Search the Community

The challenge is simple: fly as far as you can while using the least amount of fuel as possible To make this interesting, here's the rule: -stock only, no mods (FAR, technical readout and graphic mods are okay), no cheating -you can freely design your craft, but your craft must be powered by "engine assembly", which consisted of: Intake (allowed intake: circular, adjustable ramp and shock cone intake) - mk1 fuel tank - jet engine (allowed engines: panther, wheesley, whiplash, rapier (jet mode only)). You can attach at maximum of 3 engine assembly (1200 units of fuel), but you are not allowed to attach other engines, or intakes outside of that assembly -if using fuel-carrying part, such as big-s wings or large airplane wing, the content must be emptied. The only fuel source must be from mk1 fuel tank in engine assembly -do not leave atmosphere, do not use solid rocket, lf/ox, ion, monopropellant engines, or any other glitching shenanigans for propulsion. no staging or destroying part, no dropping parts/engine assembly, the plane must land/ splashed down intact How the scoring works: (Distance travelled) / (amount of fuel used) note: if using FAR, your final score will be increased by 10% mk1 fuel tank have 400 units of fuel, so for example, if I traveled for 360km, and used 40 units of fuel, then the score will be: 360 / 40 = 9, if I make it farther, say 390km with 40 units of fuel, then the score will be 390 / 40 = 9.75. This challenge is focused towards flight skills about gliding the plane to make it as far as possible with the least amount of fuel as possible. Your flight is considered ended when your plane has landed/ splashing down. The scoring will be divided according to the number of engine assemblies used Leaderboards: -1 assembly: -2 assemblies: -3 assemblies: Good luck, and may the sky has silver lining from your flight (or trail of debris, if you're unlucky)

The challenge is simple: fly as far as you can while using the least amount of fuel as possible To make this interesting, here's the rule: -stock only, no mods (FAR, technical readout and graphic mods are okay) -you can freely design your craft, but your craft must be powered by "engine assembly", which consisted of: [Intake - mk1 fuel tank - jet engine] (allowed engines: panther, wheesley, whiplash, rapier (jet mode only)). You can attach at maximum of 2 engine assembly (800 units of fuel), for those who needs extra power for their craft, but you are not allowed to attach other engines, or intakes outside of that assembly. It doesn't matter how or where you put those 3 components on your plane, but a plane must have either 1 tank, engine, intake or 2 tanks, engines, intakes -if using fuel-carrying part, such as big-s wings or large airplane wing, the content must be emptied. The only fuel source must be from mk1 fuel tank -do not leave atmosphere, do not use solid rocket, lf/ox, ion, monopropellant engines, or any other glitching shenanigans for propulsion. no staging or destroying part, no dropping parts/engine assembly, plane must take off from the ground How the scoring works: (Distance travelled) / (amount of fuel used) The distance is using "ground distance travelled" in F3 menu note: FAR User have their own category, since the flight mechanic is FAR more different than stock ones (pun intended) mk1 fuel tank have 400 units of fuel, so for example, if I traveled for 360km, and used 40 units of fuel, then the score will be: 360 / 40 = 9, if I make it farther, say 390km with 40 units of fuel, then the score will be 360 / 40 = 9.75. This challenge is focused towards flight skills about gliding the plane to make it as far as possible with the least amount of fuel as possible. Your flight is considered ended when your plane has landed/ splashing down. The scoring will be divided between single-engine craft and dual-engine craft Leaderboards [stock aerodynamic]: -1 assembly: @Cunjo Carl=41,967 -2 assemblies: @neistridlar=56,029 Leaderboards [FAR Aerodynamic] -1 assembly: -2 assemblies: Good luck, and may the sky has silver lining from your flight (or trail of debris, if you're unlucky)

First aircraft I have released in years on here. Just recently got in the mood of building interesting space and aircraft designs. Even managed to build a few new vehicles. Without further ado, here is the Spasho-I VTOL Aircraft: https://imgur.com/a/9csHn Download Link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7rsehhtcvsl0bqr/Spasho-I.craft?dl=0 Few might remember of my earlier attempts at VTOL space/aircraft. A good majority of them failed and haven't really built many even after 1.0 came out. I might look into bringing back the challenge about VTOL that nobody really participated in due to the sheer difficulty (even with aerodynamics added) at the time.

