hoioh

Good looking badge, @cratercracker

I'd guess raising the station by means of an attached booster? Funny how that happened twice to competing nations, guess building an actual shuttle is no where like as easy as KSP

I recently noticed that the Google Spreadsheet has a chat function, could that be a good place to chat about said sheet?

There is/was, a lot of what was discussed happened in private chat and then a whole bunch just directly in cells of the spreadsheet, which were subsequently deleted... What little there is in the form of an explanation is placed on the first page of the lifetime cost sheet, just look at the tabs on the bottom and click the leftmost one I'm just spitting stuff here, but if flown normally I wouldn't expect G-forces to be outliers anyway unless controls are particularly janky. Maybe something to do with the separation of control surfaces could influence a comfort score for providing a particularly bumpy ride? But then, what to include that in?

I don't understand how I get the medal, can't find it in the post. Also, I kinda liked the way you handled the medals before, so I'd love to see that again! You could make it a little easier on yourself by putting the picture once and all the receivers of said medal above it instead of each their own. Though that does make it a bit more special Nevermind, didn't read your post entirely...

Some of what you're mentioning is already integrated into the LIP10 score (I'd love to go into the details, but suffice it to say that cruise speed, number of engines, number of parts and number of struts are each weighed differently. I actualy mention them in descending order) Passenger comfort though, isn't. So that needs adding in some way. Can we come up with 3 metrics for passenger comfort? Engine placement (AKA noise/vibrations) Luxury level of cabins (1 being reserved for seats in a cargo bay) Max G-force?

Basically no red or yellow bars at the bottom of the lifetime cost sheet, but no greens either

I was thinking in ratings 1through 5 for each item, so if yaw control is too little, the plane tends to sideslip and if it's too much it's posible to get into a flat spin easily, that would be a 1 or a 2. If these aren't concerningly easy it would be a 3 or a 4 and if it's completely impossible that would be a 5. For pitch control a 1 or 2 would be either inadequate, or able to flip the plane and travel backwards, a 3 if it's strong, but doesn't flatten the passengers if used appropriately, a 4 if it's adequate and simply can't flatten the passengers and 5 if it's just so smooth you can't belive it. For roll control a 1 or 2 would be either way too strong, or way too little, a 3 would be adequate, but twitchy, a 4 would be a little too strong or weak, but close and 5 would be just excellent roll control Those engine failure ratings could be numbered 1 through 4, where 4 is obviously better and a 5 would be: I didn't notice we had an engine failure actualy? Take-off and landing speed are good additions, maybe climb speed? or time to reach cruise parameters? By assigning numbered ratings you leave some subjective measure (maintaining judge fun level), but you will smooth out discrepancies with the averages across the field

I didn't want to claim anything, that's why I agree, but yeah, Neist mentioned it just now so that's what I simply responded to. Frankly I don't really care who came up with it, it's a good idea so we should pursue it. As to the effective scoring, I was on the same path earlier with the design of a bunch of bronze, silver and gold medals to support the challenge: I think this would be a decent reward for planes that are respectively: 1. Bronze: good enough (AKA it flies well enough to consider a purchase) 2. Silver: Really good and sort of efficient (AKA it flies really well and is averagely efficient) 3. Gold: Really good and really efficient (AKA it flies really well AND is in the top 16% most efficient and cost effective) This would make the numbers less arbitrary, but we would also have to start setting up a testing procedure and scoring for each test, which would be more official and more objective, but maybe also less fun for the reviewers? We could use the judging sheet to start to make a setup to judge (please extend this list): Roll control Yaw control Pitch control Attitude at cruise Stability at cruise Meets cruise requirements KPPM Seat price LIP10 (a metric @neistridlar and myself came up with a few months ago that scores the lifetime cost per seat mile based on a whole range of plane characteristics, not just fuel efficieny) Integrated safety features Behaviour with engine failure Take-off and landing safety Please add Using numbers 1 - 5 for each respective criterium (1 for really bad, 5 for excellent)

That was me, I'm not familliar with the GK-6 König, but I'll give it a go later. Just started a new job and finally have the weekends off, at the cost of all weekdays and a training period that requires I get up before 7am to be there on time. So I might not be able to do as many reviews as I like. The training period is about 6 weeks (yes that's long and very rare in sales, but highly appreciated on my part). In regards to @neistridlar's idea to make the judging sheet viewable to all, I support this wholeheartedly. (I would recommend linking it in the OP, together with the lifetime costs sheet.) It allows for all to see the amounts bought. It would however require we put a very small note with every plane stating the reason for the purchase, or lack thereof. This way you could look around the sheet, find a desirable plane and see what could be improved, try for yourself, and come up with an even better design removing some shortcoming of the original. Without rote copy ofcourse, which we would consider plagiurism obviously. Anyway, just my 2 cents, would like to hear some other opinions

