Hodo

It was actually stable at that speed, you can see the pid tuner accelerometer is steady at 0m/s. But not going to argue a score with you. You are not the challenge creator. 137 maybe high. When I get home I will redu the points.

XF-149B Jinete I may do another aircraft that is a more conventional design. - - - Updated - - - Mine can do that, I dont think there are any extra.

I have a "single" engine light weight fighter in this challenge. It can do everything, it is asked. It is a S/VTOVL aircraft so it is a bit different than the rest. It is agile, fast, and can take off in a VERY short distance, and land vertically if needed or even take off vertically if it is operating a short distance and doesnt need full fuel. The whole aircraft fully loaded with weapons and fuel is only 18.7tons, vertical take off weight is 12.1tons. - - - Updated - - - So if I am factoring my points right I think I am at 137. The XF-149 Jinete can supercruise at mach 1.009 at 10km Reach a top speed of mach 3.55 @ 12.5km supercruise with DTs for 2:35min Pull 12.5Gs, and sustain a 7.5G turn Droptank capacity is 251.5L each, holds 2 under wings so 503L of fuel. Not to mention is a single engine, and S/VTOL design. Has an internal weapons bay to reduce its radar cross section.

The XF-149B has gone through some minor revisions and went into full scale combat testing. Some minor problems were discovered, like its single engine design does limit it to a light weapons load. Which is not a problem because it is a single seat single engine STOVL fighter. The Jinete was taken out on her test flights today by Valentena. The loadout for this flight was light even for this craft, but to test weapon deployment and clearance. It performed well, some minor changes were made and the craft performed perfectly afterwards. Deployment of an AIM-9X Sidewinder from the weapons bay. After performing some high G turns and putting the craft through its paces we found a minor mechanical issue came up (game bug). And the VTOL engine failed to function on landing so a vertical landing was not possible. But the craft was more than capable of a standard landing even after the VTOL engine failure. Overall the XF-149B Jinete is turning out to be an excellent addition to the HARM industries stable of aircraft. Finale tested loadout for the XF-149B is, up to 7000lbs of ordinance, of which 2500lbs can be carried internally.

How does my entry look so far? Everything ok rules wise?

So the continuing testing of XF-149A Today we performed our topspeed run... and it was AMAZING!!!!! Top speed recorded on a clean aircraft with just cannon ammo was Mach 2.4! Could have pushed it further but had to turn around due to fuel constraints. Jeb landed the craft safely back at the airfield peforming a short field landing with ease and stopping it well within the distance of the SPH building. 44min flight on internal fuel and making a top speed run, I believe this craft is capable of over 1hr 45min flight on internal fuel without drop tanks without going to afterburner! After some minor adjustments to the airframe the XF-149B rolled off the hanger floor for her first test flight. First I would like to show off our first improvement to the design, the HARM Industries drop tank, it is clean, low drag and shiny! It holds 251.6units of fuel and did I mention shiny! The minor changes that reduced the Mach 1 wave section from 1.58 to 1.45 helped a great deal... so much so that the craft accelerated well past its previous top speed of Mach 2.4 to an amazing Mach 3.55! At Mach 3.2 she meets the 1:1 TWR test, with exactly 1:1 at 182kn of thrust at 18.1tons. Unfortunately the airframe was damaged in the run, nothing bad, just some heat damage to one of the elevators on the left wing. It was able to supercruise back to the nearest airfield and land safely for repairs. And just for show, this is the weapons bay of the XF-149B. Which is capable of mounting up to 5 500lb bombs internally or any combination of 5 missiles or stores internally not to mention an additional 3 pair of wing hardpoints! Pictures of the XF-149B with full combat loadout will follow in the coming days along with high G airframe tests and combat performance tests. Thank you from all of us at HARM Industries!

Thanks I will work on it some this week and fine tune it.... it is still going through testing. But you know how that is. Mach 2 is going to be the REAL challenge with that 50% engine thrust for the turbojet. Seeing as it is still nearly 13tons in its VTOL fuel config, and 15 in STOVL.

So thanks to a challenge I saw I made this.... XF-149 STOVL fighter.

So I have done some reworking of the design and I think this meets the requirements. It is a VTOL/STOVL 5th gen single seat fighter WITH internal weapons bay. It comes in a short version for carrier work and in a long version for airforce operations with room for 5 500lb bombs internally or several A2A missiles.

Ok cool, what about the second craft, would that engine be acceptable?

