appearance

Carrier takeoff capable+3

Has Drogue chutes+1

1-20 Points will also be awarded for general feel of how the plane flies

[Maverick221]

Would you post the advantages and disadvantages for each design ?

[TMasterson5]

Sure I can do that. I actually all but two of them yesterday and will test the remaining ones once I get off of duty today.

- - - Updated - - -

Maverick I will also say that as of now your plane has done exceptionally well! Great job!

[Maverick221]

Thanks again Tyler

Glad to hear it

[Phearlock]

Some notes:

No countermeasures-10

Additional countermeasure pod+1

Angel wings appearance+1

-Usually, you only want about 1 per engine. On most fighters they deploy directly upward or downward as this puts the flare on the same plane of motion as the engine when the aircraft is turning away from a missile. Angel wings is simply an effect of cargo planes that can't really maneuver out of the way and need to deploy flares everywhere at once.

-Remember to test maneuverability for each design at 100% and 10-40% fuel. Aircraft that haul a lot of internal fuel (real life Su-27) are often only really supposed to enter dogfights with 40-60% fuel, range and time on-station is a big deal for air superiority aircraft, unlike short range interceptors.

-Why are ram air intakes +8? It's KSP, as long as it can maintain 100% thrust through desired flight envelopes without running out of air who cares what intakes you use. That goes under appearance otherwise. KSP ram air intakes aren't particularly realistic for jet engines due to not having any visible inlet ramps. If you want to award points for realism, the shock cone intake would be the most logical for mach 3+ fighters. While the classic round intake would be superior for aircraft that never go supersonic.

-All jet engines in KSP have thrust vectoring.

[TMasterson5]

I like the way angel wings look though and seeing as the flares in KSP don't function like normal flares anyways it doesn't matter much where they are placed in the game sadly.

And I did think of that. I flew them until they were at 50% and then repeated the tests. That is factored in to the existing categories.

As with ram intakes, I like the way they look and if the plane can maintain air intake through all speeds I did award them the points for having ram intakes anyways for fairness. And the circular nose intake doesn't look good for a modern fighter at all.

I meant the actual thrust vectoring modules that are a part of QuizTech aero pack

[Hodo]

I am not sure if I posted the version with its weapons on it or the "clean" version with just the gun. BUT you can see from the pictures it can mount 7 hard points.

Oh and the F-119 Akula is a FAR craft. Which means it was designed and works in a realistic aerodynamic model.

[TMasterson5]

Good evening everybody! first of all thank you again for all your participation, you guys have truly all done a great job with this and it is very appreciated and after the success of this I will be doing it again so look for these in the future. The UKSAF passed on that the pilots and flight engineers, navigators, and weapons officers all had a blast flying these planes and had many very close dogfighting contests with them. They actually arrested one crew that was trying to get in extra flight time by sneaking into the hanger in the middle of the night. The UKSAF has pardoned the crew because, "Well, the planes are pretty awesome!"

The UKSAF has announced their decision in the F10 procurement competition. They said that all of the designs were superb but some stuck out more than others by small margins and those are the finalists. They ended up choosing four finalists instead of three due to how close this contest is. The finalists are as follows:

-KFS-41-D by Nestor_D

-F-85 Lancer-CptNinja

-FX3-D by Maverick221

-Mk-2 by DMAN979

The very close runners up are:

-S-32B by Steamtex

-Vampire by Mad Rocket Scientist

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!

To the finalists a huge congratulations for making it into the finals. For the runners up you guys should also be very proud. This was seriously a very tough decision to make on how to order the six of you and it took me a long time to figure it out. So thank you for all of your contributions. Below is the full list of aircraft and what I felt are their downsides.

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.

F85 Lancer-Fix your center of mass and center of lift, the jet wants to do a backflip on takeoff and set up the control surface functions, also consider switching out that middle fuel tank for a storage area and try to make an internal weapons storage bay. See the other finalists designs for what I am talking about. it will save you weight and decrease drag and it looks cooler.

FX3D-Really nothing, your plane is good, fast and handles well. youre using Mk1 parts so dont worry about internal weapons bay unless you can get really creative with it and still keep the same general appearence. If you think you can though then go for it! The only other thing is that you need to add some struts to it to increase its strength, it tends to wobble at high speed and during high speed turns.

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.

S32B- Fine tune your handling and put an external fuel tank on it. Also Im not a huge fan of forward canards but if you like them then thats your thing keep them.

Vampire-Your engines hit the ground during sharp takeoff. Move your wheels back more.

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

XF10 Sparkle-I couldn't get over the body surrounding wings, and the jet itself is very large for a fighter.

Wasp MK II-It is too big to be a fighter and not fast enough of maneuverable enough. Also I didnt like the way it looked.

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.

FFX1-Wing landing gear increase drag and I dont like the way it looks. Put it on the body and offset it so that the airflow doesnt hit it while it is retracted. Also your engine hit gournd on the unimproved surface and almost hit on the regular runway and carrier.

KX10-I dont like the way it looked, it didnt resemble a fighter aircraft that much. Also once your fuel starts to drain it throws off your center of mass and center of lift.

Again a huge thank you to all that participated, you are the ones that have made this competition a success and I hope that all of you will participate in future contests as well for the UKSAF.(the current fighter bomber is getting quite old, hint hint)

[Dman979]

Hm. Are the weight requirements still the same?

Are the cost reqs still the same?

Are there any reqs changed?

And WOOT for being selected!

Congrats to my other competitors, and good luck!

EDIT: What kind of decouplers do you want me to use?

[Bob_Saget54]

Question for you TM, will there be a second compition after this one with a different type of aircraft?

Looking forewards to submitting new challenges.

Also, congrats to finalists.

[Scoundrel]

Usually, you only want about 1 per engine. On most fighters they deploy directly upward or downward as this puts the flare on the same plane of motion as the engine when the aircraft is turning away from a missile. Angel wings is simply an effect of cargo planes that can't really maneuver out of the way and need to deploy flares everywhere at once.

Not exactly correct, but pretty close. The DDS in 2nd and 3rd generation fighters were typically set for low count decoy deployment because early seeker heads didn't really have much for countermeasures rejection logic, and jinking maneuvers were usually enough to put the aircraft outside the missile seeker gimbal limit.

Then new missiles came along, and so 4th gen fighters introduced HOTAS which allowed for various automatic countermeasures deployment programs that could, depending on the DDS, spit out a single chaff and/or flare per second or ripple deploy (the so-called angel wings that was referenced) or anything in between depending on what the missile warning system detected and the pilot's situation.

Now slow moving aircraft at low altitude (such as A-10s with DDS pods or cargo aircraft) will ripple fire chaff and flare not just to foil any missiles, but to also break radar illumination and/or mess with IR targeting systems so that enemies targeting the craft either on the ground or in the air have to spend precious seconds attempting to reacquire.

Combined with evasive maneuvers the big birds *might* be able to flee the area before they're shot down (highly unlikely), but in reality it's just so they can either buy enough time for their escorts to engage enemy craft, or, more commonly, foil any surface to air attacks long enough to get out of range.