Definitely doesn't spin out with single engine failure, becomes a bit hard to control though I was not aware, but I tested it with one engine before and that worked fine, but tested it just now and think you might be right, so I've updated the KerbalX craft files shifting the engines a little bit towards the center, but not so much as to disturb the sleeping passengers inside. I can now fly it at full throttle on a single engine in a straight line banking 10 degrees towards the engine that's still on to get to the nearest runway and land there. It can even maintain speed at about 2km

Skaled Komposites presents: the Kull-Wing 56 and 88 Kull-Wing 56 Fuel load: 1294 Kallons Price: 32,037,000 Kerbucks Passengers: 56 Kerbals Speed: 235 m/s Altitude: 7500 - 10,000 m Burn rate: 0.04494 K/s Range: up to 6767 km Kull-Wing 88 Fuel load: 1332 Kallons Price: 36,725,000 Kerbucks Passengers: 88 Kerbals Speed: 250.3 m/s Altitude: 7500 - 10,000 m Burn rate: 0.07822 K/s Range: up to 4262 km The Kull-Wing series get's its name from the resemblence to the seakulls that fly around at the KSC a lot, sometimes getting sucked into an air intake at impressive speed. Contrary to the seakulls though, the Kull-Wing series is not suicidal at all. It actualy flies really neatly for a plane built to challenge the economics of the Slinky and Stingy series. We did have to sacrifice a little bit of economy in order to make a good flying plane, but we at Skaled Komposites believe we have succeeded nevertheless! The fuel economy of the Kull-Wing 56 and 88 is really quite astounding once they get up to cruise altitude and speed. This does take some time though. The climb angle starts at 15 degrees, at 2km up this is reduced to 10 degrees, then at 5km it is reduced further to 5 degrees and once above 7km this is slowly reduced to 0 degrees while the speed increases to cruise speed. This process is the same for both models. Once approaching cruise speed the plane will continue to rise, a lot, untill it reaches the service ceiling close to when the tanks are empty. Both craft are delivered with enough fuel to easily make it to 2000km, but can be fully fueled for longer trips or return trips without refueling. These trips can take a while though because for the 56 model to completely empty it's tanks can take more than a full Kerbin day. We are happy to report that these values have not been achieved through the mishandling of dragons, but are really just propelled by fuel combustion engines. Both models come equipped with a tail mounted WiFi antenna to entertain the passengers on longer trips and all seats have been outfitted with 2 USB ports for charging their K-phones and K-pads. The engines have been mounted far enough away from the cabins to avoid any noise from creeping in and so as to not obscure the view of the passengers in the middle of the plane, who now have a view thanks to the overhead wing. To ease the life of the pilots the Kull-Wing series comes equipped with avionics on the nose-cone, so the pilot too can sit back, relax and enjoy their favourite shows while they cruise to destination. Even the Stewardesses have been taken care off, because the Kull-Wing models fly completely level after the first 10 minutes and will keep flying completely level untill landing procedures start, so no hauling carts up an isle at an incline with the Kull-Wing series. This allows KEA to use only the prettiest of their air-crew without having to worry about their strength to hold back the carts. In order to make landing a breeze we have equipped the Kull-Wing series with massive airbraking flaps. For the pilots this means they can approach the runway at just about any speed they like, deploy the flaps once close to the runway and touchdown as low as 30 m/s without risk of tailstrikes, or other landing damage. They can land on a dime due to the low descend speed and they can take off in barely twice the landing distance at a mere 40m/s when required, though we recommend the pilots try to take off at about 50m/s for passenger comfort. These short distances allow the Kull-Wing to land on a longer runway, debark the passengers and embark a new group, throttle back up to full and use the remaining runway length to take off again. The island runway is long enough to perform this re-embarkation procedure on, so most small airports would not require the plane to be turned around at all saving a lot of time. We sincerely hope KEA likes the handling of the Kull-Wing series and would consider them instead of more Slinky or Stingy models. To compensate for the slight difference in efficiency KEA might hire cheaper, less experienced pilots to fly our planes instead.

