SasquatchM

I really like that prop setup

So are you going to arm it and submit it?

Probably, or at least run another tournament

The goal was to pick limits that would take a little bit of work to stay within and hopefully force some compromises. More thrust or weapons? Maneuverability or speed? I actually think the budget may be a bit too high, but it does still force some sacrifice and thinking outside the box - hopefully at least.

Sorry, no FAR.

The Adder was more a test piece than a serious submission, but if no one else enters something real, feel free to have it killed in the first round.

400ish at most

Can I suggest turning down the maximum speed? Some of the submitted craft are actually capable of hitting those speeds, but will disassemble if they try to then maneuver.

SUBMISSIONS CLOSED - TESTING IN PROGRESS - 1ST AND 2ND ROUND RESULTS BELOW We at SMA are accepting applicants for the destructive testing phase of our Combat Drone Initiative. Concerns over high cost and potential loss of Kerbal life required us to move on to a short range, low altitude unmanned aircraft for base defense. As such we are testing outside contractor developed drones against each other as well as our in house "Doppelganger" drone in 2 on 2 tournament style elimination tests. Applicant craft orientation during set up will be semi-random based on whatever amuses SMA staff at any given moment. Applicant craft are expected to meet certain requirements: Applicant craft must be unmanned. Applicant craft must use no more than 1 of any variety of stock probe core. Applicant craft must have at least 600 Battery life. Applicant craft must mass less than 5 tons armed and fueled. Applicant craft must cost less than 20,000 funds. Applicant craft must use the BD Armory combat systems. All weaponry in the BD Armory system is acceptable; however, all weaponry must be forward facing and any turret mounted system must be locked. All counter measures are acceptable. Applicant craft must have "Minimum Altitude" set to 150m, these are expected to be fast take-off and engagement craft. Applicant craft must have detection range and angle set to maximum, because why would you want less? Applicant craft must be assembled from only BD Armory and Stock components. Applicant craft must be submitted via link and include a hanger photo displaying mass and cost. Applicant craft must have the BD Armory AI Toggle hot-keyed to the '1' key. Only 1 craft per contractor will be accepted for submission and submissions can not be altered once made. Only 7 Applicant craft in total will be accepted for this trial. Submissions are due by 1/1/2016. Trials are planned to start 1/2/2016. Trials will begin as soon as the requisite number of submissions is met. Video results will be posted. Crying is unacceptable. Good luck. If we missed something obvious please let us know. 1ST ROUND RESULTS Doppelganger vs. QF-1 The Bat vs. Jester Scrappy Doo vs. Dawson's Christian ROUND 2 RESULTS - Jester and Scrappy Doo tied Scrappy Doo Jester ROUND 3 RESULTS Scrappy Doo is the winner of the close-in defense phase of the Combat Drone initiative trials. Congratulations DoctorDavinci on the win, and thank you to everyone else who participated. The Scrappy Doo drone will be as an opposition drone in the next phase of the CDI.

After experimenting with multi-engine setups i have come to believe that 2 is actually optimal, at least if you are using panthers. More than that and it seems that diminishing returns in thrust no longer offset the weight penalties in a fairly small craft. Yes the 4 engine Adder gets to altitude a bit faster than my Asp designs, but even then results are about 50-50, even if the fight gets to the gun to gun dogfight stage. The additional engines may prove more of a benefit with higher altitudes or greater engagement ranges where the higher speed makes more difference, but at the ranges and altitudes we are at it seems to be more about being the first and most stable craft to bear on the enemy and clever ai settings to aid in missile avoidance. It does seem as if the AIM-120s are a bit overpowered at the moment, but if both craft survive the missile exchange having the tightest controlled turn radius seems to win out. The wing stacking may make the biggest difference here as it not only aids in post-maneuver stability, but survivability as well.

I have been thinking about this as well. The way this challenge is set up the only limits are the point cost of weapons, perhaps for future challenges there can be tighter definitions. Not that this set up is bad - it encourages wilder designs and more experimentation, I know as I ran over 40 different simulations testing different designs and balancing to come up with what I finally submitted, but putting tighter limits in can encourage creativity in different directions. Here area few examples, obviously there could be many more: Total cost in funds. ( this on it's own may work to reduce wing stacking, or at least make it a trade off against weapon purchases ) Number of engines. Type and number of weapons. Tech limits. (only Wheesleys, or intake limits for example) You get the idea. With setups like these you get a more tightly defined experience that hopefully creates a more even playing field.

Adder Mk3 A Should be 60 pts on the head, no pics yet , but try it out.

Get with the times! It's the return of Bi- and Tri- planes!

I am working on a few tweaks now, several in the AI settings and possibly a couple design changes.

I like the design, but i think the pop-up turrets are a no go. The planes just shoot each other on the ground, depending on the setup, or dodging is almost impossible. I could be wrong though, in which case I have some more tweaking to do. That is really cool though! I have been trying a 3 engine design, but keep having stability issues. edit; Apparently I need to learn to read. I was looking at the last tournament rules, not the first page rules.

No FAR in this challenge

There was a great deal of discussion about box planes, but no ban came about. The majority, if I remember correctly, was "it should look plane-like", but no actual hard and fast definitions. If you would rather limit the wing styles, be my guest. I enjoy working out new solutions.

Generally my starts are less than a second apart: however long it takes to switch between craft. I usually have the alt set for 600 though, it was one of the rules in the last tournament and i just stuck with it.

I just had am idea. When setting up the test trials I have been placing the aircraft nearly back to back; that is, facing opposite direction about 200m apart. It may giver more interesting results if they were set up with only a 45 degree heading difference instead of a 180 degree difference.

First off, both planes need to be set for the same Minimum Altitudes, otherwise the lower has a marked advantage getting on target first and firing off it's missiles. The other issue is that the same maneuverability that assists you in gunfights actually can hurt you in a long range battle if you scrub off too much speed in the turns: It doesn't matter if you changed your heading if you are down to 50 m/s. You have to strike a balance between speed and turning to be successful. As far as missile avoidance, the sidewinders seem a little off for some reason. I have, quite literally, never been hit by one. I don't know if maybe the AI isn't waiting for the target lock, or if the flares are just super-effective if the sidewinder can not see the engine's heat signature. Avoiding AIM-120s seems to be more dependent on movement than the actual chaff. Sure i have the chaff on my planes, but it only seems to make a minor difference in the end.

So I ran several battles between the two planes. The deciding factor seems to be minimum altitude. Mine was set at 600m, yours at 150m. When left that way you won about 60% or so. When i changed the minalt to be the same for each craft, the results shifted the other way to about 90% in my favor. Although there were a couple of pretty cool dogfights after both craft had expended all of their missiles. I think I will try video capturing a fight if it gets to the point where we are down to guns.

I always thought it would be a good idea for the craft files to be submitted as private messages to the tournament-holder. Feel free to put pictures in the thread, but once the craft are posted, everyone starts tweaking their designs against the submissions. You get planes designed to beat certain other planes, not designs that stand on their own.

Did you want a certain naming convention for the craft files? Are unlocked turrets allowed (I strongly recommend not)? Is this 1 on 1? What are the point totals allowed?

Here is my submission for the most recent round: 2 Vulcan w/ 1 ammo box 18 pts 4 AIM 120s 16 pts 4 Flares 12 pts 4 Chaff 8 pts. TOTAL: 54 Pts. Craft File

You, sir, will require more rules. Turrets break these challenges if not banned.