The other variation on the design I discussed has this engine.... But this is the preliminary tests with the F-146A Jinete

Not sure what you are going to allow and not allow so this is an experimental craft I have been working on.... Before the patch now I am stuck because I have something spitting errors like its a camel eating pop rocks. It has 3 engines total, 2 of those basic jets for its VTOL, and 1 Turbojet for main engine. If I can get somethings fixed in my install I may change out those weak stock jets for a mod vtol engine that has the same power as both of them but is ONLY for VTOL.

I dont think it is dead but I dont think it is doing well either.

I use leading edge slats on several of my aircraft and they deploy downwards, I just dont have them deploy out to the standard 20+deg like most people. My leading edge slats are usually between 2.5-15deg to keep them from causing negative lift. They are often used in conjunction with flaps this gives me more "lift" at lower speeds and at higher AoA. Like this older design has leading edge slats and flaps. You can just make them out on the inside of the leading edge of the wing. This one also has slats. But it was from an older version of FAR but the design still works.

With the nuFAR it isn't about where the CoM is in relation to the CoL, it is more about the airflow over the airframe of the craft. Is it smooth and stable. There are a lot of other factors too but your craft looks like it would actually be just about fine in the current FAR. It may need some balancing weights placed in the airframe to bring its CoM closer to the real life version. And the removal of the I-beams off the tips of the wings as they really aren't there on the real aircraft, they are missile rails which are designed to be aerodynamic, I-Beams really are not.

--- http://cs625729.vk.me/v625729249/37fb0/NHx3G2N8PHY.jpg And last - SR-71 replica, which flies exactly like a brick. Besides it's almost unreal to take-off despite the fact that center of lift matches the center of thrust. [spoiler=]http://cs625729.vk.me/v625729249/37fb9/YSWDKJREjbo.jpg Your SR-71 doesn't have enough length or wing for the craft this is why it flies like a brick. The real SR-71 had a pretty large wing area and was a REALLY long aircraft. Far longer than most people expect. Kind of like the U-2 having seen one of each in person that wasn't a museum piece, they are some REALLY impressive sized aircraft. If you increase the length of the SR-71 and the wing to match the new length you will find your wave form will smooth out quite a bit and make the craft almost a joy to fly at supersonic speeds. EDIT- Quick question where is the cockpit from on your IL-76?

OUTSTANDING! I haven't logged into here in weeks and when I do you amaze me with this wonderful piece of work. Best replica to date using stock parts. And it looks like it would actually work in NuFAR which is the best part. +1 Rep here, if I could give more I would!

71 years ago today, D-Day happened thousands of brave men lost their lives fighting for their nations. So let us take time today to remember these brave souls who had their lives cut short by this war. EDITED-- 71 years ago... sorry hadn't had my coffee yet at that time math fail.

Outstanding video there! So did you get the retro future stuff working? Because that is one of my favorite mods and is REALLY missed right now.

Can I get the link to that cockpit?

A bit of advice on the design that may help a bit. If you sunk the radial fuel tanks into the hull a bit more to give it a more streamlined shape it would smooth out the overall airflow issue. Also if you were to extend the point of the nose a fair bit more, try adding an antenna on the tip of it to give you a point in the airstream. DONT extend the antenna it will just blow off. Lastly move the solar panels behind the wings or into your cargo bay so that they are not blocks metal in the airflow.

Not a huge fan of it. It was ok, and a step in the right direction but I dropped it as soon as FAR updated to the NuFAR, and I wont go back. My problems with stock are as follows. -Still to simple allows for stupidly high G turns without any real consequence. - Still feels "soupy" at lower altitudes and then at higher altitudes, like magic its just not there. - From a pilots perspective it still feels wrong, very wrong, things that should never fly, fly, and things that should dont.

Do you have pics of your replicas? I would love to see them.

I stopped reading right there and just reported the post. No need for insults.

I am not upset or hurt. To be blunt I find it refreshing that my craft wasn't considered. It means others have stepped up their design game, and that is good. But as for stock aero, that is a joke even with the new system. If I were to take a real aircraft and put it in the stock KSP aero system it wouldnt fly. If I were to take half of these craft and put them in FAR they wouldnt fly let alone perform well at all. The only reason I didn't submit that other craft is because I haven't loaded KSP in a week to finish it. So I submitted a craft that is over 2 years old that is still more combat capable than half of these craft. Oh and it is a SSTO.