W-89 Odelion & Variants

[Space_nico]

Disclamer :all mods are listed on KerbalX so, more pratical for you and me

W-98 Odelion

The W-89 Odelion is one of the state of the art in term of airliner. Design to travel across the world, the another fact of this plane is it’s capability to be upgraded in various platforms ( civilian & military ).

Download Link

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

W-89 SOFIA

Base on W-89 Odelion, the variant SOFIA was design for studying celestial bodies.

Nota : sadly, the DMagic Orb' Sci don’t work in atmosphere : only aethetic for the moment!

Download Link

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ABL-9 Sunburn

To face the threat of balistics missiles, one anwser : ABL-9 Sunburn

Based on the Odelion liner, the Sunburn is equiped with a Kründer TLS-580-E. 350 E.C/sec are necessary to operate the beaming for a short period. That why a part of the fuselage is remplace by 3 powerfull batteries of 40 500 E.C per unit. A Target Tracking Laser of High Velocity (TTL-HV) is installed for a more precise shoot.

Download Link

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RW-9 Guardian

The RW-89 Guardian is a recon & spying aircraft. Equiped of various antennas for transmitting, listening information, operators can operate on all kind of frequencies.

Two wing-mounted pods are used to jammed an ennemy area.

The main role of this aircraft is political and psychological warfare.

Download Link

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EW-89 Spectro

EW-89 Spectro was design to detect all kind of flying object in a wide airspace. In fact, it’s an A.W.A.C.S ( Airborn Warning and Control System ).

Two wing-mounted ALQ-131 are displayed to ensure an ECM protection around the aircraft.

Download Link

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited September 24, 2015 by Space_nico
Add new variant

[JuanxLink]

You sir have not failed. Nice craft.

[Space_nico]

You sir have not failed. Nice craft.

Thanks, sir!

[Space_nico]

Update : add EW-89 Spectro

[m4ti140]

What's the takeoff distance of W-98 at MTOW? What's its takeoff distance at MTOW with FAR installed? I've tried to building a 5 segment passenger plane like this with additional LF section in front of front passenger section and I pretty much hit the limit of what 4 J-33 could do even with proper flap set-up. I used b9 procedural wings though.

EDIT: Also you might want to disable pitch in all control surfaces attached to main wing, they give very little pitching moment and reduce lift, acting as spoilers when you rotate during takeoff.

Edited September 25, 2015 by m4ti140

[Space_nico]

What's the takeoff distance of W-98 at MTOW? What's its takeoff distance at MTOW with FAR installed? I've tried to building a 5 segment passenger plane like this with additional LF section in front of front passenger section and I pretty much hit the limit of what 4 J-33 could do even with proper flap set-up. I used b9 procedural wings though.

EDIT: Also you might want to disable pitch in all control surfaces attached to main wing, they give very little pitching moment and reduce lift, acting as spoilers when you rotate during takeoff.

Well... For the moment, to be honest, I don't know... I'm not a really scientist in the soul but I'll try to calculate the MTOW. If you want you can help me, or anybody else in this forum (erf sorry, I really s*cks in mathmatics ). However, I take notes about your sujestion about the lift : updates will come soon.

[Growler117]

The SOFIA variant is beautiful, and I'm building something similar to your Sunburn, except on a much smaller airframe, perhaps your design is more realistic.

Anyway good job on these practical and clean looking crafts.

[m4ti140]

Well... For the moment, to be honest, I don't know... I'm not a really scientist in the soul but I'll try to calculate the MTOW. If you want you can help me, or anybody else in this forum (erf sorry, I really s*cks in mathmatics ). However, I take notes about your sujestion about the lift : updates will come soon.

MTOW is a design parameter, it's maximum takeoff mass. By takeoff distance at MTOW I mean the take off distance when fully loaded with fuel (or with maximum amount of fuel/cargo it was supposed to takeoff with when you designed it; kerbals are massless).

My aircraft couldn't takeoff before the end of the runway, so I was wondering if the stock wings are superior to procedural ones or if I just messed something up.

About the control surfaces: the inner trailing edge control surfaces at the wing are usually used for flaps. Most airliners have slotted flaps i.e. there is a gap between the wing's trailing edge and the flap's leading edge when it's lowered (they also, usually consist of multiple sections) but I don't think it's possible to recreate those in KSP. Still, even with stock aerodynamics flaps should give you more lift during takeoff/landing and reduce your stall speed with FAR. When using stock make sure they extend downwards when you set them to deployed in context menu (otherwise invert in the same menu) and set it to an action group. Also disable all input on them. You can also add spoilers that activate when brakes button is pressed, those are also supported in stock KSP - stick a control surface to the upper surface of the wing, disable all input and set its "deploy" (or whatever it's called) action to brakes action group (also make sure they extend upwards when deployed). They will keep you on the ground after initial touchdown and help in slowing you down.