After learning how to make propellers in stock KSP, I wondered if it was possible to make a solar-powered aircraft, like Solar Impulse or the NASA Helios. The problem is, all the propeller engine designs I've seen require the engine to be physically separate from the aircraft, preventing electricity from wing-mounted solar panels from reaching it. Is it possible to make a propeller engine that isn't physically separated from the aircraft, or somehow "beam" electricity into the engine? If not, are there any easy code fixes that can allow either of those things?

Typically, as the thrust produced depends on the propeller used and the airspeed, propeller engine performance IRL is measured in horsepower or kilowatts. As stock propellers require a constant amount of electricity to run, we can find their in-game power consumption in units per second easily—in fact, by just looking at the Resource bars. However, there are 2 potential ways to convert this into real units: A solar panel of a certain area pointed ideally at Kerbol from Kerbin will produce a certain amount of charge per second. An in-game power-per-unit-area figure can be calculated from that. Compare that with Earth's 1361 W/m3 ideal power-per-unit-area figure. This will of course depend on the efficiency of the solar panels used, but assumptions can be made. More reliably, the Realism Overhaul mod suite has a conversion factor from units of electric charge to Watts in case a part specifies its power consumption that way. So, it should be possible to measure the power output of stock propeller engine. It should also be possible, though difficult, to measure the mechanical efficiency of the engine by taking into account the rotary's* moment of inertia, angular acceleration, and cruise angular velocity. Has anyone ever thought of this before? Regardless, if you have made a stock propeller aircraft, please post the power output of the planes and engines you've made, as well as preferably their masses. Posting mechanical efficiency would be really awesome. *Most KSP stock props are technically rotary engines.

Hello, and this is my first post here! I hope this is not too much of a noob question, but is there anything like a VOR to help landing an aircraft, SSTO, or shuttle? If there is then I missed it, if there isn't then what else can I use to help make landing a bit easier? Is that too many questions? Any and all advice will be gratefully accepted. It is needed. Thanks you in advance, but I must attend to my clockwork band.

The Antonov AN-225 Mriya was a large cargo aircraft designed to carry cargo of up to 250 metric tonnes that was designed and developed by the Ukraine based company Antonov in the years 1984 to 1988. The Mriya was designed to carry large payloads both inside it's large cargo hold as well as on top of the aircraft. The Mriya was designed with launch vehicles such as the MAKS project in mind, this influenced numerous design elements including the twin vertical tail fins which left the aircraft's rear clear for rocket exhaust to pass through. However, said feature only saw service in transporting the Soviet space shuttle Buran. The Mriya holds the title as being the longest and having the widest wingspan of any aircraft in operation, as well as having the largest maximum take-off mass of any aircraft ever built at 640 metric tonnes. The name Mriya is Ukrainian for "Dream", which I think you can agree is a truly accurate name to this colossus of an aircraft. Part Count: 979 Length: 87.5m Wingspan: 88.3m Mass: 640.3 tons Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/Kronus_Aerospace/Kronus-Antonov-AN-225-Mriya Performance: -Rotation Speed: 60 m/s -Cruising Altitude: 7500m -Max Speed at CRZ ALT: 222.7 m/s (exactly the same as the real thing) -Stall Speed: 40 m/s -Maneuverability: Surprisingly okay For more images as well as additional information, please check out the KerbalX page!

Hello all! I'm back, and I've made a new replica. Unlike all of my other replicas, I have decided to record the making of the BF-109. So far, this replica has been one of the easiest to build so far; only taking about/less than an hour to complete and test. (I'm only showing 40 minutes of building footage in the video because the extra 10-20 minutes were just tweaking) The video is here: The stock bearings used were initially designed by MajorJim, however, a similar design, using different parts (the one I use in the plane) were designed by Klond and Azimech. Download is in the video description.

