TheGoldenSoldier

I do not think so, but I might be wrong. Probably best to not use it, since I don't have the mod and I think some others might not.

Looking forward to review this, good job!

Not a definitive one I think, but try and keep it under 1000 if possible.

Still open, we're just a bit backed up at the moment. If you post a submission I'll review ASAP

Test Pilot Review: @panzerknoefs P-201A Cloudsurfer Figures as Tested: Price: 25.244.000 Fuel: 1100 kallons Cruising speed: 298 m/s Cruising altitude: 7000 m Fuel burn rate: 0.17 kal/s Passengers Carried: 32 Range: 1900 km Review Notes: Pre -flight checks: As the Cloudsurfer Prototype was delivered to our ground crew, they thought the plane looked good. A long, slender body with large, non-swept wings and engines mounted just below those. One thing surprised our ground crew about the engines, they didn't use an open engine, but a cover with small inlet holes covering the nacelles. This reduces dangers on ground crew and even protect the engines from bird-strikes. After the engines were inspected, the crew began looking at the wings, tail and control surfaces. The wings weren't swept, also surprising for the quite fast cruising speed of the plane. The control surfaces seemed normal, but all of the wing-mounted surfaces would roll. The largest surface acted as a flaperon, being a flap and aileron at the same time. The rudder was quite small, but not as exotic as the elevators. It used the same fins as on some fighter aircraft, with the entire elevator turning instead of just a control surfaces on a fixed elevator. After the wings were inspected, landing gear was up. The plane was fairly low to the ground, with the rear gears retracting into the engine nacelles. The brakes were tuned to a fairly weak 50% of the available 200% of the gears. In short, the plane is not too weird but it's not completely conventional either. Flight characteristics: When everything was inspected and given the all-clear for use, our Pilot began to take off. The Cloudsurfer had excellent acceleration and rotated very early at around 28 m/s, but a tailstrike happened. Fortunately, the tail was reinforced so crisis was avoided. The climb rate was exceptional after the takeoff at 60 m/s, exceeding 50 m/s and still accelerating. After gaining some altitude, our Pilot began rolling like a fighter jet. The pitch was almost too good, resulting in up to 6 G's when fully used. Our pilot also tested the top speed, and actually broke the mach at mach 1.02. Rudder authority was almost laughable, since the plane was barley moving when rudder was used. It handles well at all speeds, but almost a little too well. After having a lot of fun, our pilot decided to land. The plane handled admirably and touched down at around 60 m/s, stopping around 10 seconds after touchdowns with help from the thrust-reverses. After a quick check on all systems and a quick re-fuel, our pilot was gonna try and cruise. Again, the plane shot up to altitude, reaching 7000 m in just a few minutes. After a quick acceleration, the plane was cruising. Emergency testing: When our pilot was ready for an emergency test, engine #1 was shut down. The plane slowed down a bit but all instability was restored by the rudder. Our pilot then rolled over the plane and tested it in inverted flight with one engine. The plane flew good, so our pilot shut down engine two as well and rolled back. Gliding on the winds was a breeze (pun intended) and the Cloudsurfer lived up to its name. Even inverted did it glide well. After performing a quick descent along with some rolls, it was time for a water landing. After a careful descent, our pilot successfully landed and the plane stopped really quickly but floated really good. Our pilot said "I went out on the wing and had a small picnic while waiting for rescue boats.". The Cloudsurfer doesn't use any special safety features. The Verdict: The Cloudsurfer is a very reliable and great short-haul low-capacity airliner. It is fast, efficient, quite comfy and quite cheap as well. It would probably be cheap and easy to maintain. Reparations/replacements of wings and engines could be done at the same time due to the layout of these modules. It is great during emergencies and very easy to fly but also a bit easy to overstress. It can also be a bit draggy at the wings and engines. A swept wing would increase efficiency and maybe even cruising speed to save time. Referencing the incredible reliability of the Cloudsurfer, TKA is recommended to buy anywhere from 10-25 Cloudsurfers, with numbers increasing if a larger version with a swept wing is released.

