Mars-Bound Hokie

Everybody knows about the famous Corsair Skipper Riley and his role in WWII (or lack thereof) - and how he trained the fastest crop duster in the world. However, nobody seems to recall that he had a son who fought in Vietnam, an A-7 Corsair II. And unlike his dad, he kept flying into danger despite setbacks. The A-7 Corsair II on display in the SPH. To increase thrust and speed, I used two Wheesley engines clipped together (by using two crossfeed-enabled small hardpoints and small Oscar-B fuel tanks to attach them to the aircraft) and stashed them in a structural fuselage. However, the plane has one air intake - which has led to a few flaming outs in the very beginning and the end of the flight. To address the flaming out, I used two air intakes clipped together. However, for some reason, that resulted in a worse cruise performance. So now, the replica has one air intake. You’ll get some flameouts in the beginning, but the engine/s will get back online soon and your plane will run better. To repeat, DO NOT add another air intake. The real-life A-7 had an airbrake under the fuselage, so I included one in this replica. To make sure it didn’t activate along with the gear brakes, which would result in the plane losing balance and/or crashing while landing, I removed the airbrake from the brake action group and set it to be toggled by the AG5 button. The wing connectors on the side of the fuselage are just for aesthetic purposes. The A-7 firing decoys a minute after takeoff. It only has eight, so use them wisely. Better yet, don’t get locked on by enemy missiles in the first place. Historic photograph of an A-7 Corsair II flying over Kerbin’s oceans 15 minutes after taking off from a carrier. This plane was intended for close air support (CAS) against enemy ground units. It should therefore come as no surprise that this plane was nominated to be transported to Laythe when Kerbin established a military presence there many decades later. The A-10 Warthog was also a good choice, but it was not designed for use on carriers. Either way, it got turned down for faster and more modern carrier-borne aircraft. After a little less than 45 minutes, the plane could fly at cruising speed and gradually ease up on the throttle. Of course, the pilot would be in for a very long flight if he didn’t have any missions to complete. #planareclipse Sometimes, daring aerial photographers would fly directly underneath aircraft and line it up with the sun so that it looks like a plane-shaped eclipse. A front view shot of the A-7 Corsair II flying over Kerbin. Four hours and almost 3,000 kilometers later, and the plane had 20 fuel units left. Just like with my C-141 Starlifter replica, I had to turn south to avoid running out of fuel while too far into water. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Status: UNARMED; MINIMAL COUNTERMEASURES 8 x Flares 8 x Chaffs ONE LAUNCH: (1 x Flare) and (1 x Chaff) Altitude: 7.4 km (~24.3k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Velocity: 220 m/s (~492 mph) Flight time: 4 hours Expected Range: 3,000 km WARNING: the plane will get bouncy and will experience a few flameouts while landing, but if you know what you’re doing you could put the plane down in one piece. Also, make sure your airbrake is retracted before touchdown. A navy pilot stepping out of the A-7 after putting the plane down on dry land. Airbrake test over the KSP. Don’t worry about it tipping your plane up and throwing it off-balance before takeoff and during landing - unless you hit the AG5 button by mistake. The brake action group will not work on the airbrake. That's another plane down that I also have in my "Maximum USAF" aircraft lineup in War Thunder. I've already copied the A-10 Warthog and the F-16 Fighting Falcon, and @TheKspEngineer recently did the F-4 Phantom II. All that's left is: Already have in War Thunder, in museum: F-111A Aardvark Don't have in War Thunder yet, in museum: F-15A Eagle Don't have in War Thunder yet, NOT in museum: F-14B Tomcat I sure got a long grind to go, both in War Thunder and in this KSP thread. Thank you all for taking the time to check it out. Replicas Remaining: 202

