Jump to content

Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread


GusTurbo
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, MiffedStarfish said:

I'm pretty sure @Azimech made a thread on bouancy.

Found it Thanks Its a shame about the claw. I might have to add a mod to the list if I cant make a sub that sinks on its own. I'll have to study Azimechs thread.

Done, Thanks for all the testing Azimech it was very disappointing to see most stuff floats to the point of defying logic.

I also checked the following along with a bunch of comments from Reddit that google turned up;

 

Seems the only way to get a proper sub is with mods, either adjusting the buoyancy levels of individual/or all parts or water density or adding adjustable ballast tank parts.

I might have to make 2 versions of the final craft, one with mods and one without. woth lots of ore tanks on the stock which will look real ugly and be a pain to balance to mention the tonnes of mass to the launch total ( I could fill in LKO I guess ) but damm I was hoping squad had decent or at least realistic values for buoyancy by now.

Edited by KandoKris
research results
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, He_162 said:

The US designates a 6th generation fighter as a "all aspect stealth" design, which means no rudders, and no canards, no elevators, and a wing body design with planform alignment as the main form of stealth for the wings, and a buried engine, cooled exhaust, supermaneuverability, payload capability, supercruise of up to mach 1.4 or higher (if it is to be superior to most modern aircraft being developed) and high range.

You lack the following:

-All aspect stealth (although it seems to be at least as stealth, or more so than an F-22, or Su-57.
-Payload capability (no room for medium range, or long range air to air missiles, or any kind of ground ordinance (inside the body for stealth)
-Range, there is no way you can travel across Kerbin with such a small amount of fuel, while carrying payload.

I'd say it's probably one of the better attempts I've seen, Heck, I haven't even made one. It'd be very hard to do in KSP.

Thanks for the input. I've made a bigger version that has 1,5 MKII cargo bays worth of internal payload. I also removed the rudder, burried the engine deeper and made sure all surfaces are angled.

Speed at sea level is worse ("only" 1000 m/s instead of 1600 m/s) and it's a lot bulkier than the previous model (I like small planes), but manoeuvrability is still good.


1z2kkki.jpg

34y1l6e.jpg

1z3bgw4.jpg
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jefzor said:

Thanks for the input. I've made a bigger version that has 1,5 MKII cargo bays worth of internal payload. I also removed the rudder, burried the engine deeper and made sure all surfaces are angled.

Speed at sea level is worse ("only" 1000 m/s instead of 1600 m/s) and it's a lot bulkier than the previous model (I like small planes), but manoeuvrability is still good.

You're close, but the nosecone is at a different angle than the wings, and the rear of the wings has no planform alignment with the body.

The "hopeless diamond" is one of the only shapes you can make a KSP aircraft stealth with. We can't make smooth shapes.
1998836_orig.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Built a new experimental fighter, and so far I'm happy with it's performance. It can go 300 m/s at low altitude with it's afterburner and 216 m/s without, which isn't bad for a custom-cockpit fighter, and is very maneuverable with a low stall speed (meaning that if you turn too hard and the plane starts to stall it is very easy to recover). It's also one of the prettiest fighters I've built. Now I just have to actually get around to naming and releasing it, which is the hardest step in all of this.

oHAfDFV.jpg

uzJx2YU.jpg

g3IpYyj.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Noname117 said:

Built a new experimental fighter, and so far I'm happy with it's performance. It can go 300 m/s at low altitude with it's afterburner and 216 m/s without, which isn't bad for a custom-cockpit fighter, and is very maneuverable with a low stall speed (meaning that if you turn too hard and the plane starts to stall it is very easy to recover). It's also one of the prettiest fighters I've built. Now I just have to actually get around to naming and releasing it, which is the hardest step in all of this.

oHAfDFV.jpg

uzJx2YU.jpg

g3IpYyj.jpg

Wonderful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm too lazy to make that diamond shape, but I did make a new version of my own design, which should have better stealth characteristics. 

xftces.jpg

2ns5ml1.jpg

2hgbl0j.jpg

 

 

On 19-9-2017 at 1:23 AM, He_162 said:

You're close, but the nosecone is at a different angle than the wings, and the rear of the wings has no planform alignment with the body.