He does, but it is our company policy that he can't do so on ANY flight because we consider it smoking.

Test pilot review: @neistridlar's NA slinky 152 Figures as tested Slinky 152 Fuel load: 2950 K Price: 31,199,000 Passengers: 152 Speed: 225.2 m/s Altitude: 1500 m Burn rate: 0.155 K/s Range: 4286km Test pilot notes: While Jeb was on his vaping break in between testing some waterplanes and test-flying a new design Skaled Komposites has been working on he noticed the tip of the nose of the Slinky 152 coming around the corner of the space plane hangar, then a window and another window and on and on and on untill a wing segment appeared and then a wing and the more windows and more and more and finally a tail, bungling a little bit as the Slinky 152 rolls over a little bump in the tarmac. Sneaking up behind him Gene whispers in his ear: "You're testing that tomorrow", Jeb jumps into the air, drops his vape and runs off down the SPH screaming at the top of his lungs, through the back door, around the admin building only to find that Gene was ahead of him and had taken the liberty of removing the wheels off of Jebs roadster and placing it onto a couple crates of beer instead. Frantically Jeb starts the engine and revs it right into the red, but to no avail, his car is not going anywhere! He'll have to bunk in the rafters again and will surely be flying the slinky the next day... But Jeb has flown the worst of the worst and this has been built by Neist Aerospace, known for their excellent planes! The handling will be good, the instructions adequate and there's a small chance there will be anything wrong with the Slinky 152! But Jeb noticed something the day before and nudged will, there's something fussing about in the compartment in front of the engine. "It states: Air Intake, no step!" Bill explained, "but there's no holes in it to let any air in." A low pitched whine comes from the compartment, even though the plane is completely shut down. "Must be a dragon in there! Bob exclaimed looking very worried. "A what?" Jeb asked, "A dragon" Bob explained, "a firebreathing mythical monster, looks much like this plane actually... Scaled fins on the back, floppy tail, long body with relatively small wings..." So Jeb has been having nightmares about mythical firebreating, flying creatures the size of a Slinky 152. "Could you imagine that thing escapes mid flight?" Valentina had whispered in his ear. It was actualy a surprise Jeb showed up at all yesterday! But there he was, trembling like a straw, coffe in one hand, sucking his vape ferociously this morning. He might not have moved at all! Approaching the Slinky 152, as far away from the tail as possible and coming from the front, Bob and Bill cart Jeb towards the plane to climb into the dragon's mouth cockpit. Reluctantly Jeb turns on the SAS control and moves the throttle forward. A load screeming noise comes from the tail of the plane with a little puff of smoke as the lumbering giant airplane jolts a bit and starts to move forward. Just before the end of the runway Jeb notices he's going the reccommended take off speed and pulls the steering wheel. Slowly, but surely the front wheels leave the tarmac. Not untill the pitch reaches a whopping 5 degrees upwards and the tail nearly striking the runway does the plane gently leaves the runway. With some notable effort Jeb manages to maintain pitch control and lift as he pulls in the gear. As the plane accelerates, Jeb pitches down very gently to gain some more speed. At about 170 m/s he ever so carefully pitches back up to 5 degrees to find the plane can maintain speed at this pitch while the back end starts to sputter a bit. At 1500 m/s Jeb starts pitching down again while the plane start picking up some serious speed. To Jebs surprise the Slinky 152 requires a 1.5 to 2 degree pitch up at cruise altitude and speed and he found that the Slinky 152 can slightly exceed it's stated cruise speed, but hardly the altitude. According to the brief there is such a thing as a ceiling this plane can operate at of about 3500, but Jeb's never going to reach that at a climb rate of 1 m/s. Jeb does calm down a lot during flight though as the Slinky isn't very maneuverable in all but the roll direction. Roll, Jeb found, is way more like a normal Neist aircraft and he is very prone to overcompensate on roll because all the other controls feel so heavy and lumberous. If this is a dragon, there's nothing to fear, anything can automaneuver the slinky 152, even smaller models of the slinky! We found the slinky can, to Jebs surprise, be ditched safely. This is not an easy procedure, but it's doable. Just pitch up at about 20 meters above the water to maintain 0 lift, or lack thereof, untill the speedometer drops to about 40 m/s, then slowly descend untill the tail hits the water at about 30 m/s horizontal speed. Landing on the runway is not so easy though. This plane could do with some airbrakes, or flaps! The slinky 152 doesn't really want to fly, so much as slowly drop with any speed below 100 m/s, but it doesn't really have the braking power to stop anytime soon, even with the thrust reverser (if you still have it after the wheels touch the ground). Also the Slinky 152 is very prone to tailstrikes, on take off, but particularly on landing. This too comforts Jeb who knows just what to do to get rid of that pesky baby dragon in the back. The verdict: Although the Slinky 152 is a VERY fuel efficient plane and can fly a LONG way on fairly little fuel, we don't trust it. Firstly, there's a dragon in the back! Secondly, the dragon can easily escape due to the tailstrikes the Slinky 152 is prone to and we have no idea where to get a new one. Lastly, the plane wobbles whichever steering maneuver is made, which scares the living daylights out of the annoyed passengers. We don't recommend KEA buys any of these and sticks to the smaller Slinky and Stingy models they already own, or maybe expand that part of the fleet some more.

