keptin

Test Pilot Review: Kramer. - 150-100 Baltimore Figures as tested: $116,033,000 Fuel: 3160/3160 kal Cruising speed: 243 m/s Cruising altitude: 3500m Fuel burn rate: 0.43 kal/s Range: 1785 km Mass: 51.045t Review Notes: The Kramer 150-100 Baltimore is a sort of an odd duck in our reviewed medium-haul aircraft submissions. Most notably, it's a turboprop, using soviet-era contra-rotating engines. These old designs are notoriously noisy, reducing passenger comfort, and limiting airport availability due to noise regulations. More notably, they're inefficient. We found the Baltimore's fuel burn at the rated cruising altitude to be almost three times the competition, at 0.43 kal/s, making it costly to run. And with four turboprop engines, maintenance would be higher still. At 96 passengers, it's quite larger than most other offerings, meaning it would be unfilled on our less busy routes, leading to additional profit loss. The final nail in the coffin is the price. At $116,033,000, it's twice the price of the competition's medium-haul offerings. Our verdict: The Kramer 150-100 is not what we're looking for in a medium-haul jet aircraft. It under performs on all accounts, and is nearly twice the price of competing aircraft.

It's really when I can get to them over the next week. I honestly didn't think the challenge would be this popular, so it's going to take a bit longer to go through all the submissions.

@Vinhero100, PM me the 1.2.2 craft. I'll see if I can get it working with 1.3.

MinMax Spectre 200/300 Optimized for cutting-edge cost reduction, while meeting minimum requirements. This as an example of an aircraft that would score very highly in this challenge. Spectre 200, $10,000,000: https://u66999462.dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66999462/Spectre 200.craft Spectre 300, $11,350,000: https://u66999462.dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66999462/Spectre 300.craft 24 passenger / 32 passenger 19 parts / 22 parts Fuel: 200 kal Range: 900km Cruising Speed: 133 m/s Cruising Altitude: 2000m Cruising Fuel Burn: 0.02 kal/s

Not currently, but anyone is welcome to copy the rules and host their own

Players can submit one model per category. For the sake of this challenge, each category must be as separate "model". There are other considerations involving props, like prop clearance, that wouldn't be taken into account by using jets instead. You're welcome to modify yours and resubmit. Yep, that's the end! Get 'em in quick!

So many incredible entries, I'm getting behind in judging them all. I'm going to mark tomorrow as the submission deadline. You have 24 hours as of this post (9AM PST) to submit your designs! Sweet starship! If you're submitting it as a turboprop, it must use Airplane Plus turboprop parts, otherwise it will be considered a jet, and must meet one of the jet category requirements. See contest rules for the variants that Kerbal Express Air is interested in. No other variants will affect judging score.

Unless it's a very heavy craft, is your center of lift too far behind your center of mass?

Test Pilot Review: Kramer - 50-100/150 Avery Figures as tested: Fuel: 450/450 kal Cruising speed: 164 m/s Cruising altitude: 1500m Fuel burn rate: 0.05 kal/s Mass: 8.66t Review Notes: The Kramer 50 series offers everything we're looking for in a turboprop aircraft. It's high wing design makes it stable and easy to fly, reducing training costs. It's offered in both 24 and 32 passenger variants, giving the model flexibility. It's well balanced and easy to control at all speeds, even when fully fueled. Landing is a breeze; its flap system sufficiently lowers its landing speed, and its landing gear gives it plenty of clearance. We determined the range of the 50-100 to be 1450, which is more than sufficient for short-haul routes. Range could even be reduced in trade for weight reduction and higher fuel efficiency. The Kramer 50-100 is very light at 8.66t, and quite affordable at the listed $16,010,000 per aircraft. While just over $20M, the Kramer 50-150's 32 passenger load will allow us to cover our busier short-haul routes, especially between island. Overall, we're very impressed with the Kramer 50 series and expect them to perform competitively against the competition. We intend to purchase 50 immediately for our Kerbal Express Air Islands subsidiary, with a flex contract for an additional 20 after a 1 year service trial. Our verdict: The Kramer 50 is a versatile and economical turboprob. We're very satisfied with its performance and ease of piloting. It's a strong first entry in the turboprop category.