Hear a plane being described as "a missile with a man in it," and you might think about the Japanese Okha and/or the German Komet (or its Japanese variant) from WWII. While both certainly qualify for such titles, it was actually used to market the American F-104 Starfighter from the early Cold War. The F-104 Starfighter on display in the SPH. After the nose, I went straight to the engine and the tailfin. When choosing the engine, I was stuck between the Panther and the Whiplash. I then chose the panther since it was shorter in length, could switch between supersonic and regular mode, and had a higher vectoring range than the Whiplash. As for the tailfin, I had to move it back as much as possible just for the tip of the rudder to be placed further back than the engine tip - just like the real Starfighter. After that was completed, I added a battery and a drag chute. The real-life Starfighter’s fuselage was long, but I didn’t want to make the replica’s fuselage took long or else it would look ridiculous and flimsy later. So, I worked on the engines and had their tanks end where the tailfin began. I then placed the engines on the tanks, moved them closer to the fuselage, and bent them downward. To extend the plane’s range - and since a lot of pictures of the F-104 I saw had wingtip fuel tanks - I added those to the craft. After the test cruise, I configured the fuel flow priority so that the external tanks will drain first. The AG5 (Action Group 5) button will toggle the crossfeed and switch the fuel flow from the external tanks to the main fuselage. Hitting it again will switch it back to the external tanks, and so on. If you’re unsure about which tanks are draining now, right-click on a fuselage or external tank and see which one of them is draining. The AG0 (Action Group 0) button will detach the external tanks from the plane. I set that button farther away from AG5 to reduce the risk of accidental detachments. This plane starts with 1120 fuel units total (out of 2010), and the external tanks hold 300 of them. Assuming you don’t touch the AG5 button at all, you can lose the tanks once you hit 820 fuel units left to shed some dead weight - and extend your range. Someone in the manufacturing plant screwed up the cockpit button labels and put the "ENGINE ON/OFF" label on the button that actually detaches the fuel tanks. The KAA investigators thought Jeb was being dumb, but the owner’s manual was found to have not matched what was displayed inside the cockpit. Further testing of the aircraft’s controls later proved that Jeb was telling the truth about the buttons being mislabeled. In other words, anyone could have gotten it wrong. Less than five minutes down, and the Starfighter has already cleared Alt Test Mountains. Flying over the ocean at 9.975 km altitude. At the 33-minute mark, the plane on autopilot was picking up speed. When this picture was taken, the Starfighter was flying at 800 m/s at an altitude of 10.1 km. This phenomenon reminded me of my F-16 replica from a year ago. It started out slow at full throttle in wet (supersonic) mode and the altitude locked, but in the end it was flying just fast enough to catch fire. With such an inconsistent performance, I don’t know if I could even log recommended cruise stats since they rely on consistency. At least I can jot down how the flight began vs how it ended. 50 units of fuel left, and the Starfighter is flying at 814 m/s. Jeb cut off the engines and looked for a nice flat spot to land his jet, and there were plenty of them here. I’m sure the plane could go farther if the empty tanks were detached earlier, but I didn’t set the fuel flow priority until after this flight. You can expect a better performance this time. TEST CRUISE STATISTICS COULD NOT BE LOGGED BECAUSE THE PLANE’S FLIGHT PERFORMANCE WAS FAR TOO INCONSISTENT TO QUALIFY The KSP replica's test flight performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 9.975 km (32,726 ft) Starting Velocity: 295 m/s (659.9 mph) Ending Velocity: 814 m/s (1,821 mph) Throttle: 100% Range: 820 km (509.5 miles) External Tank Status: Attached the entire time Jeb doing a smooth landing with the F-104 Starfighter, and with the aid of its drag chute. Both tanks were recovered without a scratch, although KSP personnel have argued that Jeb should have ditched them and increased his range. At the same time, the tank’s design engineers were rumored to have contemplated installing parachutes that would deploy upon detachment from the plane. Perhaps that can be done in the next upgrade. Sorry I've been gone from this thread for so long. Besides a marathon, work, road trips, and watching the eclipse, I've been grinding the U.S. Air tech tree in War Thunder lately. I still have a long way to go before I get the F-15A Eagle and the F-14B Tomcat (in that order), and then my "Maximum USAF" collection is complete. Any and all help to add to this showcase thread is greatly appreciated. UPDATE: I changed my craft file with the following: Finally updated my game to 1.12.5 this afternoon; was previously 1.12.4. Installed drag chutes on backs of external tanks and set them to deploy upon detachment. Replaced the front nose cone with a fly-by-wire for aesthetic and so non-pilots can use it. Put a USAF symbol on the top of the left wing. Replicas Remaining: 203

Great job with the F-4 Phantom, @TheKspEngineer. I play War Thunder as well; U.S. air's my favorite (though U.S. naval isn't bad either). Interestingly enough, the F-4S Phantom II I bought at the 2023 Christmas sale is my most reliable plane so far. If you look at my checklist for this thread, you'll recognize a lot of these planes from their respective countries' tech trees. Replicas Remaining: 204

Bet that will be a great story to tell the grandkids.