That kinda sucks, @Box of Stardust, I purposely keep a lot of my more important designs backed up for precisely this reason. on top of that I work in like 4 folders of KSP and ALWAYS play in one of the copies, never the original install (that's a modding thing, if KSP updates automagically I would be forced to download all mods again, but only after they update, so working in a copied KSP folder solves this issue)

Pretty much, yeah, 87 to be precise

Confused mk2 with size 2 there, the mk2 cabins are heavy for their passenger count, so I don't use them much

check my Kerbal-x in my signature, it's on there and yes, I have submitted that flying boat

It would become my Aqua Twin eventually

Test pilot review: @neistridlar's Neist Air Company Seezik 16 (L) Figures as tested Seezik 16 Fuel load: 200K (max 400K) Price: 15,375,000 Passengers: 16 At reccomended speed and altitude: Speed: 180 m/s Altitude: 5500 m Burn rate: 0.04834 Range: 744km (max 1489km) Full throttle at ceiling: Speed: 227.2 m/s Altitude: 11000 m Burn rate: 0.03916 Range: 1160km (max 2320km) What to say about this one then, like anything else Neist it flies GREAT! No jokes, it really does fly great, we couldn't get valentina out of the pilot seat for anthing other than food! She even went so far as to take the boys along on a trip to show them how she feels about them, unfortunately there wasn't enough fuel to return all 4 of them, so she left the boys alone to "go and get help" It's not without any room for improvement, but surely that won't be found in the flight characteristics. When we arrive at cruise altitude Valentina cut the throttle to about 2/3rd to maintain speed, but to maintain altitude she had to pitch the nose down by about 2.5 degrees to remain at level altitude. This being a small plane it will hardly annoy anybody other than the pilot because you can just about see te ground and nothing breaks the illusion of flight more than seeing the ground! So she decided to go full throttle and check out that fabled "operational ceiling" of 11500. To everybody's surprise the ceiling can be approached pretty closely, we didn't manage to pass 11km on our test runs. Furthermore the Seezik 16 is supremely efficient at this altitude once you get there. You can also fly perfectly level, so the ground is nowhere in sight for the pilot. When flown high and fast the Seezik has an exceptionally good range for such a tiny bit of fuel, I mean, even fully fueled it's still just 400 kallons worth and it'll get the little plane over 2300km away if tanking is available and half that if it's not. What's holding it back is size, though the brief was for a minimum of 16 passengers, a great many of the submitted planes exceed this number putting the Seezik at a below average passenger count, and thereby also making it unable to reach the top cheapest planes per seat in the seaplanes class, it's pretty close though! The verdict: We would like to order 5 Seezik 16's for pilot training of water landings, the Seezik being an examplary performer in that regard and the low fuel consumption makes it an excellent training plane. On top of that we would recommend KEA order some 20 pieces to service the many uninhabited islands of Kerbin, a niche tourism market where these planes would really shine! We do recommend to tell the pilots to level out the plane at 5500m and to keep the throttle on. The plane will just keep rising, extending the standard range as it continues upward while the passengers enjoy a nice, smooth, level flight. Figures as tested Seezik 16L Fuel load: 500k (max 900k) Price: 15,775,000 Passengers: 16 At recommended speed and altitude: Speed: 150 m/s Altitude: 5500 m Burn rate: 0.04626 Range: 1621 km (max 2918 km) Full throttle at ceiling: Speed: 208.2 m/s Altitude: 10500 m Burn rate: 0.04190 Range: 1790 km (max 3222 km) The Seezik 16L has as specified by the manufacturer: "A lot less visibility for the passengers", this is unfortunate because it has an absolutely insane flight time. When fully fueled and flown at high altitude for maximum range it can utilize the maximum 900 kallons of fuel aboard to fly the absolutely mind bending distance of 4472 km! But it takes a long time to do so and the lack of onboard entertainment will make it a bit dull perhaps. According to valentina the plane handles fairly well, but when compared to the regular Seezik it's the comparison of an eagle to an albatros. The KPPM is also a bit worse compared to the regular Seezik, but because of the supreme range the plane is very close to the top 16% best performers per seat-mile. The included barf bags also proved handy because the light little airplane bobs around on the ocean surface with the precise frequency of 3hz. It turns out this is the perfect frequency for causing, as the name suggests, sea sickness. Better use this one for lake-landings. The verdict: The Seezik 16L is a fine addition to the Seezik 16, but the flights will ultimately be boring and long. We recommend KEA buys 5 pieces to reach the further lying lakes and other outreach locations, such as polar return flights to check on the whales. We do recommend the same flying strategy as with it's smaller sister, which is to fly up to cruise altitude and then level out, but keep the throttle on so the plane will continue to fly ever higher and the range ever increasing. Considering the fuel load and the range, it's not so important when cruise alt is achieved, as long as it is achieved.