Generally each control surface should have only a single input axis enabled: roll for ailerons (outer control surface in wings), pitch for elevators (cs in horizontal stabilizers) and yaw in rudder (vertical stabilizer). Inner control surfaces in the main wing can be used as ailerons as well if you need more roll authority, otherwise use them only as flaps.

Now the reason why adding pitch to ailerons is counterproductive (even though Scott Manley does it - while wondering why his planes can't take off before the edge of the runway):

Simplifying this to basic mechanics: When you pitch up, the control surfaces you assign to pitch up generate downward lift force. The downward lift force in elevators is offset from the center of mass of the aircraft by the tail length - thus it provides moment of force (or torque, whatever you want to call it) that rotates the aircraft (pitching moment). However, the ailerons are not offset from the center of mass or are offset by a very small arm. Thus they generate very little pitching moment (remember, moment of force is the arm multiplied by the force (if the force is perpendicular to arm)) but the downward lift force is still there, pushing you into the ground. If you disabled pitch in elevators and enabled them in ailerons only, the moment you pressed "S" your plane would start going down without rotating, pressing "W" would cause you to ascend, and your nose would just stay in the same orientation.

Of course, if we put aerodynamics into this it gets more complicated - you would always get some pitching moment from this, but it's still not worth it.

[Space_nico]

MTOW is a design parameter, it's maximum takeoff mass. By takeoff distance at MTOW I mean the take off distance when fully loaded with fuel (or with maximum amount of fuel/cargo it was supposed to takeoff with when you designed it; kerbals are massless).

My aircraft couldn't takeoff before the end of the runway, so I was wondering if the stock wings are superior to procedural ones or if I just messed something up.

About the control surfaces: the inner trailing edge control surfaces at the wing are usually used for flaps. Most airliners have slotted flaps i.e. there is a gap between the wing's trailing edge and the flap's leading edge when it's lowered (they also, usually consist of multiple sections) but I don't think it's possible to recreate those in KSP. Still, even with stock aerodynamics flaps should give you more lift during takeoff/landing and reduce your stall speed with FAR. When using stock make sure they extend downwards when you set them to deployed in context menu (otherwise invert in the same menu) and set it to an action group. Also disable all input on them. You can also add spoilers that activate when brakes button is pressed, those are also supported in stock KSP - stick a control surface to the upper surface of the wing, disable all input and set its "deploy" (or whatever it's called) action to brakes action group (also make sure they extend upwards when deployed). They will keep you on the ground after initial touchdown and help in slowing you down.

Generally each control surface should have only a single input axis enabled: roll for ailerons (outer control surface in wings), pitch for elevators (cs in horizontal stabilizers) and yaw in rudder (vertical stabilizer). Inner control surfaces in the main wing can be used as ailerons as well if you need more roll authority, otherwise use them only as flaps.

Now the reason why adding pitch to ailerons is counterproductive (even though Scott Manley does it - while wondering why his planes can't take off before the edge of the runway):

Simplifying this to basic mechanics: When you pitch up, the control surfaces you assign to pitch up generate downward lift force. The downward lift force in elevators is offset from the center of mass of the aircraft by the tail length - thus it provides moment of force (or torque, whatever you want to call it) that rotates the aircraft (pitching moment). However, the ailerons are not offset from the center of mass or are offset by a very small arm. Thus they generate very little pitching moment (remember, moment of force is the arm multiplied by the force (if the force is perpendicular to arm)) but the downward lift force is still there, pushing you into the ground. If you disabled pitch in elevators and enabled them in ailerons only, the moment you pressed "S" your plane would start going down without rotating, pressing "W" would cause you to ascend, and your nose would just stay in the same orientation.

Of course, if we put aerodynamics into this it gets more complicated - you would always get some pitching moment from this, but it's still not worth it.

I appreciate that you take time to explaine it to me. I better see what's wrong now, thanks!

I've changed the wings : a compromise between stock and B9 Proc' Parts. The fact that it's more efficient in stock aerodynamic and FAR. More over, like you say, flaps are better for take-off (obviously, "niahé" ). The reason why I didn't put flaps before is only caused by the mod used for the part : they're not symetrical when flaps is used ( one go up, one go down ) but... the design of it was interesting. But now I'll update on all versions of the aircraft and rebalance with each one.

Update soon!