I'd love to see the timelapse when it's completed, please. Was it a looooong drive arriving to your watch spot as well? My family and I agree that April 8th, 2024 might have been the most profitable day of that farmer's life. With cars from 25 different states (plus at least one car from Ontario) pouring in for the eclipse at a high-demand spot, why wouldn't he take advantage of that opportunity? Even on the off-chance he charges for parking on his field for Fourth of July celebrations, the total sales for one of them would still be nowhere near what he made this Monday. I'd also like to see your timelapse when it's completed, please. That would make a fun KSP challenge. Waiting for the right time for an eclipse. Will need outside help in determining the dates and times. Getting in position for said eclipse. Will also need outside help in determining the location and the path of totality. Flying at the same speed of said eclipse when it happens. I may not know where and where said eclipses will happen on Kerbin, but I got a lot of supersonic planes on my KerbalX ready to go.

PLOT TWIST: that was no moon. Dang it, I was so close. We parked less than 100 feet from the corn field entrance.

That's awesome, although if we did then neither of us would have recognized the other. By the way, my family also found cars from 25 states (and one Canadian province) in the field next to the museum grounds (and the nearby Lowe's).

My family came to visit me in Ohio (and they brought the dog, too) a few days ago for the eclipse. We left early this morning for the Armstrong Air and Space Museum in Wapakoneta, and it's a good thing we did. The line to the museum parking lot was long, but we found an empty field next to the grounds that charged $40 for parking; totally worth being so close to the exit and having grass for the dog to lie on. The next several hours included having breakfast at Bob Evans, walking around, playing card games and mini cornhole, texting friends, drinking water, my mother messing with her camera's new eclipse filter, and also getting pictures in our "Twice in a Lifetime" t-shirts. When the partial eclipse began, we would frequently look up with our eclipse glasses on and see the sun turning from an orange circle into Pac-Man, then a crescent moon, and then a tiny sliver. While waiting for totality, I used the phone camera filter Mom gave me and took some partial eclipse photos. Below is my best shot from my phone. Taken 1434 EDT When totality was getting closer, it got dark in Wapakoneta fast. More specifically, it looked like a storm was coming while all the lights were turning on. It reminded us of when we watched the eclipse of 2017, only there were no farm animals making noise this time while the sun was getting blocked. Finally, when totality hit at 1509 EDT, we saw an amazing thin ring of fire. That was also when Dad bunched us all together to take a group selfie with the total eclipse in the background. Taken 1511 EDT My best shot from my phone, although I think Mom got clearer images with her fancy digital camera. We noticed a small orange spot at the bottom of the ring, but we don't know what it is. Taken 1511 EDT At first glance, you would think it was sunset at Wapakoneta. But it was actually early-mid afternoon, and the sun was blocked thanks to the moon. Taken 1512 EDT I changed my phone's orientation to include the eclipse. If you look closely enough, you can see the center of the ring. And you can see Venus in the sky too. After totality ended, we rushed back into our car and left town immediately. Getting out of Wapakoneta had almost zero traffic; we were so close to the field exit and we had packed everything in the car, including the dog, at least 20 minutes before totality even began. However, when we hit Dayton, that was when the major traffic jams began. Long story short, we returned to my apartment in plenty of time for dinner. And that's my eclipse story. Really? Where specifically?

Thank you very much. Any requests from the checklist you would like to see in action? And out of curiosity, have you ever played Blazing Angels yourself?

For War Thunder's new update plane, I would like to nominate the Martin NBS-1 for an American Rank I bomber. The Martin NBS-1 on display in the SPH. Although few people are likely to know about this, I included MB-2 designation in the craft name in case someone tries looking for the plane with that tag. I started with my Caproni Ca.3 replica and modified the rear so that it only has one fuselage instead of two. As for the engines, I reduced the motor size to 10% and kept the main torque limit at 20%. I noticed in my last several test flights involving props that the recommended throttle for cruise was way less than half (sometimes even a third), and I recall when I first started using props that I was advised to have a reduced motor size. So, in hopes of increasing fuel efficiency and leaving a recommended cruise throttle that made sense, I configured the engines as I had mentioned earlier. While this did work wonders for the plane’s range, it did not help my sleep schedule. I switched the regular prop blades with ducted blades to improve performance, especially speed. If I ever do prop planes again, I’ll either use ducted blades since they work the best or the large regular prop blades (like the ones on larger aircraft like the Commando or the Peacemaker). Since the real-life NBS-1 had wings that folded, I started with taking the outer halves of the wings off and adding hinges to the middle before re-attaching them. Just like with my XF-85 Goblin replica, I removed the symmetry and did not autostrut them so that I don’t end up with freezing hinges again. Behind the front gunner, I installed a solar panel to mimic a seat and to give the plane a power source if it’s just sitting there in the sun. For the finishing touch, I added a couple of monoprop tanks with tailfins to copy bombs. Just like the Martin B-10, this plane never saw action for the U.S.. However, you have to admit this plane looks pretty cool for a biplane bomber. And if you think the aesthetic is impressive, you should see its performance - even with a couple of bombs near the nose. Photograph of a Martin NBS-1 replica with its wings folded on the runway. This makes storage easier when the plane was not in use - at least when actual Martin NBS-1s were flown. However, just like in real life, this plane was soon replaced with metal monoplane bombers such as the Martin B-10. This particular replica was built for showcasing purposes in Woomerang and put on static display when not in use. Jeb didn’t need to touch the controls (except for throttle and turning SAS on) to get off the ground at only 30 m/s. The Martin NBS-1 flying north through the countryside. This replica, which was completed around the time Bill, Jeb, and Val graduated high school, came equipped with a probe core. Old historical records buried deep in (what used to be) Martin Aerospace Incorporated’s archives point towards the NBS-1 having an incredible range for a bomber of its time. However, there were also complaints of pilot fatigue and some crashes resulting from said fatigue documented as well. To prevent such tragedies from happening again with this replica, the man who commissioned this expressly mentioned that it should come with an autopilot and a means to control it remotely from the ground. For once, Jeb was grateful that this plane had an autopilot. From what he was told before testing this replica, he and Bill were in for a long and agonizingly slow flight. With the autopilot on, the two of them could sleep while the plane was cruising. While flying north, Jeb had to fly around some mountains. Good thing Bill was there to wake him up, or they would be dead. Jeb and Bill flying over Kerbin’s north pole with the moon shining behind them. Minutes after this photo was taken, they passed out from the cold. Apparently, you need helmets if you’re flying in an open cockpit in the polar regions. Good thing that the plane had a probe core connected to ground control, who also received vital readings from the two men's suits. Otherwise, they would be toast when the plane ran out of fuel. After clearing the north pole, the NBS-1 is seen flying towards some islands with ground control looking for a place to land it. Emergency rescue crews in the area were alerted and dispatched to the area. Here's how I calculated the range for this replica: Below is the KSP replica's cruise performance stats compared side-by-side with the real-life NBS-1's. I'm displaying them in this format to showcase how superior the replica is. REAL LIFE KSP REPLICA - ARMED (WINNER) U.S. Metric U.S. Metric Altitude 7,700 feet 2.35 km 13,944 ft 4.25 km Velocity 99 mph 44.3 m/s 168 mph 75 m/s Range 400 miles 650 km 759.3 miles 1222 km As for other performance stats for this replica: Best Vertical Speed to Altitude: <10 m/s Flight Time: 4 hours, 30 minutes A (not-so) perfect landing. If both occupants didn’t need to be rushed to the hospital after collection, it would have been perfect. This plane was armed the whole time. If it wasn’t, it might have better performance stats - but this should at least serve as a minimum expectation. After Jeb recovered, he told his friends he learned why Marxan pilots - which were located around Kerbin’s south pole - always wore closed helmets while flying open-cockpit planes in their home turf. And here's a picture of the bombing test. While Jeb and Bill were in the hospital, the NBS-1 replica was transported back to Krakopolis and two more pilots volunteered to do a fake bombing run. Seriously, this plane would make a great addition to anyone's War Thunder collection. This bomber would also serve well for rookies or those that feel like going old school. Gaijin could replace the PBY-5 Catalina - the multi-engine amphibious bomber variant that DOES NOT have wheels (and hence can't reliably land on the ground) - with the Martin NBS-1, giving it the chance to defend the Stars and Stripes once more. The PBY-5A has wheels and is on display in the Air Force Museum. Another plane I built that was the first of its kind on KerbalX, and I did (in my opinion) all the good stuff in the Early Years Gallery. Perhaps you all can help me with it while I return to building jets. Thank you all very much. Replicas Remaining: 205

Bomb Austria for the Italy. Show no mercy, slaughter them like sheep. Oh, no, they're fighting back. Oh, this is bad. My pants are soaked in pee. Caproni, oh please help me now. Send me some Ca.3s. Historic photograph from the First Imperial Wars. Here we see a Gondolan Caproni Ca.3 bomber flying southwest to reach Krakopolis after Heinkel landed troops on the mainland. Those of you who followed this showcase thread may remember the story of how the Green Baron and the Heinkelians took over what would become the Island Airfield during the First Imperial Wars, how they used it for their attack on Krakoplis. What happened after that is the subject of today's story. The Caproni Ca.3 on display in the SPH. When you launch the plane, expect it to rest on the tailwheels instead of the front. Don’t freak out about historical inaccuracy, as the real-life counterparts often had their rear gear on the ground with the front wheel in the air while resting. In fact, the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, OH has supports holding the plane up at the rear gear. The front gear (both in-game and IRL) is for the pilots to land easier. I started with the cockpit from by triplane replica so I can keep an open cockpit aesthetic. At the same time, since two pilots were in that cockpit, I installed two command seats - and one ladder for pilots to board and disembark. However, that still left the issue of the long nose for the gunner and a central point of command (due to two seats), so I stuck with a probe core and a fuel tank. With the probe core coming with MechJeb, this made the test cruise way easier and performance more efficient. For aesthetic accuracy, I used Propeller Blade Type Bs with blade angles fixed at 16 degrees. However, this meant that the plane’s thrust would be weaker than if I used ducted blades. So, for the two front engines, I kept the motor size and output at 100% BUT I left the main throttle torque limit at 20%. As for the third pusher engine in the back, although I had two other engines in the front for thrust, I didn’t want to deal with that annoying roll. So, I reduced the rear engine’s motor size and output to 20% while leaving its main throttle torque limit alone. This engine will not be as powerful as the other two, but it should keep rolling down to a minimum (without the use of MJ aircraft autopilot). The rear tailwheels had to be moved further forward and lower than expected, otherwise the blades in the rear engines would hit the ground. In addition, the rear blades had to be moved further into the engine itself. AGAIN, ANY HELP IN TAKING CARE OF THAT ROLL FOR SINGLE-ENGINE PROP PLANES IS GREATLY APPRECIATED. Jeb being an idiot (again) and flying low enough over the SPH to touch the roof with the landing gear. Fortunately, no damage was sustained to either the aircraft or the building - at least none that could be attributed to pilot stupidity. And good thing too, because this was the only airworthy Caproni Ca.3 in existence - and it’s a replica on loan from Gondola. Historic photograph of a Caproni Ca.3 cruising over the Gondolan countryside. After the First Imperial Wars, many of the remaining bombers were converted and sold for civil use. Such purposes included transporting mail, sick or injured patients, and even paying passengers. Back in the present day, Jeb and an unnamed Gondolan flight engineer are flying along the coastline away from the KSC. To make the test cruise easier, the replica was equipped with MJ aircraft autopilot. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 750 m (2,460 ft) Best Vertical Speed to Altitude: 2 m/s Velocity: 50 m/s (~112 mph) Recommended Throttle: 10% Expected Range: 100 km The Caproni Ca.3 replica safely on the ground, and with only 2 fuel units left. Not a (new) scratch on it. If I thought getting this plane to look like its namesake was hard, I was in for a surprise keeping it off the ground. Maybe I should stick with using ducted blades for props that aren't large, fixed-angle or not, then I'd get better performance stats. On a positive note, it's not every day you see an Italian warbird. Usually, it's the major players (Great Britain, U.S., Germany, Japan, USSR) whose military planes get the most recognition. @Sebastiaz made the best-looking Caproni Ca.3 replica on KerbalX - I would like some numbers on cruising altitude and range, though I suspect they're better than mine - but at least I used only Stock + DLC parts. Replicas Remaining: 206

My OV-10 Bronco replica got flagged as a modded craft, even though I've only used Stock + DLC parts; I've never downloaded SSTO Project in my life. When I looked at the parts list for the Bronco, I noticed that my "rotor.02s" - the small electric rotor - was marked as the modded part. However, my Kettering Bug replica which also has that same motor was not flagged as modded. Parts Lists OV-10 Bronco parts list (at least up to the modded (highlighted) part) Full Kettering Bug parts list I asked around what could have caused this problem, and @shibusu mentioned that someone tagged the rotor.02s part as modded by mistake. Is that it? Whatever the problem is, can you please fix it? Thank you.

GOOOOOOOOOD MMMMMMMMORNING KERBIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNN! This is not a test, this is your local OV-10 Bronco pilot! Time to ride it from base to the DMZ! The OV-10 Bronco on display in the SPH. For some reason, KerbalX detected a mod when I uploaded this craft even though I SWEAR I only used Stock and Breaking Ground DLC parts. Furthermore, I don’t even have SSTO Project. Mod confusion aside, I went with EM-32S Standard rotors to match the aesthetic of the real OV-10 Bronco. That meant that I had to go electric, which also meant I had to forget fuel and add as many batteries as possible while maintaining aesthetic. The solar panels on the cockpit was not only to simulate the front windows, but to add a power source to reduce - if not completely negate - the power drain caused by the engines. However, if I was to get an accurate reading of how far the plane can go on one charge, I had to do the test cruise at night. In case I needed an emergency power boost and there was no sunlight available, I installed a fuel cell in the back - and left some oxidizer. Sure, this plane was used as an attack aircraft back in Vietnam, but unless you’re behind enemy lines flying without nav lights is a safety hazard - especially if you’re transporting cargo or patients. That’s why the nav lights are their own separate action group instead of connected to the main light switch. I installed rocket pods on the wings to simulate this aircraft being used for attacks. When you’re done with them, simply hit ACTION GROUP 7 to detach them both. At first, the plane was nose-heavy. I had to not only fill up some of the fuel tanks in the back to move the CoM closer to the rear, but I had to reduce the motor size and output to 50% and bring the main throttle torque limit back to 20%. In addition, I turned off the pitch and yaw controls for the ailerons and used five Elevon 4s for the elevators. Seriously, what set KerbalX to flag this plane as modded? Historic photograph of an unknown airman rushing towards a Bronco before a late-night mission. The Bronco was a popular air support craft among Kerbin’s ground forces for a time. However, once the A-10 Warthog was introduced, the Bronco was reassigned to carrier-borne close air support. Eventually, it was phased out of military service completely. Remaining Broncos were used by civilian agencies, with the most notable example of which being the Kerbal Space Program for atmospheric studies. The design then served as a basis for unmanned drones sent to other planets to study their atmospheres, like the E-38 Earhart for Eve. The Bronco on a test cruise at night. Although the main lights were turned off, the nav lights were not. The nav lights alone drained more battery than the regular lights alone, and they HAVE to be on unless doing so would result in immediate enemy attention. So they were left on to get a more conservative reading on how far the plane can fly on a single charge. Here we see a Bronco launching an attack on surface targets from the air. It does not need to return to base after that because the ground would make a suitable landing spot without hostiles around to blow it up. The plane was running low on power anyway. Though the sun was barely shining over the horizon, the landing was in the mountains so there was pretty much zero solar power available. That was what the emergency fuel cell was for. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 5.83 km (~19.1k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Velocity: 145 m/s (~324 mph) Blade Deployment Angle: 30 degrees DO NOT GO ANY HIGHER THAN THAT! Recommended Throttle: 14% Expected Range: 307 km This test cruise was done at night without using the fuel cell (before the landing sequence) so there’s no external power sources influencing the results. The nav lights were on the whole time as well. #warflashbacks Here we see an unnamed airman standing in front of a Bronco after using incendiary rockets to clear an airstrip of hostiles in the mountains. Like newspaper forts, the encampments caught fire easily after the first volley. The flames quickly spread to the surrounding buildings, engulfing everything and everyone. Any survivors will be scarred not only physically, but mentally from witnessing the carnage. After further investigation, I'm still baffled by why my Bronco replica was considered modded. To read more about it, expand the spoiler below. I haven't downloaded any mods in years, and I have never installed SSTO Project in my life. What's the deal? Not that it's the end of the world if it cannot be fixed. I said in the OP that "any and all parts necessary, including ones that come in DLCs and mods" are allowed, so there we go. Either way, we have a complete and functional OV-10 Bronco. Replicas Remaining: 207

Ladies and gentlemen, Damen und Herren, we're live in Deutschland celebrating the nation's top three most produced planes from WWII. Here we have our bronze medal winner, the Schnellbomber straight out of Dessau. Let's have a round of applause for the Junkers Ju 88. The Ju 88 on display in the SPH. The plane’s only battery is a Z-200 that’s at the rear end of the ventral (belly) turret pod, located underneath the main cockpit and behind the front guns. For the engines, just like with my VC-54C and B-10, I kept the motor size and output at 100% BUT I set the main throttle torque limit to 1%. As I found out during the test flight, the minimum throttle percent required to cruise was quite low. The tail was harder than it looked, as I had to get the stabilizers to line up with the fuselage despite working with a Tail Connector A. I forgot how I did it before, so I cut the tail from my TG-3A replica and made it a separate craft file before merging it with the Ju 88 WIP. Then, I redesigned the rudder and repositioned the rear stabilizers accordingly. With its long fuselage and low mass, I had expected it to have a long range - albeit not nearly as long as my Mosquito replica’s. Historic photograph of a Ju 88 Schnellbomber heading west soon after takeoff. You can see the Island Airfield under the aircraft. And here's another story about the Island Airfield and how it was used in wartime. If one remembers my post about the Fokker Dr.I, they'll recall that it was once used by Heinkel during the First Imperial Wars until it was forced to surrender the island when it ended. After the Second Imperial Wars broke out, it was used as a naval flight school with at least one cruiser guarding it at all times. Back in the present day, a replica was built and tested. It would not be used in combat thanks to modern-day jets, but it would at least be used for airshows featuring historic designs - whether they be aircraft from that era or replicas thereof. A Ju 88 replica flying over Kerbin’s desert. Back in the Second Imperial Wars, (actual) Ju 88s were used on Allied tanks in that same desert. During the test flight, I started to get Blazing Angels flashbacks again. However, they were short-lived as this was not the plane that was shooting at me and blinding me with smoke in that fjord. They were actually Messerschmitt Bf 110s. They had twin tails (two rudders) while this bomber had a conventional tail. According to this aircraft guide, the Ju 88 is not a plane that can be unlocked or used. One could argue that they were the German twin-engine bombers I would have to shoot down sometimes, although the same thing can be said about Heinkels - which Frank had explicitly mentioned in the Battle of Britain. The Ju 88 flying over some mountains before hitting the ocean. When the Ju 88 had only 10 units left, it had covered 1,640 km and was flying over the ocean. AND SO BEGAN THE MOST NAIL-BITING MOMENT OF THE TEST FLIGHT Since there was some land on the horizon, I decided to go for something I honestly shouldn’t have in hindsight: landing straight ahead. I started by cutting off the engines and gliding down toward the ocean. I figured that if I got too low, I’d use whatever energy I built up to gain some altitude and then glide down again when I reached the top. However, I soon realized that such a strategy wasn’t enough. When I was less than 400 meters above the ocean, I started the engines at 9% and kept it low. For a while, I thought I would run out of fuel and the plane would end up in the water. At last, by the skin of my teeth, I managed to land on the ground safely with only 1.48 fuel units left. I only felt that way in KSP once before, and that was when I was doing the Jool-5 in my T-6 Cannonball four IRL years ago. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 8.2 km (~26.9k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Starting Velocity: 205 m/s (~459 mph) The cruise ended at 214 m/s (~479 mph) Blade Deployment Angle: 40 degrees Recommended Throttle: 18% Expected Range: 1,640 km HAIL HEINKEL! The first unmodded replica of the Ju 88 - and, apparently, the first Ju 88 replica with an actual picture - on KerbalX. Any of you have any cool planes you would like to show off? I'm sure you can also build a replica no other kerbalnaut has before, though you'll most likely find those planes in Hangar One due to the later planes being so popular. Oh, and P.S. Replicas Remaining: 208

For those of you who like large bombers, you have the B-10 to thank for revolutionizing bomber design. Historic photograph from between the First and Second Imperial Wars. Here we see a prototype of Martin Aerospace Incorporated’s B-10 doing a demonstration flight from Krakopolis to Baikerbanur. Before we continue with the demonstration flight, here's a story of how it came to be and what happened to it. The B-10 on display in the SPH. Due to the fat fuselage and oddly-shaped nose on the real-life B-10, I had to stack a second fuel tank underneath the front cockpit with a somewhat pointy nose and a Tail Connector A. For the main fuselage’s nose, I went for something a bit flatter - and added a Communotron 16-S antenna to simulate a nose turret. After some research about the aircraft - as well as trying out a B-10 in Air RB battles in War Thunder - I included rear guns on the top and bottom of the fuselage. Unfortunately, the bomber’s turret configuration leaves it vulnerable to head-on and sideways attacks from underneath. By the way, the actual B-10 had an internal bomb bay. I felt like I should mention this because the bombs in War Thunder are carried externally, which actually create more drag (and a weight imbalance if you have the 1 x 2000-lb bomb). Since the actual B-10 is confirmed to have variable-pitch propellers (Source: Wikipedia), I did the same thing for these propellers here. As a last-minute aesthetic change, I added a decoupler to mimic the ring that’s behind the support beam on the fuselage. Image of the B-10 on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, OH. In real-life, this is the only surviving B-10 airframe. It was exported to Argentina in 1938. Over three decades later, as the Air Force Museum was looking for surviving B-10s, Argentina’s government donated an incomplete airframe which was then restored. As part of the restoration process, it was painted to look like a B-10 that was used in the mass flight to Alaska. Another historic photograph involving a B-10. This one has two unnamed Nye Island airmen standing in front of it before they’re ready for gunner training. The B-10 flying over Kerbin’s oceans during its range demonstration flight. For some reason, this was the only photograph that was colorized. It is speculated that the person in charge of the picture restoration process was on a tight budget and decided that this action shot was the best one. The KSP replica's cruise performance stats were as follows: Altitude: 7.5 km (~24.6k ft; Class Alpha airspace) Velocity: 195 m/s (~436 mph) Blade Deployment Angle: 37.5 degrees Recommended Throttle: 15% (Or go for 1/6 if you cannot get that precise) Expected Range: 780 km That's almost 20% of Kerbin's circumference. For reference, the real-life B-10 had a range of 1,370 miles (~2,205 km). However, that's only 5.5% of Earth. Picture of a B-10 resting in the desert after a mission. When looking on KerbalX to see if others have built the B-10, I came across @epicman352's namesake model. Then again, it looks more like a conventional bomber whereas I took the time to make my model look like an actual B-10 - from the oddly-shaped fuselage down to the ring and struts. You all be the judge on whether or not he made a true replica. Either way, that's a piece of military aviation history that often gets overlooked despite its significance. Replicas Remaining: 209