Jump to content

Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread


Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Well derping around with the 850T series medium tank, and i think i like this variant more then the previous one which was lost due to my stupidity and accidentally overriding the file.


Nolonger looks anything remotely like a panther/t-34 tank the previous 1 was inspired by, and actusally looks more like the original T-850 i had back in 0.90 or whatever version was b4 the multicore patches were a thing and it even had a stock armored (hit from ibeam would usually jam it but it could still aim by driving) decoupler based turret that could recouple itself after firing and was super smooth and accurate aiming (that alone was an accomplishment in the world of stock KSP mechanisms).  Ofc its also smaller as the original was 4x4 of the smallest non DLC metal plate in size and that doesnt count the gun which stuck out a bit beyond that.


This is what the previous 1 (dat was lost to file override :() looked like.  It was a good deal taller, and it could take a beating (havent tested the current 1 in combat yet but its made using a very similar armor system which seems to be very capable against both ibeams and fireworks).


I offset the turret as far back as possible (without sticking out beyond the rear and thus making the tank longer then it has to be) as im going with rear mounted weapons on all AKS vehicles, and i wanted it offset to 1 side too (so its not symmetric) but there is literally no space for anything of the sort since the tank is as compact as it can get while still being considered a tank.  Fits into a MK3 bomb bay, good terrain passability, at least on the bodies that have scatters, parallax seems to be broken on a few moons now specifically Ike since 1.12.4 hit (its my favorite place to go now with those amazing looking red crystals) and checks everything that a medium tank has to have, not overly heavy (8-12t depending on variant), agile, and hopefully able to tank some hits.


Well anyways, combat tested it and its defenetely solid.  Took like 10 direct hits from BCorp's Avenger tank and wasnt really affected (1 wheel was broken, some non-essential bits were shot off, interior was mostly intact and the turret/gun took no damage but the rear bit). 


Ofc as dumb luck goes the 1st retaliatory shot instantly blows the turret off the Avenger and smacks the tank so hard it nearly flips over despite being almost twice as wide as the 850T. 


And about 30 or so shots later the tank hull explodes so violently the semi intact piece ends up almost 1km away from where it was (you can barely see the flying chunk in the top and to the left of the boom).  Going to use the AKS armor layout with minor edits to make room for crew since BCorp vehicles are crewed in the Avenger class tank (which in universe is supposed to be superior in 1v1 to any AKS tank but the 930T which is the strongest single vehicle in universe as it carries starship grade heavy autocannons for like 5 times the firepower).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Made a new variant of the HK-II Trifighter, with a bit less BSG viper inspiration and a bit more starwars tri inspiration although its no replica as i dont bother making replicas anymore (too many parts to put into a carrier or use it in any fight but taking some screenies or something of the sort).


New one is on teh left, with the 5th gen beside it, then the 4th, and then a experimental 4th gen atmospheric variant (the 2 are internally identical aside from the wings and a kraken drive to allow it to actually fly in atmo albeit very slowly as there is no consideration for how draggy the thing is). 


Had to make it a bit fatter and wider owing to the larger fireworks, err cannons, which was a design consideration (and to make them not look utterly stupid and out of place i added those airbrake based front wings (which look cool but serve no real purpose otherwise).  Without the wings, teh profile from the sides is no larger then the previous variants (they just fall off when hit by anything anyway) and the front profile is a hair fatter with the now larger cannon hitboxes, a flaw yes, but sofar in testing i have not found it to be disarmed easier then the older variants and it does carry around 4 times the ammo capacity.  One of the biggest flaws with the old design was minimal endurance and having to constantly be rearmed as those 8 shot cannons are just a joke really and eat 4 times the part count per round.  Back in 1.12.1 or so before we got the fireworks spread 32 shots per hardpoint was overkill, but now even at point blank ranges half the shots are going to miss anything fighter sized).


Not entirely sure if i like this 100% just yet (its larger then i'd like), but i cant seem to come up with any reliable method of mounting 3 of the larger cannons (a design requirement for the 6th gen) without also making the fighter somewhat large (at least for my scaling since my smaller corvette class capital ships are actually around teh size of a modern fighter jet replica that are all over kerbalx, and for me a starfighter is at most the length of a FLT-800 tank, often half that).




So yeah, made some more progress the next day, namely fixed the drop to survivability due to the new style somewhat more exposed core.


Tested the armor using the standard AKS G7 series torpedo (weight efficient anti-capital ship).