I built a pretty large aircraft, and put a drop probe in its cargo bay. Basically a relay station, with lots of battery, solar panels, 6 antennae (4 relay, 2 shorter range), and some atmospheric science. I flew the plane to where I wanted to drop the probe, and deployed it. It deployed landed just fine (I switched to the probe just after release). After it landed I switched back to the carrier plane to fly back home. So far so good, but when I tried to go back to the probe, it didn't exist any more! Should I have left the plane unrecovered before going back to activate the science and configure the antennae? I'm using KSP 1.3.1.1891, with a bunch of mods. I doubt that it was a mod issue. I didn't quit the game or anything like that, and didn't accidentally revert the flight or anything. I _did_ recover vessel before I tried to go back to the landed probe.

Browsing this forum before uploading my simple wing design, I was struck by how similar it is to @Cupcake... Vulture wing design. Whilst my offering is nowhere near as nimble as Cupcake's design, it is easy to fly and is, perhaps, of a slightly purer design. Flight demonstrates no untoward traits, except for perhaps a small amount of sideslip at low speeds, but it is only a small amount. Take off is simplicity itself - Turn on SAS and stage the engines, throttle up to max, and this wing will take off with no further input at around 70m/s. Action group key 3 can be used to toggle reverse thrust to slow down for landing. Download from KerbalX - https://kerbalx.com/Scarecrow88/Flying-Wing

1:1 Scale Replicas Full stock, full scale, full power In a scaled-down universe filled with scaled-down Kerbals, it's easy to forget how big real planes are. I've been building planes to the same scale of their real counterparts, enabling more accurate replicas with functioning mechanisms like swing wings, moving lift engines, and the odd GAU-8 Avenger. Mikoyan Gurevich MiG-23 Flogger Antonov An-2 Colt Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird North American F-86K/F-86L Sabre Dog North American T-2 Buckeye Douglas DC-3 / C-47 Skytrain General Dynamics F-111A Aardvark Consolidated PBY Catalina Vought F7U Cutlass Martin P6M Seamaster Ryan NYP - Spirit of St. Louis Mitsubishi F-2 "Viper Zero" Vought F8U Crusader The Century Series Convair F-102 Delta Dagger Lockheed F-104 Starfigher Republic F-105 Thunderchief Convair F-106 Delta Dart Lockheed F-117A "Nighthawk" Stealth Fighter PZL M-15 "Belphegor" McDonnell F-4 Phantom II EC-18B ARIA - Apollo Range Instrumentation Aircraft Douglas A-4 Skyhawk Mikoyan Gurevich MiG-19ST "Farmer-B" USS Johnston - Fletcher-Class Destroyer McDonnell Douglas F/A-18C/D Hornet Superscale (1.3x) Republic P-47 Thunderbolt Superscale (1.5x) North American P-51D Mustang Grumman YF-28 "Alleycat" Northrop B-2 Spirit Martin XB-51 Ilyushin IL-76 "Candid" Convair B-58 Hustler McDonnell F-101C / RF-101C Voodoo Grumman F11F Tiger Panavia Tornado Fairchild-Republic A-10A Thunderbolt II "Warthog" Shuttle Transport System Northrop T-38 Talon Lockheed L-133 Starjet Yakolev Yak-38 Forger Boeing-Saab T-X Trainer Aircraft Dassault Mirage 2000 North American F-100D Super Sabre Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-200 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 North American F-86 Sabre Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor Dassault Rafale Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Lightning II Republic F-84 Thunderjet Concorde General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon Grumman F-14 Tomcat (MULTIPLE VERSIONS) McDonnell Douglas / Boeing F-15 Eagle + F-15 ACTIVE STOL/MTD McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II Lockheed NF-104A "Zoom Climber" Sukhoi Su-27M/Su-35 Flanker-E More will be posted as I make them. Feel free to suggest favorite craft for me to take on!

Hello to all again. I'm new to the KSP forums and after searching google I'm turning here for support. I want to build a customized artillery shell but the small warhead isn't working. Sometimes it'll explode like its supposed to, but mostly it just impacts and disintegrates. Can anyone help?