The "hopeless diamond" is one of the only shapes you can make a KSP aircraft stealth with. We can't make smooth shapes.
1998836_orig.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update on the Laythe Aircraft carrier;

Sub testing has now gone through its paces. Fine tuning has evolved into this;

The Mk 3

jlODv7J.jpg

Able to decend down to a 600 m depth with 1400 Ore which will be placed in the aircraft carrier at launch to enable immediate use once landed on Laythe.

It can store 2025 ore in total meaning it can retrieve 625 ore per dive for the carrier to extend range.

Range for the sub is well poor at least between re-fills, approx 10 km horizontal travel under water, and its slow as well with a max speed of just 12 m/s she wont win any races but will fill the requirement of ocean mining and being able to fit into the Mk3 Cargo bays.

iDi1KR1.jpg

While I hate the fact I needed to clip so many little ore tanks to maintain both fit and look I feel its ok cause the buoyancy in KSP is so off for so many parts that just shouldn't float.

Time for Aircraft

 Space is getting tight and I'm still undecided on what are the aerial requirements. VTOL's its seems are needed as not only does it avoid the plane hitting any snags in the deck but also as thier below deck until landing.

I need to give a shout out to fourfa and the "Smallest, lightest SSTO?" thread in general for helping me make this;

shuXyrM.jpg

lny0X42.jpg?1

As with most of the craft here it needs a name at the moment its Mini SSTO VTOL Mk3 cargo. Don't know if I really want or need to take the SSTO with the ship I mean it's nice to have one but I think I want more small craft like this little guy,

gprlMLb.jpg?1

I can take 3 of them for every SSTO in terms of both space and part count. It's not the best flyer but still fun and easy. But with it I also need to add a way for it to lock into the deck. I've made tiny adaptor things;

 wh8qysH.jpg

But I really don't want to need them. so I might need to start again on the plane, I wish we had smaller folding wheels. It did however give me an idea on how to get a rover up on the deck to move planes around. I'll have to search to see if anyone has made a mini rover in a fairing yet. That's assuming that the fairings will protect all these bits from the heat of decent and that they don't change the airflow to badly prior the chutes. That test is still a little way off yet.

 

 

Spoiler

 WN0nQNl.jpg

Thanks EpicSpaceTroll139

 

Edited by KandoKris
spoiler testing :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm building it, the first stock "steam" locomotive. This is a 4-4-2, complete with offset crankshaft (no direct drive on the driving wheels, would make the construction too wide), crossheads and valve gear. When it runs properly I might increase the diameter of the driving wheels to give it a higher top speed. Don't expect blinding performance though, it probably won't be able to run faster than those things from the 1850's.

7QBIDeb.png

WciOtzi.png

kzREVKP.png

 

Edited by Azimech
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Azimech said:

<snip>

I once attempted to make something like that out of a static model someone had made on KerbalX. It didn't take long for me to abandon that endeavor though. Good luck making that work!

Speaking of abandoned endeavors, I decided to take a break from racecars and clocks, and work on this neglected thing:

2017-09-23%2021-48-21.png

I estimate she's about 50% complete. Cockpit needs some work, most of the tail needs to be built, tail rotor drive and bearings too. Then I need to figure out how to move the center of mass several meters forward (without making it significantly heavier) before I can even think about tinkering with the turbomachinery so it can (hopefully) fly.

Making this thing fly isn't going to be easy. It's gonna be fairly hefty and draggy with all the detailing and whatnot, and the turbine wheel is smaller than what I usually deal with, thus meaning I will get less torque per blower. Torque will be important given the high moment of inertia of the 7-bladed main rotor, something which will probably cause all sorts gyroscopic control problems. When (if) it flies, it will almost certainly have the flight characteristics of a hippopotamus.

Edit: @KandoKris At the top of the text box when you're creating or editing a post, among other things, there should be a symbol that looks like an eye. If you click/tap on it, it will create a spoiler box inside which you can put text and pictures. No need for bbcode.

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Azimech said:

KXtSgQk.png

Yes, there's a kerbal. 