Test Pilot Review: One More Booster Co. - Kerb Ferry 72 Figures as tested: Price: $138,480,000 Fuel: 1500/1500 kal Cruising speed: 256 m/s Cruising altitude: 7000m Fuel burn rate: 0.35 kal/s Mass: 45.9t Review Notes: The thing that impressed us most with One More Booster Co's Kerb Ferry 72 is its hardiness. It's a sturdy bird, and it's airframe would undoubtedly last for decades of heavy service, but this structural integrity comes at a price: weight. At nearly 20 tons heavier than the comparable medium-haul aircraft, it burns extra fuel. It's four-engines give it additional redundancy during an emergency, but also contribute to higher maintenance costs. It's extremely spacious, and with its rear cargo door, our inspection engineers guessed that it may be a converted cargo aircraft for passenger use. It certainly has the durability of a heavy cargo transport, but we're afraid that its high fuel burn rate would cut too deeply intro profits. Lastly, it's terribly expensive. At $138,480,000, it's over twice the price of competing aircraft. Our verdict: The One More Booster Co. Kerb Ferry 72 is a durable and rugged aircraft, perhaps ideal for cargo transport, but its high fuel burn rate and price make it expensive for commercial passenger use.

Test Pilot Review: Kerbolde Supersonic Jet - AAA072-1 Figures as tested: Fuel: 600/1000 kal Cruising speed: 970 m/s Cruising altitude: 15000m Fuel burn rate: 0.18 kal/s Mass: 15.0t Review Notes: The Kerbolde AAA072-1 is hands down one of the best performing aircraft we've had the joy of flying. It's turbo ramjet engines let it cruise at 970m/s at 15,000m, while sipping fuel at 0.18 kal/s. She handles well at both supersonic and sub-sonic speeds, is relatively easy to land, and has staggering climb performance. The AAA072-1 is also surprisingly affordable to purchase at $22,996,000. Unfortunately, KAA regulations limit supersonic aircraft over populated areas, meaning that the AAA072-1 could only be operated across the poles and ocean. Training may be an issue, as each of our pilots would have to be specially trained to operate it at supersonic speeds. It's turbo ramjet engines also show some concerning maintenance costs, both in training and part sourcing, along with needing to be frequently serviced due to the extreme temperature fluctuations the engines face during each flight. That all being said, its performance is unprecedented, and short international travel times will interest our Platinum Class customers. We're interested in leasing five aircraft on a five-year lease, with potential for an additional five after a 1-yr service trial. Our verdict: The Kerbolde AAA072-1 has unprecedented performance for an aircraft of its price and fuel efficiency, but it's speed is also a cost concern for training and maintenance costs, and its limited route use given KAA regulations of supersonic aircraft mean that we may not be able to use it in any large numbers.

Not yet, it's still ongoing. I've been busy this weekend, so will probably get to reviews during the week.

Some amazing entries! The test pilots can't wait to give them a spin! Seaplanes are allowed, but they probably won't be competitive since that's not what Kerbal Express Airlines is looking for.

Updated the review of the Bluebell A+ here,

Hello everyone! There are some amazing new submissions that the test pilots will get to as soon as they can. Please be sure to read the rules for the challenge and submission guidelines. Submissions not meeting both will not be considered valid entries. I see we have our first supersonic aircraft. It's certainly within the rules, but since the intent of this challenge was to create subsonic aircraft, I'm adding a new rule that requires aircraft to operate below mach 1. KSP doesn't account for the cost of advanced materials, engineering, and supersonic regulations over populated areas, but this challenge will. I'll let any supersonic entries submitted so far to be allowed, but consider that loophole closed.

@qzgy As long as the craft file imports into 1.3, then I'm ok with it. I've updated the rules to reflect this.