So I thought I could better if I ditched the gear and made a better start:

There: 3-4 seconds this time, actually beat my previous distance by slightly over 1 km! Video to follow: I could very likely still do better by fuel tuning the thing, currently it lands with 75/80 fuel in the tank and the video proof: (by my count I take off at second 33 and shut off/detach the engines at seconds 36-37

7 seconds (yes I just re-watched the video and paused the video when the wheels leave the ground at 33s and when I throttle down at 40s) I think I can do better, might even exceed the 25km mark again with 2s less thrust. (Hold my beer!)

Test pilot review: @Overlonder's LJ-30-100MR The figures as tested: Passenger cap: 36 Part count: 64 Price: 36,295,000 Takeoff: NOT BELOW 60 m/s (severe tailstrike warning) Measured at recommended altitude and speed: Cruise 7500 m Spd 250 m/s Fuel 1500 K Burn 0.11424 K/s Range: 150/.11424*250/1000 = 3283 km Measured at recommended speed and alt, after corrections: ceiling: 7500 m spd: 250 m/s fuel 1500 K Burn: 0.1097 K/s Range: 1500/.1097*250/1000 = 3418 km (a slight improvement on an already good range) What? Another LJ-30-100? Jeb sprints out of the vaping room at the control tower to go and check this one out! After the fun he had doing wheelies with it's predecessor he couldn't be more excited! The new prototype is rolled out, it looks a bit battered... The engines are a bit wonky pointing inward, the wing tips are tilted to face the airstream and the wings look a like they're held together with duct tape. But who cares? Wheelies on the runway, right?! Well no, this one sits pretty stable when fueled up. Too bad, Jeb! It's a promising start for the plane's landing gear, so Jeb, not the must trusting person, brings Bill around to have a look under the hood. As expected the steering is fully wired up to everything again. So Jeb pulls Bill into the cockpit to come along for the ride, so Bill can fix the steering if it proves too dangerous. Taxiing to the runway proved exciting with 3-wheel steering enabled and Jeb drifts the plane into position at the far end of the runway, punches the throttle to full and shoots past the SPH. At about 40m/s the plane becomes really unstable and Jeb needs to correct it a little to keep going in a straight line. Adusting the friction on the rear wheels proved of some help, but it's not altogether stable still. This won't stop Jeb, so he pulls the stick back and with a loud, crashing sound completely destroys the tail and the rearmost passenger compartment. Luckily we weren't using that particular compartment because as with its predecessor there's a fuel tank obstructing half of the cabin. Slightly panicky Jeb pulls the brakes and manages to save himself and Bill, but looses most of the plane unfortunately. We will not be bringing any test-Kerbals on this thing untill it proves safe to fly. Lucky prototypes come in multiples. To our surpirse the strange engine placement, bent wing tips and duct-tape wings turned out to be a feature and not caused by KEA's crammed hangar policy. It looks just like the first one, rear wheel steering included. Undaunted Jeb and Bill take the controls again for another go. This time Jeb speeds up to about 70m/s before pulling back on the stick, a little more gently this time, to find that it does take to the air when you're being careful. Flying directly east from the runway Jeb decides that since pitch control is managable he'll make some altitude prior to testing the steering abilities so they can parachute out if required. Turns out that was a good idea because the plane handles abysmally with all the controls strapped together like that. Bill has a quick look under the hood, clippes some random wires and before they can actually crash the plane Jeb gets it under control. Better to turn around and inspect the plane on the runway. The plane proves to be VERY stable on descent with the controls sorted out and doesn't lose pitch control until the speed drops below 40m/s. You can't land at that speed because half of that will be your vertical velocity in negative numbers. Better speed up a bit Jeb! Landing at about 70 m/s with full flap deployment is something Jeb could handle, any slower and the vertical speed would run out of control, any faster and the runway would not