TheHengeProphet

I'll get around to it... I've been working on getting its stability in line. Here is the version without hard points, vulcan only, and mod required for the cockpit. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/11337184/MRF-3B%20Black%20Mamba.zip

I have to agree with the annoyance at the lack of in-hangar tweakable guard mode. Ones I had adjusted in the previous version work as they should, but I am unable to adjust them in the current version until launch. Reasonably, an individual should be able to see another plane from about 5km away, but 3.5km to understand it's a target also seems somewhat reasonable. Perhaps an investigatory stage might be warranted, so that if a plane is within 5km or so, the plan would investigate, rather than continuing its loop. I suggest this, because I've been having an issue with launching planes with them seeing each other as targets, and yet proceeding to ignore that after they have launched because they're out of "visual distance" by the time they reach altitude, and both happen to circle in directions not conducive to seeing each other again.

Actually, pulling up doesn't make it better or worse, and no, the back legs start jumping, basically. I've tried reducing the brake torque, but then the plane just doesn't stop. I think I need to pull this into a fresh install... Anyways, I had my MRF-2 face off against the MRF-1B... At standard half-thrust flight, the 1B would constantly scrub all its speed out, and never get over 200 m/s. However, at full throttle, and given 40% control, it outperformed the 2 every time... Really not sure how to feel about this. However, if stock wings are overperforming, it makes some sense. Also, I noticed something interesting: B9 wings have a temperature tolerance of 2000, while stock wings have one of 2400, which explains why planes built with stock wings can weather missiles. On multiple occasions, the MRF-1B was hit by an AIM-120, suffered nothing more than turning red, and proceeded to turn around and wreck the MRF-2 with vulcans.

Even on half thrust, I had my plane do the same thing in another battle, but it only made it to 40km, rather than the 72. The plane itself has a not-so-unrealistic flight ceiling of around 17km, because it has so much relative wing area, where the engines will cut out around 22km (but at half throttle, they don't provide a whole lot of thrust). I think the F-16 needs more forward mass, or less rearward mass... I'll do some testing to see if I can make it viable. Even under 100% thrust value, it just couldn't stay level. I would like to know what your thoughts are on reaction wheels being active. I personally deactivate then on any plane I build, but that's because I don't think fighters should have magic forces giving them extra control authority (though it is really nice when the thing stalls out). Now, if I can only figure out this landing gear issue, things will be just peachy...

Thanks! And here's the list of parts I use on a regular basis: -Command The old CB-C Viper cockpit HV Mk2-1 R-71 Mk2 SC-TD Multipurpose cockpit -Control None of these, but I've mainly been working on in-atmo craft. -Air Intakes 1.25m to Mk2 inline air intake -Engines 'Afterburn' TurboRamJet Been working on a challenge that's restrictive toward engines. -Aerodynamic Chines in three flavors Mk1 scale chine pieces - short, long, and end cap segments for 1.25m parts Mk2 scale chine pieces - short, long, and end cap segments for Mk2 fuselages Mk2 scale chine wing root pieces - chine adapter, short, and long segments -Fuselage and structural Shrouded 1.25m Engine Mount Hypersonic Mk2 nosecone with integrated RCS Spadetail Mk2 to wing adapter Mk2 inverter fuselage

Yeah, facing off against it several times, if I managed a "click and go" control-ability set for both my MRF-2 and your Su-27, my plane was the consistent victor. However, if I adjusted each plane's control value mid-flight, the Su-27 became more maneuverable than mine, but couldn't keep up on speed, and it became a much more even match. That 30mm gun is a beast (having taken out my cockpit several times), and your Su-27 is a tank, having gotten hit by a sidewinder and losing nothing but some missiles and its air intakes! I was running these dogfights at 100% thrust for both craft, with a max speed set at ~400m/s as it was much more interesting that way. Now I need to try my craft vs some other craft! Update: The F-16 proved too unstable, even under 30% control value, preventing it to perform even basic combat flight without fatally stalling. The Rafale also proved quite unstable, but was still able to function. Unfortunately, after three flights, each ended with an AIM-120 up the rear, despite chaff. The F-18 proved an incredibly even match with each plane allowed full control authority. Incredibly, even with one of its wings shot off, the F-18 continued to haphazardly maneuver and remain flying, taking shots at the other craft when possible! However, with its combat maneuverability compromised, it was only a matter of time before it was finished off. Now to continue on for a best-of-three... I'm almost daunted by this, considering each of the matches with prior craft took about 10 minutes each, and against the F-18, even the first lasted almost a half hour. Okay, things started moving faster when I upped max thrust to full. I'm not sure I can declare a clear winner here. Both managed to destroy each other 2/7 times (both died from combat-related injuries), and killed the other unscathed once. One of the double-death scenarios involved the F-18 shooting off the tips of the MRF's wings, and the MRF continuing to fly as a lifting body and getting a lucky shot with the 20mm as the F-18 blew past, causing it to careen into a mountain. The F-18 managed to rend itself in twain during a daring maneuver once, and the MRF-2 ran out of fuel once. One fight, a whole lot of nothing happened, and the MRF-2 performed this insane climb maneuver and went into space, eventually re-entering and returning to safe flight almost 100km away in what I would consider an incredible disengage action. I suppose this is one of the reasons we need to keep those engines throttled down, heheh. In end, though, I might have to give the combat edge to the F-18 on endurance standards, and very slightly in the maneuverability departments, even though the MRF-2 has the advantage in speed, and also maybe stealth, if that matters...