Test Pilot Review: Pizio & Hartmann Co. - Bluebell A Figures as tested: Fuel: 500/854 kal Cruising speed: 250 m/s Cruising altitude: 8000m Fuel burn rate: 0.09 kal/s Mass: 12.170t Review Notes: Pizio & Hartmann Co.'s Bluebell A meets our expectations on all accounts. The above-wing design makes the aircraft exceptionally stable and easy to fly--this is great for our younger pilots with less training. We love how well featured it is: landing lights, nav lights, plus integrated ladder a big plus. At 59 structural parts (not including accessories: lights, solar panel, and ladder) it will have low maintenance costs. Having the room for 854 kallons of fuel gives the Bluebell A great versatility for longer range, although few of our regional short-haul routes require ranges above 1200km. For our tests we filled her with 500 kallons of fuel for a range of roughly 1380km. The Bluebell A handles well when fully fueled, although she wants to nose down when low on fuel. We suspect her rear fuel tank is acting as a ballast, making her a bit nose heavy when empty. Cruising speed is a good 250 m/s @ 8000m. She's light for a 32-passenger aircraft, which contributes to her good climb performance. While she has good takeoff performance, her lack of flaps give her a higher than desired landing speed, especially for short runways. The inverted rear-gear steering system provides exceptional taxiway maneuverability, but it has the undesired effect of making the aircraft sidestep on landing, which could result in a crash. Disabling this system proved to eliminate the issue. It's very affordable at $19,215,500 per aircraft; we'll see a return on our investment sooner than we expected. We're excited to see if Pizio & Hartmann Co. intend to build a 40-Passenger variant, regardless, the Bluebell A will be a fine addition to the fleet. Our verdict: The Bluebell A meets our expectations and will make a great short-haul aircraft. It's well featured, and despite its exceptionally dangerous sidestepping issue, we're ready to order ten aircraft immediately, and potentially more should Pizio & Hartmann Co. address the notes in our review. Updated Review of the Bluebell A+ and B variant: Pizio & Hartmann Co's latest arrival, the Bluebell A+ improved upon the existing design with landing flaps, further reducing landing and takeoff speeds. This had made the Bluebell a suitable aircraft for the short landing strips of the island areas where Kerbal Express Airlines operates. With the further addition of the larger-capacity Bluebell B, the Bluebell series is versatile and well suited for KEA's short-haul division. Both, oddly, still seemed to have the dangerous rear-steer sidestep issue, causing the aircraft to drift dangerously on the ground, but we see this as a minor lethal flaw, as disabling the system as before seems to solve this issue. KEA is ready to place an order of 40 aircraft (30 A+, 10 B), with flex contract option for an additional 10 Bluebell A+'s. @Andiron

Test Pilot Review: ScarsTarsProducts - Vulture-01 Figures as tested: Fuel: 620/1200 kal Cruising speed: 308 m/s Cruising altitude: 4000m Fuel burn rate: 0.15 kal/s Mass: 15.298t Review Notes: We really enjoyed our experience with the Vulture-01. Firstly, it's a beautiful aircraft. The under-wing engine layout reduces cabin noise--that'll make our passengers happy. And the conventional design with 54 parts will be relatively easy to maintain and integrate into our existing fleet. Having the room for 1200 kallons of fuel gives the Vulture-01 great versatility for longer range, although few of our regional short-haul routes require ranges above 1200km. For our tests we filled her with 620 kallons of fuel for a range of roughly 1120km. The Vulture-01 handles well when half-fueled, although she wants to nose down hard when you let off the stick. We suspect her center of mass is a bit too far forward of the center of lift. Cruising speed is a peppy 308 m/s @ 4000m. She's a tad heavy for a 32-passenger aircraft, which might contribute to her underwhelming fuel efficiency at 0.17 kallons/second at the tested speed and altitude. Though, its recommended low-altitude at 4000m is likely to blame. We tested her at her ceiling altitude of 9000m, but still had trouble getting the fuel efficiency below 0.15 kallons/second. ScarsTarsProduct's offering of a cargo variant, as well as the available passenger-cargo conversion kit gives the model great flexibility, allowing us to sell or lease the aircraft to a wider range of airlines should our passenger needs on short-haul routes decline. Our verdict: If ScarsTarsProducts can improve the fuel efficiency of the Vulture-01 into the 0.08-0.10 range, they might have a hit on their hands. @ScaryTerry

Awesome first entries! I'm heading to bed, but will ensure the test pilots give all submissions a thorough review tomorrow! I totally couldn't wait. First aircraft review is up! All players are welcome to submit multiple entries!

That's a pretty drastic change in the rules. I'd say that calls for a completely new design.

Yep! The higher it is, the thinner the air, and better fuel economy.

Sure, as long as the link is your post. I just don't want a bunch of submissions filling my inbox. Nobody has to worry about people copying their designs; I'll put a stop to that if it becomes a problem.

@MILN12R Check out this tutorial I made! It might help:

Example Submission for copying: OSPREY REGIONAL JET - ORJ400/500 ORJ400: https://u66999462.dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66999462/Osprey Regional Jet ORJ400.craft Price: $21,845,000 Cruising Speed: 275 m/s Cruising Altitude: 12,000 m ====================================== ORJ500: https://u66999462.dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66999462/Osprey Regional Jet ORJ500.craft Price:$23,195,000 Cruising Speed: 270 m/s Cruising Altitude: 11,000 m The key to the Osprey Regional Jet's success is its flexibility. With a line of variants ranging from the light ORJ200 to the fully featured extended range ORJ1000ER, a single model of aircraft can take the place of several, reducing equipment and training costs.

Kerbal Express Airlines is in need of updating its aging fleet of regional jets and turboprops. It's a big client, operating at hundreds of airports around Kerbin, and that means big fleet sales. Does your aircraft company offer the right kind of aircraft for the job? Kerbal Express wants profitable aircraft. They're looking for aircraft that meet or exceed their requirements for fuel efficiency, speed, range, passenger load, ease of training, and cost of maintenance, for the right price that gives them the best return on investment. They also want a design that's flexible, offering variations of the same design for a variety of different routes. The Rules: KSP version 1.3 or 1.2.2 (Craft file must import into 1.3 for judging). Stock parts + Airplane Plus (optional) only. The Mk1 and Mk2 Crew Cabins count as 8 Passengers Mk3 Passenger Module and Size 2 Crew Cabin count as 24 Passengers Small aircraft must have at least 1 pilot in a cockpit, and medium-large at least 2 pilots. No command seats. No reaction wheels. Air breathing engines only. No overly wacky designs or "spaceships", it must look like a modern aircraft. Minor clipping is allowed, within reason. A rolling runway takeoff is required. Takeoff & Landing speed of no more than 80 m/s (Use flaps to achieve this, if necessary) Flaps must be set to toggle on action group Custom 01 Your aircraft must stay intact. [No drop tanks, etc.] Model variants may only have minor differences between them to be considered. 15,000m altitude limit. Mach 1 speed limit (343 m/s) TweakScale is allowed, just please don't ruin the spirit of the challenge with it. Submission Deadline: 9AM PST, 7/6/2017 What is a variant? To improve your design's competitiveness, your company can submit a variant of the same design (See Wants section below). A variant is built on the same model platform with minor changes in design to give it, say, extra range, or extra passenger room. This is most commonly achieved by adding fuel tanks or lengthening the cabin, sometimes with minor changes to wing and emmpanage design. To qualify as a variant, it must generally have the same structural layout, meaning engines, gear, and lift surfaces must be in roughly the same location & design. Basically, if you make it too different, it will be considered a separate model/submission. What Kerbal Express Air Wants, By Category: For all categories, Range will be calculated by total fuel capacity divided by fuel burn rate at the recommended cruising speed & altitude. Turboprop Range of at least 800km Cruising Speed of at least 130 m/s 24 Passengers, and optional 32 Passenger variant Small Regional Jet Range of at least 1000km Cruising Speed of at least 220 m/s 32 Passengers, and optional 40 Passenger variant with an extended range of at least 1200km. Medium Regional Jet Range of at least 1500km Cruising Speed of at least 240 m/s 72 Passengers, and optional variant with extended range of at least 2000km. Judging Criteria: Every submission that meets the requirements will be ranked w/ feedback from Kerbal Express Jet test pilots, but how well it ranks depends on: How well it meets or exceeds the category requirements How well it meets or exceeds the requested variant Cost of Aircraft Fuel Efficiency at recommended cruising speed & altitude Ease of maintenance; fewer parts and fewer engines are preferred How to Submit (See Example Submission in post below). Your post must include the following: The name of your aircraft company and model names for the designs you're submitting. At least one screenshot of your designs. A link to your craft files in your submission post. No PMing me. The price of your aircraft times 1,000,000. (If $23,555 in-game, submit as $23,555,000. This is just for fun to make prices more realistic.) The recommended cruising speed and altitude for your aircraft. This is the speed and altitude you've fine-tuned your designs for, ensuring the best balance of speed, range, and fuel efficiency. It's also what the test pilots will be testing your aircraft at for judging. (Optional, but will help in review) Pitch your aircraft to the Kerbal Express Airlines executives, selling them on why it should be purchased for their fleet. Include any notable features (even if fictional). ========================================================================== Challenge Submissions & Rank Turboprop Kramer - 50-100/150 Avery, A well balanced turboprop with good all-around performance and handling characteristics. Small Regional Jet Kembraer ZO-135, While unconventional in design, the Krembraer ZO-135 performed excellently, besting the competition in every way. Pizio & Hartmann Co. - Bluebell A+, Well featured, and meets all of our requirements at a reduced price. Osprey Regional Jet ORJ400/500, A well-rounded aircraft, meeting our requirements in all areas. Kerbolde Supersonic Jet - AAA072-1, An efficient, high-performance aircraft, but its supersonic speed significantly restricts its use over populated areas. ScarsTarsProducts - Vulture-01, A beautiful looking aircraft with excellent flexibility, but it burns fuel like a mofo. Medium Regional Jet One More Booster Co. - Kerb Ferry 72, Sturdy for cargo use, but its high fuel burn rate and steep price make it expensive for commercial passenger use. Kramer. - 150-100 Baltimore, Expensive, inefficient, loud, and too big. The Baltimore fails to be competitive on all fronts.