All hits blew apart the cockpit (no amount of armor plating will truly protect a cockpit from a 4.5t torpedo), but the rest of the ship retained at least 1 weapon, engine, fuel, and control systems.  Granted 1 of the hits destroyed the entire rear section so badly that there was like 200dV left and no autocannons, but at least it was still a threat and able to do something (its still able to ram after firing the drone).  I think with that the new ship is finished, it is very much not like a starfighter has any buisness eating heavy torpedoes that often can 1 shot a capital ship with good aim, and it is very much vulnurable to autocannon fire (engines+fuel+weapons are extremely suceptible to a direct hit by firework), but i think its good nonetheless.  Fulfills all hard requirements, namely 1K dV minimum (2 forward reserve tanks give it 1K dV total), armarment of 3 full size cannons and then either a M-drone or a SRM-4M, under 120 parts, 3 engine layout (i cant call it a trifighter otherwise, duh), and not too much clipping or abusing or parts (there is SOME fuel clipping in the rear as asthetics come 1st, but in theory the clipped tanks could fit into teh cockpit so it doesnt violate volume physics).  Also fullfills design intent, armored heavy fighter that should be able to 1v1 every other fighter i have made before and still seriously hurt capital ships with good aim (thats what the drone is for).

Edited by panzer1b
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/28/2022 at 12:11 AM, Kerbalwerks said:

Landings should be interesting  :D

It was an idea for a build with a reduced height profile.  I tried diagonal rudders but their effectiveness was pretty questionable.
My solution was a foldable main rudder, with small secondary rudders to maintain some stability when taking off/landing. The main rudder would fold out while in flight.
Here's the final design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LHACK4142 said:

Have you tried using Git? I've started a git repo in my saves folder in case this type of thing happened to me- never had to use it yet, but I just know the day will come

Just curious, what's  your process for committing, etc? 

I know that there is a mod somewhere which keeps multiple versions/iterations of a vessel, don't remember rhe name of it right now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Just curious, what's  your process for committing, etc? 

I know that there is a mod somewhere which keeps multiple versions/iterations of a vessel, don't remember rhe name of it right now

Not 100% sure what you mean by process, but I just commit after doing anything significant, whether that be finishing a craft or making progress in a mission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LHACK4142 said:

Not 100% sure what you mean by process, but I just commit after doing anything significant, whether that be finishing a craft or making progress in a mission.

that's what I was wondering, that's your process :D   although it seems you do it by hand


Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a change of pace, started messing with walkers again, mostly cause they are actually hard to make work properly (and as "unrealistic" as mechs are, they are really cool).  Sofar this is my standard chikin style leg setup, and the first attempt to make a viable walker with just 2 robotics parts per leg.


It does have issues with heavy weight on kerbin gravity due to the limits placed on the lower joints (those have a rather long lever arm which makes it move faster but also cut its carry capacity, i will likely make a variant of this leg with equal upper/lower lengths lateron for heavier walkers.  That said, what im very happy with is the lower leg component, it offers excellent side-side stability (it will not fall over sideways even with 0 reaction wheels), it does not require moving parts, and it provides a decent speed capability while allowing some sliding on the starting stroke.  All my older style walkers had an issue when planting down the foot that it slightly slowed the entire craft due to the initial 30% of the movement being slower then the rear 30% which is the main propulsion stroke.  This solves that problem entirely offering a somewhat lower friction girder initially which then rotates in such a way as to grab the ground with the grip pad just as the higher velocity motion engages.  Its still way slower then id like, but i also consider the fact that realistically i am not going to get a 15 ton walker up to 20m/s without sacrificing something im not willing to (i once made a walker go 23m/s, but it had 0 armor, used like 20+ reaction wheels, and was so tall that once it flipped over you could not right it again at least under kerbin grav).  Also, i made an attempt to cut the bumpiness and jumpiness of the older legs by making at least 1 leg at any given time touching teh ground.  Another tradeoff towards stability and weight carrying over speed, but i need it to be armored and able to tank hits.


Does around 8m/s on duna sofar which isnt great but isnt bad for 15t total weight.  10m/s downhill, 5m/s down the highest slope it will even go up at all (it can go up hills no worse then a conventional tank).  Goes over rocks a bit less good then id like, but its just a matter of some minor tweaks and raising the height of the legs when they return to forward position.  Still got a ways to go (and im not even entirely sure what i want the top to look like (i make legs 1st as those are the hardest to do and can be used on multiple different walkers).

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.

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...