Looks like it wants to suck my blood. Or one of those silence things from Dr. Who

latest?cb=20140110090638

Impressive work though. Have a gif of it running?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Progress on the 53E:

2017-09-24%2021-13-48.png

I'd say, ehh... 75% done? I need the tail rotor bearing/power mechanism(s). I'll probably use thermo-rcs bearings for that. Then I need to make the ramp. Currently debating whether to make it movable or not. It would be nice, but the part count is already at 350 or something like that.

Anyways, after those things, I'll try and see if I can get it to fly, and perhaps add pitot tubes, antennas, and other doodads and it'll be finished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of you may have seen the new Star Wars fleet project that i'm running right now, and may have seen me say in that post that i might do the super star-destroyer Executor.

Well, i did some number crunching last evening, and using the Recusant class destroyer i made as something to scale it of off, i calculated that the Executor would have to be about 550m long.

 

and here is a tweakscaled "measuring stick" i made to demonstrate that just how big it would be length wise.

OswH8sb.png

Every part was tweakscaled to it's maximum size witch is 400%.

 

Because i want the ship to have a reasonable partcount (i said in the post that a part count of 100 per ship would be a nice goal), and because i want it to be a little more sturdy, i am going to use Procedural Wings for this one.

 

Tough i pretty much know already that reaching a reasonable part count with this one is gonna be almost impossible, i'm still gonna give it a go since it's one of my favorites and because i feel like doing something crazy again.

Wish me luck :wink:.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Gman_builder said:

@Azimech Two question, can your train actually run on a rail? And what is the top speed? I'm interested in how piston engines can actually be used in vehicles.

My guess is yes it will ride a rail but it wont be going anywhere at any decent speed. Also, good luck making a rail that goes anywhere with KSP physics in the state they are in..

On 09/24/2017 at 10:38 AM, Azimech said:

I was one of the pioneers of using light reflection for the creation of custom lighting a few years ago.

LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Majorjim! said:

My guess is yes it will ride a rail but it wont be going anywhere at any decent speed. Also, good luck making a rail that goes anywhere with KSP physics in the state they are in..

LOL

That's what i was thinking.

Give him a break he's been a little high on his horse lately.... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello all!

I am attempting to re-create the Space-X landing capsule with thrusters and hidden landing legs in Stock KSP, what do you guys think?

Also, does anybody know how to put a Heatshield at the bottom without blocking the landing legs? at the moment if i add a Heatshield it blocks the Landing legs, and then it blows up when i start the thrusters. :/

VogZefM.jpgul8P9UJ.jpgAmtAEQG.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a little update to show you that the SSD Executor is coming along nicely.

 

C76LoaU.png

 

I wanted to give the ship a more proper color scheme by using oretanks as the "super-structure", but it ended up being a pretty part hungry idea, so i desided to just use MK-3 tanks.

 

zUvn3xL.png

 

It's 560 m in length and a little over 190 m wide. I really fear that how in the world am i going to get it to stay together :confused:.

I'm also wondering that what kind of armament's will i put on the thing (the real one has over 4000 lasers, missile launchers and ion-cannons).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This stuff actually happened last night. I've been pretty busy today with schoolwork.

By uprating the engines, something I often do for replicas*, the main rotor on my CH-53E can now lift itself in the air with its main rotor. I'm having trouble getting the tail rotor spin fast enough to provide adequate antitorque however, and I haven't added any reaction wheels or other attitude control systems, so it just spins out of control and flips out.

IvMMPju.jpg

 

wH4y08G.jpg

 

*I do this on my replicas because I make them using stock parts not for the sake of showing what as possible with stock capabilities, but for the sake of them being loadable for players without mods. Thus I strive for the lowest part count for the level of detail I want. I do not use the same philosophy for my non-replica builds, and thus they do not have hacked/uprated parts in their craft files.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, kacperak46 said:

Also, does anybody know how to put a Heatshield at the bottom without blocking the landing legs? at the moment if i add a Heatshield it blocks the Landing legs, and then it blows up when i start the thrusters. :/

 

Welcome to the forums! I suggest moving the thruster out and up, and hiding the top with another part. The link above shows someone who made one in stock, though it was a long time ago. Not sure how to do the heat shields, but I look forward to seeing to the finished version!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...