be long enough. Jeb struck the tail though, so there goes prototype number 2... Rolling out prototype number 3 Bill immediatly gets to work on the controls while Jeb rages at the mission director for having to fly another one of these. While he's at it Bill also fixes the steering, straightens out the engines and patches the wing tips so at least the whole thing is straight and under control. Jeb flies it very carefully over to the island runway and manages to pull a landing without damage, so far so good! Jeb and Bill take off again and head north to the mountains for some brochure shots and find that the plane is actualy really stable at high speed and altitude and reasonably efficient at the recommended settings. Its KPPM is a little below average it turns out according to Mortimer, which he confirms is good in big bold letters so as to avoid the previous mess up with the LJ-30-100. After flying out to the mountains and back again Jeb and Bill perform a stall test, they point the nose 0 degrees and shut down the engines completely, then wait and see what happens while leaning back, hands on the eject seat controls. The plane slows down, completely level, all the way down to 45m/s before it starts to sideslip and tilt a little to the right, they almost come full circle before the plane decides to go the other way and actually stalls out at a mere 35m/s (half of which is downward velocity). A little jelp from Bill attends Jeb to get the plane back under control, so he fires up the engines and pulls out of the dive with ease. "Since we've already destroyed 2 prototypes we might as well ditch this one in the water next to KSC" Jeb pronounces to the horrified look on Bill's face. Jeb puts the plane into a dive, shuts down the engines and pulls the brakes, hard. With all of the spoilers extended the plane does not exceed 150m/s coming down steeply towards the monolith. Just before the end Jeb pulls it straight, heads down the coast a bit to bleed of some speed and ditches the plane sort of safely at about 50 m/s. Just like his first runway landing Jeb destroys the tail section and the rear-most passenger compartment. One of the wings is lost and it has an engine less than it was delivered with. Mortimer decided to be on the resque crew so he could immediately confront Jeb with his next paycheck of roughly -120mln! "These things are expensive Jeb!" he yells as the reque chopper descends overhead. "I told Gene I didn't want to fly another one and you were right there Mort!" a p!ssed off Jeb yells back at him, "At least I didn't damage the runway and nobody died!" Other than the sound of the chopper everything turns silent as Bill is being hoisted out of the plane, he clearly lost his lunch and most of his consciousness. Jeb wipes the sweat off his forehead and clips on to the other line to be hoisted into the chopper as well. Mortimer tries to explain: "Look, they cost 37mln to make, then there's fuel use, the amount of passengers, the range you fly, the construction, the airframe, the parts, the engines and it all needs to be maintained. On a per seat basis this thing is among the most expesive planes we've ever tested and you just destroyed 3 of them on a single morning!" "Ah, well, if they're that expensive KEA isn't going to fly them anyway." Jeb replies. More silence ensues. The Verdict: We've been informed by KEA that we will not be paying for the three destroyed planes and neither will Jeb, becaue we wouldn't want him to have to break his vaping habit and live with the result of the rehab, he'll never be the same. Taking off and landing with the LJ-30-100MR is a hazard, if not just to the plane, the runway as well. In the air this plane flies pretty well after we sorted the controls. Cheaply it may fly, it is expensive to maintain and to purchase. As a cost saving measure we recommend KEA abstains from the buying of this craft to avoid all the other costs altogether.

Took a couple of tries to get the engine configuration right, but once you've got it, you've got it. Mass of 3.79t = thrust of 73.9 (actual thrust: 73.6) Race down runway, pitch up, drop engines, coast to altitude, mild pitch down at max alt. wait, wait, wait some more. tilt back up right before the end to prolong it as long as possible, then ditch in the sea. Result: 25.8km Proof: Video proof: