Jump to content

Squall Mk2 - Light Trainer


Recommended Posts

CRAFT FILE: https://goo.gl/N7rpE6

l5Ml9Np.jpg

Presenting the Squall Mk2 light trainer; an exceptionally agile light jet that can pull off every manoeuvre in the aerobatics manual and quite a few that aren't!

NAhYens.jpg

Through a bit of KSP voodoo I've managed to drastically increase the performance of the design while still keeping the weight down to a hair over 2t.

oZXnFOv.jpg

This new version can super-cruise at over 670m/s (Mach 2) and is capable of circumnavigating Kerbin with ease.

oEewvU3.jpg

Like the original it's powered by a pair of Juno engines nestled just aft of the cockpit.

 

CONTROLS:

1 - Toggle Engines

0 - Toggle Cockpit Doors/Air brakes

 

RECOMMENDED MOD:

 

 

OWNERS MANUAL:

Due to the extreme manoeuvrability of the design a Joystick is highly recommended!

By default the control surfaces are maxed out and should be dailed back if you're finding the ride a bit wild.

For normal day to day cruising you can disable the control surfaces and rely on the reaction wheel torque for a more gentle ride.

Deploy the landing gear and cockpit doors as an air-brake to help slow the craft down.

This design can handle water landings/take-offs if needbe.

0URDCMl.jpg

The carrier design used in the video can be downloaded from the Odds N Sods section. You'll need Hyperedit/Vessel Mover to get her afloat. Enjoy! :wink:

 

Edited by Cupcake...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, KingPhantom said:

very cool. ever tested on laythe? dropping it with a 10m heatshield just for traveling there.

It'll work quite happily on Laythe, the challenge will be keeping the intakes shielded during re-entry as their heat tolerance isn't great.

13 hours ago, Hast5250 said:

How do you get 2 junos to go at 670 m/s? one could hardly push it to 200, right?

Is this Magic  Hackery?

How can I explain this? Basically the design makes use of both sets of (4) attachment nodes in the materials bay for the fuel tanks/engines and rear/aft intakes. This essentially means that there is a single airflow stack despite the craft having two engines. Does that make sense? :P

7 hours ago, The Dunatian said:

You offset them into each other?  Kinda cheaty don't you think?

Nope and no, the engine's aren't offset into each other they're mounted separately at the top/bottom of the rear fuel tank.

 

Cupcake...

 

Edited by Cupcake...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Hast5250 said:

The problem is that the craft having two engines, they are both inside the fuselage, making it unrealistic.

 

Don't mean to be rude or anything.

Do not question the powa! Seriously though I find that annoying too and generally try to avoid it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hast5250 said:

The problem is that the craft having two engines, they are both inside the fuselage, making it unrealistic.

 

Don't mean to be rude or anything.

 

8 hours ago, The Dunatian said:

Do not question the powa! Seriously though I find that annoying too and generally try to avoid it.

I would argue having engines tucked away inside the fuselage is very realistic indeed! :)

22595745416_775b1b305e_b.jpg

 

Truth be told though realism hasn't been that high for me in terms of design priorities, most important being performance (1 Juno is far to anemic), handling, aesthetics and usability. In the case of the Squall having the engines mounted just behind the cockpit means perfect 50/50 weight distribution at all fuel loads and helps keep the mass tucked in nice and close to the COM, this in turn gives the design plenty of agility despite using a single reaction wheel. But again that's just the way I like to build, each to his own etc... :wink:

 

Cupcake...

Edited by Cupcake...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
2 hours ago, Cupcake... said:

Strange, it should work fine. You running 1.3.1?

 

Cupcake...

How do I check? When I boot the game, the launcher doesn't show up.

EDIT: Nvm, I probably have a really old version of KSP. 

Edited by Autoclave
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...