Now I'm wondering if there is some way to detect for a craft's radar cross section, versus both active and passive radars. Oh, I forgot to provide my assessment of the Su-27! It is really quite nice to fly. Heavy (12t dry!) and slow, but quite nimble. Okay, I ran a couple dogfights between the Su-27 and one of my test planes. The Su-27 was unable to compete, simply because it couldn't get up to speed. Eventually, as a test, I set its engines at 100% thrust (it was still having some trouble at 75%), and it began to function quite well. It is ridiculously maneuverable, and the AI can only be trusted with about 65% control at best, and about 40% control at low speeds. If the intention is to let the AI dogfight to find a winner, I suggest people tune their aircraft and AI parameters for best one-click use (turn on and go).

That's cool that you approximated and F-117, but I'm pretty sure they were simply not a fighter. I'm curious if yours is capable of competing in an air-to-air combat.

Unfortunately, camber is not the issue here. I get the same performance with the camber being up to five degrees off, though I haven't tested past that. The pictures show that the camber is off by a fraction of a degree. A fraction so small I can't actually get closer to it with the adjustment resolution KSP allows. The cockpit does look kinda goofy, but that sharp shape is great for reducing the wave drag area. It does cause the plane to be a little squirrely under high pitch at low velocity, but if you've gone that far you're probably at risk of stall anyways. I haven't messed around with Procedural parts... been thinking about it, but it's just yet another mod to install, haha. So, I actually have a rule with this plane that if there is a significant quantity of parts clipped into an individual part, I can't use it for fuel storage. As such, the engine nacelles and the wings are currently the only holders of fuel, allowing the rest of the area to be used for equipment. This nets me around 500L of fuel, which isn't that much less than an F-16 carries. When you say the plane should be able to pull a 9g turn in sub-sonic flight, do you mean that so long as it's not going mach 1, or should it be below transonic speed as well? Transonic speed is around 275m/s at sea level.

The plane is perfectly stable until braking, at which point I get a directional influence left or right. I tried almost doubling the wheelbase and suffered the same issue, not being worse or better. When I have more time, I'm going to run further tests...

Adjustable landing gear is already on the list. My primary concern is I may not be able to use the cockpit I have been using, and there is no way to approximate its shape in stock. Speaking of which, this is my current project: MRF-3* Black Mamba I created this particular album for the Adjustable landing gear thread in hopes they can help resolve this bizarre wobble I'm getting from the landing gear.

Alright, so all of the wheels are attached to the same fuselage section, so frame warping should not be an issue here... I have been trying to adjust spring tension and damping, but have really achieved the same result each time: when braking, it tends to start bouncing left and right, eventually going far enough to prove catastrophic.

I just noticed some things... heh... So, are there no other mods allowed than the ones listed in the OP? Rule 19 feels like it should be referencing Rule 18, not 14. "18) Should an AA/AAQ-28 Targeting pod be mounted, an ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) pod must also be mounted" implies that either you have the targeting pod and all related peripherals, or you don't have it at all, even with what that rule goes on to explain. I may, or may not have figured out what was wrong with my planes, but I certainly don't understand what I did... They started working in a horrifically nimble manner. Also, I was trying to figure out why your Su-27 had so much lift compared to my planes, despite the simulations saying that they have near identical lift profiles. Then I remembered something Ferram said: I wonder if this is something to take into consideration, but probably doesn't matter much, as B9 wings carry their own benefits, even with the loss in lift.

C: Have them both! I don't use many of the engines, but I like having them there. I have a query for you, SuicidalInsanity: May I redistribute your original Viper cockpit on its own, for the sole purpose of allowing my craft to be usable by others?

Actually, is there a reason it has to be below 150m/s? If it can land on the island runway, that really should be sufficient.

I've actually been having an issue of them not being effective enough, but that's just par for the course, right?

I've tried to let the AI fly it, but it just can't. Beyond that, I haven't done much testing... I've been more trying to pinpoint what has gone so desperately wrong with my planes. Do you have an armed version of the Su-27 that is pre-tuned for AI use?

I would really enjoy steering trim... that would make my life so much easier, haha. Okay don't know if this mod is even attended to anymore, or if this is the place to post bugs, but I appear to be having an issue with landing gear either not braking evenly, or not holding up under load. Using two light landing gear in the rear and one medium at 0.8 size in the front on a 13t craft, I get a distinctive directional influence to the right. It's strong enough to put me into a flat spin on the runway, which causes some spectacular drifting acrobatics, but is ultimately lethal.

So, there is actually something funky going on with the B9 wings. I'll just keep working with what I have. I just need to drastically increase control deflection to get a similar effect... Not sure I'll be able to pull a 9g sub-sonic turn, though. These engines just don't have that power at half thrust. I can pull a 6g sub-sonic and 15g+ supersonic, though.

The low drag was specifically attributed to the original Viper1 cockpit in the Mk2 Stockalike Expansion, due to its sharp profile. That stock cockpit I attached to reduce mod count drastically altered its low drag profile. I might be able to approximate it with stock parts if I use one of the Mk2 tail sections and finagle on some air intakes, but... ugh. I figured this might be the case. Oh well, thanks for looking into it!

Using B9 Pwings. Weight of at least 10t under full combat load is completely reasonable. An F16 weighs 9.1t dry, and carries over 2t of fuel. My only complaint here is rule 17. What if that targeting pod is actually an integral part of the craft? Just by having it, it MUST be equipped with anti-ground measures? I'm not sure I follow this logic. I'm not a fan of slow landings, but I'll see what I can do about that... I would, however, suggest that radar be a requirement. Unless it's exclusively a close-range fighter, it's essentially necessary for target acquisition. You should also provide a link to all mods required for the challenge in the OP.

I have a number of mods installed. I removed all modded parts excluding B9 Pwings, meaning it has an ugly placeholder that brings its wave-drag down to around .7, but it's the wing arrangement which causes the twitchy nature anyways. I will PM you links to download both the stripped and original.

I'm having an issue in two plane dogfights, in which one plane will wind up in front of the other, then do everything in its power to remain in front of that plane, within shooting range. It's incredibly frustrating to watch. Update: I realize now that it was a snaking maneuver to scrub speed and try to get behind the target. It started working when the planes' top speeds were set within 30 m/s of eachother. It then became an epic battle of wills to try to get behind one another, but neither was particularly willing to lose on speed in order to get there. This occurred for quite some time before one chased the other into a mountain... Also, I was wondering if it might be reasonable to eventually be able to set flight profiles for individual planes. Setting a flat 0.7 control factor for all speed ranges greatly inhibits a craft. Even more so if the craft has so much control authority that the AI cannot be trusted with more than 0.3 of its potential below 200 m/s and can only be trusted with the full 1 at around 350 m/s. No, I'm not just saying this about my plane. I've been trying to dogfight other people's planes for some time now, and most seem to have this issue.

Unfortunately, the latest FAR doesn't seem to like... pretty much any of the planes I built. They're down to almost 30% control capability, and have become just a burden to fly. All except the one using stock control surfaces... I'm having a bear of a time with this.

Control surfaces seem somewhat less capable in this update, but I guess that can be attributed to the adjustment in aerodynamics. I am, however, struggling with that many of my planes now have drastically increased drag, and almost 30% their original control, while also having only about 60% the lift. After wondering what was going on, I started wondering if it was the B9 Procedural wings, so I tested a craft that had stock wings and control surfaces. It worked better than ever... Then I took a craft that was made not long after that (though prior to the update), which was essentially the same, but with procedural control surfaces, and it was nearly un-flyable. I then decided to attach stock control surfaces to one of my B9-winged planes, and it handled fairly well compared to its original arrangement. This same plane went from having a mach wave drag area of ~0.29 in Goldstein to having one of ~.72 in Haack. However, if I adjust the wing down a couple degrees in Haack, the wave drag drops down to ~.27 in Haack, and up to ~.32 in Goldstein. Yet, if I adjust the wing down a touch further, it goes back up into the .7 region in Haack and ~.36 in Goldstein. Sorry, I'm taking you on a journey here. Anyways, I built two planes that are nearly identical, using B9 wings and control surfaces, and they operate... nearly identically. I've been trying to hunt down what is going on here, and I just can't pinpoint it, which is incredibly frustrating. May be multiple things going on here...