@panzerknoef I can't find your craft file page, did you delete it or did something else happen?

Thanks for the Co-Op, no need to apologize. I calculated a 100000km range once because I was stupid.

Are you sure you calculated/documented the correct figures on your submission? Even while using the figures from your original post, I calculated a range of 2570 km. This is my calculation: 4720/0.47*256/1000=2570

Test Pilot Review: @Sarion Kermans A7-1100P "Astral Plane" Figures as Tested: Price: 174 078 300 Fuel: 4720 kallons Cruising speed: 218m/s Cruising altitude: 5000m Fuel burn rate: 0.46 kal/s Passengers Carried: 60 pax Range: 2247km Review Notes: Pre-flight checks: The A7-1100P was first anticipated to be a cargo aircraft by ground crew due to the lack of windows, but it turns out the cabin just didn't have them, something almost unheard of for commercial passenger aircraft. Along with the high-wing and T-tail, it looks different to the other airliners in the hangars. It uses two large turbofans for engines, which makes the plane powerful and efficient, in-line with most airliners for the medium-range market. However, it doesn't carry many passengers for the market, making it harder for it to be used as the back-bone of Medium-range routes. In short, the plane surely stands out in design. Flight characteristics: When our test pilots were ready to take off, the A7-1100P was reported to almost accelerate like a fighter, and it rotated at 59 m/s, slower than the advertised. The plane also climbed great, keeping anywhere from 40-55 m/s in vertical speed. When the roll rate was tested, it rolled fast, but not too fast to be hard to control. Turning was a bit slow, but still manageable. When our pilot tried to land, it went smooth. With flaps, spoilers, strong brakes and thrust reversers, the plane stopped quickly, making it possible to use at smaller airports. Flying it for a long time would probably be easy and nice, according to our test pilot. Now, it was time to climb and try to cruise. While it climbed greatly, the plane couldn't push past 220 m/s, cutting it's range from 3300 km to 2257 km, a lot smaller then advertised and limiting the plane to medium range. However, during cruise, passengers would have a luxurious flight in a large, spacious and custom made cabin. The passengers had quite space in front of them and a lot of walking space for the flight attendants, making it easier to cater to the passengers, leading to a very high level of comfort for the passengers. Emergency testing: When the pilot was ready for emergency testing, he shut down engine #1. The plane naturally grew more unstable and flew slower when the engine was shut off. When the plane had descended to 2750 m over the sea, the second engine was shut off, the instability instantly went away, and the plane glided pretty good. When 500 meters over the sea, the plane prepared for a water landing, which resulted in failure, since the plane couldn't fly at a high enough AoA to land smoothly in the water, shattering the fuselage and destroying the plane. However, the plane has a thick and double-walled fuselage, it has a lower chance of rapid/explosive de-pressurization then other planes. This will also reduce noise heard from the engines, increasing comfort. The Verdict: The A7-1100P isn't so expensive, but costs more than some other medium-range planes with a larger passenger capacity. Even if the comfort is larger than other medium-range planes, this reduces efficiency and increases cost, since more planes will be needed to transport the same amount of passengers that fewer, larger planes could. Maintenance of the "Astral Plane" would not be too expensive and relatively easy. With the engines being quite low to the ground and having around the same amount of moving parts as other planes. However, since tail-strikes was quite possible, a small landing gear installed in the tail might need more maintenance after hard landings or quick takeoffs. The A7-1100P is very efficient, leading to fuel costs being quite low. Due to all previously stated facts, TKA will buy 6 planes for their luxury, medium-range routes, with more orders being possible if a version with more seats is created.

Test Pilot Review: @Mars-Bound Hokie's B-343 Supersonic Transport Figures as Tested: Price: 138,804,000 Fuel: 10700 kallons Cruising speed: 1000 m/s Cruising altitude: 14000 m Fuel burn rate: ~2-3 kal/s Passengers Carried: 24 Passengers Range: 3566-5350 km Review Notes: The B-343 Supersonic Transport is a special craft with quite a unique appearance. It has quite stubby fuselage, made up by a small cabin, a fuel tank and a cargo ramp to form the tail. Using doubled canards with a quite crooked swept mid-fuselage-wing along with a space shuttle-like vertical stabilizer and cockpit. It also uses quite large rear landing gear The cockpit gives the pilots a good view of the runway and during flight. Some of the design features stand out, like the external struts going between the fuselage and the four engine blocks instead of any internal reinforcements, using four J-X4 Turbo Ramjets, shock cone intakes, fuel tanks, reaction wheels along with battery packs. In essence, it is a design that gives a mix of Sci-Fi vibes but still feeling a bit old-school due to the external struts. Unfortunately, the B-343 does have a problem with turning being almost sluggish when turning. The roll rate is quite fast, almost fighter like due to every control surface participating in all axes available to it, trying to roll, pitch and yaw. It basically never handels well, and can put up to 3 Gees on passengers, decreasing comfort. It is a challenge to fly, especially for a long time but it can be worked around if autopilot software is used. Takeoff is quite slow to achieve, accelerating slow on the runway, and it wont rotate and takeoff under 100 m/s (360 km/h, 223 mph), limiting the airliner to airports using long runways. It could land at just over 80 m/s, but slowing down also takes some time. During emergencies, the B-343 can be a nightmare to handle. If one of the outer engines are shut down, the airliner needs almost full rudder to keep straight. If two engines are shut down, the airliner becomes a powered glider as the engines can barley keep the plane going if it's not facing downwards, and without engines it has a hard time keeping in the air. It also has a hard time landing in water, stripping the wings of the fuselage at both tests. It does float quite good, compensating for the poor gliding. The B-343 doesn't have any special safety features. The Verdict: The B-343 is quite costly, but inline with similar supersonic airliners. The maintenance of the B-343 could be costly due to structural stress during compression/decompression while climbing to the low pressure of 14 km. Stress from atmospheric friction could also lead to required repeated maintenance of the fuselage. The amount of landing gears could also be challenging to maintain along with the amount of control surfaces. Since the engines are integrated into the wings, replacing/repairing wings could be easy due to the wings being attached to the engine blocks, leading to a way of quickly replacing outer wings and engines at the same time. The plane is pretty efficient, but burns fuel a bit unevenly. Due to the multiple errors and design choices that could be easily fixed, TKA is recommended to not purchase any B-343's, but if another version with the previous issues fixed is released, TKA will consider purchasing 2-5 planes.

It's cool to see all the different types of planes being submitted

AirTrain introduces the new and improved 737-200! A verison of the AirTrain 737, but in a low-wing configuration to increase the comfort for passengers. It cruises at 6000 metres, burning fuel its 14485 kallons at a slow rate of 0.85 while going 235 m/s. This gives it a range of around 4000 km, carrying 144 passengers that can now enjoy the flight more due to less noise from the engines, and a great view from the cabins. The plane takes off at just over 50 m/s, and it reaches that speed quickly due to the powerful engines. It has capacity for some cargo, but the bays are mostly stocked with luxury food and goods for the passengers, along with their belongings, of course. AirTrain hopes that the 737-200 can be a greater appeal to the passengers of TKA, and will happily create even more planes or versions for their airways. Fly safe! Price: 399, 729, 000 File: https://kerbalx.com/Pr3d4tingPilot/Airtrain-737-200

AirTrain 737 This is the AirTrain 737, built by AirTrain, a long-haul medium-capacity airliner with a recommended cruising altitude at 7700 m and travelling at 200 m/s with a cost of $400 729 000. The fuel capacity is 14485 Kallons with a burn rate of 0.69. Takeoff speed is around 60-80 m/s and with those powerful engines, it reaches that speed very easily. Having a capacity for 144 passengers to travel in comfort even though the wings block some of the sights, an on-board entertainment system is installed, making sure everyone can have a good time while they cruise in luxury. https://kerbalx.com/Pr3d4tingPilot/Airtrain-737

My range is over Long-Haul but the cruising speed is in short haul. What should I classify it as?