Kerbal Space Program Ultimate Fighter Competition (KSP-UFC) With the Guidance of Emperor Allister of house Kerman. The Bosognian Empire would now host a gladiator pit-fight between the world's greatest aircraft designer's fighters. The First set of the competition would be Theme-less and would follow an 8 competitor bracket. The battle would be fought with 2 planes per player with the opposing planes facing each other back-back. No tampering on the planes would be done. If you sent your fighter with an maneuverability even an AI cannot control then that's how it shall battle. The Competitor would be chosen through Random Selection The Competitors Submission must be sent by E-mail to [email protected] The Competition Shall Impose restrictions on the fighters however the restriction would be light. Mods (Required) BDArmory (The (Optional) Quiztech Airplane Plus Aviation Cockpits Firespitter SMArmory Master Tech weapons Procedural Wings Adjustable Landing gear Restrictions No Gimbaling Turrets No Gimbaling missile launchers No Meteor Missile from Master Tech Weapons Crafts should be 80 parts or less FAR would not be used No PAC-3 missiles Clipping is allowed but Resource Clipping is not allowed The Clips from the battle would be posted at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfLcV69Rtie9wDHmAoW-8kA

Hello friends! I present to you the Margański & Mysłowski EM-10 Bielik! Hope you like it! More Images! ----------------> https://kerbalx.com/Kerbalyst/EM-10-Bielik More Crafts! -----------------> https://kerbalx.com/Kerbalyst/

Hello friends! I'm happy to present you my latest design! The B-29 Superfortress with surprise inside, the XF-85 Goblin! A parasite deployable aircraft from the cargo bay! It took me a long time to get the correct modifications and good configurations of many files, but I finally did it! Of course, there are many things to improve, so suggestions and more are welcome! I also have to say that this would not have been possible without the help of @ TheKurgan, @winged, @JadeOfMaar and other people who helped me with some mods, thank you very much guys! Deddicated to all of you! Thanks to all, I hope you like it! If you like it you can download it at https://kerbalx.com/Kerbalyst/B-29-Superfortress--XF-85-Goblin <-------------More images here More Crafts! https://kerbalx.com/Kerbalyst

Apparently, use of electric motors allows you to design aircraft with contra-rotating propellers- as is demonstrated in these electric racing aircraft designs: I had no idea this was possible, and this massively changes the game in terms of electric vs. internal combustion aircraft. For one, with contra-rotating electric propellers it's easily possible to pack twice as much Thrust into a given airframe as with an ICE design, allowing for higher speeds (in racing designs) ot larger wings and more space/weight for batteries (in actual utilitarian planes). It's also possible to achieve a much higher ratio of propeller-area to Thrust with the same Thrust- allowing for better performance at higher altitudes (electric engines also operate better than ICE ones at higher altitudes, due to not requiring Oxygen..) I could easily imagine an Electric passenger aircraft being designed someday with 5 sets of contra-rating propellers (1 on the nose and 2 on each wing), each with 3-4 blades rotating in each direction with a rather large propeller diameter, being used to support very high-altitude flight with electric aircraft for the inherent advantages this provides (lower drag for a given speed, less turbulence, more glide time/distance in case of engine-failure). At high altitudes electric propellers eventually reach their maximum torque and rotation-speed, and start to consume less and less electrical power as the Thrust produced and air resistance to rotation starts to fall off with even greater gains in altitude. So, if you climbed high enough you could eventually reach the point where 10 contra-rotating propellers (5 sets of 2) with large diameter blades spans and 3-4 blades on each propeller only draws as much electrical power, and produces as much Thrust, as a single propeller at sea level. However at this altitude, Drag would be greatly reduced- meaning you could (and would need to in order to generate adequate Lift to maintain altitude) fly substantially faster than that amount of Thrust would allow you to fly at sea-level. Even accounting for decreasing Lift/Drag at higher speeds, you could still cover far more miles of distance per kilowatt-hour of electrical power consumed with a design optimized for high-altitude flight and cruising at high altitude... This would lead to substantially extended max range compared to electric planes with lower cruising-altitudes, and might (just barely) allow for practical electric Transatlantic flights on a large plane (larger planes encounter less parasitic drag relative to their volume, and have less mass dedicated to cockpit computers, landing gear, and pilots compared to their payload) with a substantial portion of volume (maybe 50% of the plane's internal space) dedicated to batteries, for instance... Other videos worth watching on the topics of electric aircraft and high-altitude flight: (Above: a general overview of efforts at small electric aircraft...) (Above: a video on the development of "Alice", a proposed 800 km range passenger aircraft by Eviation...) (Above: Airbus and Rolls Royce' efforts at developing Distributed Electric Propulsion for large passenger jetliners- with company estimates putting a rollout date of about 2030-2050, target of 2042)

Hi to all kerbonauts i'm Diias, So let me tell you my idea, in a simplified version : I wanna reshape (not in a bad way) the way you start with your aircraft in the ground, I wanna add this items to my first iteration of this mod when it realeses which I have no date, 1. New small to mid size engine, I'm aiming for like a A320 to B737 engine 2. Add an APU system 3. Add 1 new type of material which is pressurized air So it would be like: So you would do your aircraft or plane, and to start the engines you need pressurized air.... and to make that pressurized air you need to start the APU (It's worst than it sounds) but to start the APU you need Electric charge which I will tweak during the development to be balanced. "Obviously the APU can only start one engine ( You could only start 2 engines at the same time if you putted 2 APU's but that is kinda obvious)" But here it's where it gets tricky, I know little about 3d modeling and I just have my girlfriend helping me doing it but she only had like a crash course of blender, so if anyone wants to help or in this case volunteer for this project send me a private message, and for everyone else I will try to update every once in a awhile the development of this mod thanks to all who red this post stay kerby 1st Update: https://imgur.com/Iu8IVTe 2nd Update https://imgur.com/UQ7n52k This is how it looks in unity now with some really fast textures but almost finished: https://imgur.com/TRrlnB5 and https://imgur.com/bQM2LS9

This should be a nice simple challenge. Build an airplane, powered only by solid rocket engines, capable of taking off from the SPH runway and landing on the island runway. Rules: Solid rockets are the only propulsion allowed. No jets, no liquid rockets, no RCS, no infiniglide. Aerodynamic control surfaces only. If your command pod has reaction wheels, they must have torque turned off. Rolling takeoffs and landings; you can't use dedicated solid thrusters to lift off or anything messy like that. No staging, no damage. What takes off must come down in one piece. Kerbal it! You've gotta have a pilot; no probes. Is there scoring? Well, sort of. All submissions must be able to take off from the SPH runway and land on the island runway (velocity = 0) but there are leaderboards for different capabilities within that set. Your plane only needs the capability; you can get the following achievements/challenges on a separate run. I'll make a rockin' awesome badge if I get enough buy-in. Achievements/challenges: Speedrun. Take off, come to a full stop on the island runway, return, and come to a full stop on the SPH runway, in as short a time as possible. Shockwave. Reach the highest possible airspeed (below 60 km altitude). No recovery required. Endurance. Travel as far as possible from the SPH and make a successful rolling landing. Spaceballs. What's the highest altitude you can achieve? No recovery required. Featherweight. What's the lowest-mass solution you can manage? Replication. Make your solution look as close as possible to a real-life aircraft (I'll judge). More achievements/challenges may be added based on demand.

The Mustang is a new Mk1 sized Turboprop fighter from KAe systems, it is being built to enter the Stock Turboprop DogFight challenge and may be selected by entities to fulfil the role of Airborne Combat Patrol and Homeland Defense. Mustang Prototype Download The Mustang prototype has been under development for quite a while. There were several technical challenges to be overcome. Today we are unveiling the prototype for review. This version is a test-bed for new technologies and will be worked on to increase speed, range and include armaments. It has a top speed currently of 60.5ms in level flight (don't be fooled by the navball, the wings are pitched so even though the nose is slightly down, the wings are level and maintaining altitude). It is as efficient as could be built although it is currently under-powered for military purposes. It uses two twin Juno KAe Mercator engines in a push/pull configuration. It is envisaged the production version will be equipped with the tri Juno Brigand engine. A lot of effort was put into making this aircraft AI controllable for the Stock Turboprop DogFight challenge, so it could not be finicky, or need special tricks to fly. As such it is remarkable easy to fly for a pilot, just stage (space), engage SAS (t), and full throttle (z). Pull up at about 40ms and it should lift smoothly off the tarmac, you don't even have to worry about tail prop strike. Landing is as straightforward as any other aircraft, though landing pitch of more than 10' may cause damage. Stall speed is below 30ms. Mustang Prototype - Top Speed You can eke slightly more speed out of it by deploying the rear blades. Mustang Prototype Development

Ammonia borane (H3NBH3) is a compound with properties analogous to ethane, but with a higher point of fusion. Basically ammonia borane is solid at room temperature and pressure, unlike ethane that is a gas. Ammonia borane has an special property: it will release hydrogen while is heating (being transformed to H2NBH2, next to HNBH) until degrade to nytrogen boride at 1000 "C. If ammonia borane isn't degraded to nytrogen boride, it can be recharged of hydrogen. This is a good thing, since a ammonia borane volume is able to store much more hydrogen than the same volume of liquid hydrogen. Then, it could be used for build light reusable rockets, as well as compact high hydrogen density cells of cars, and like hydrogen batteries for jet engines. Currently the ammonia borane is being studied for its possible application for hydrogen batteries of future, the main problem is the production of this substance, together logistical problems derived in the extraction and recharge of hydrogen gas from it.

A fully operational carrier hull and bridge. As opposed to Eskandre's excellent Nimitz, this one has a ski-jump. It's not actually based on any real-world aircraft carrier, but it probably most resembles the Russian Navy's Admiral Kuznetsov. The lifts and hangar are fully operational. The mod is actually just a single part that comprises the hull, deck, lifts and bridge. It generates its own power, but it's meant to be used along with other ship mods for engines, radar, antennae, defence systems, etc. [MOD - Download link removed due to missing license - sumghai]

P-101 Boomerang Stock KSP 1.3 Personal Flying Wing Download Craft File @ KerbalX! Inspired by early flying wings such as the Gotha Go229, the P-101 brings back the pioneering spirit with its radical, yet simple flying wing design. Featuring just 22 parts, the pint-sized Boomerang is powered by two Size 0 turbojets making it one of the simplest aircraft capable of controlled flight at subsonic speeds.

By now there's multiple procedural parts generation mods that allow fully custom rocket and spaceplane designs. However, I'm yet to see one that tailors towards more graceful fuselage design for aircraft. I doubt I'm the first to think of this, but I haven't yet found any topics that discuss this. The would only feature one part - a regular procedural fuel tank. Users can edit the same properties that current procedural parts mods allow, such as textures, width, length, part type (fuel, structural, battery, etc), and so on. However, the following customisation options would also be included: Cross Section Type: Each fuel tank has a cross sectional shape that can be changed. Ellipse Rectangle Chamfer Rectangle (diagonal corners) Fillet Rectangle (rounded corners) Cross Section Dimensions: Each end of a fuel tank has tweakable geometric properties. These would be unique to each end. For example, you could have a fuel tank that starts as a tall ellipse and ends as a flat ellipse, or a square with small chamfer corners growing in size as you move down the tank. Section width Section height Chamfer size Fillet radius Cross Section Smoothing: Each end of a fuel tank has optional smoothing. What this means is that you can make a tank change shape smoothly, rather than instantaneously. This would allow you to have multiple parts inline that gradually change shape so that your fuselage doesn't have any jagged lines. This imgur link describes what I'm talking about. Section Offset: Each end of a fuel tank can be offset vertically and horizontally. This would allow you to create long and smooth tail/nose pieces, much like what we see in aircraft in reality. Is there anything already like this? What do you guys think of this?

Send in some KSP Surveillance aircraft. Put it in a reply. They have to be in a KerbalX web link. There can only be 3 SR-71 because in the next video their can't be to many SR-71 aircraft compatible for KSP 1.3. Here is the channel that they will be shown in https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCI5ZatD11IKoKkNDy6pWCJg Here is an example https://kerbalx.com/Trekkie148/SR-81-Eclipse requirements The craft must be stock unless if it have BDarmory Continued installed [optional] Give it a proper name by starting with a SR in the beginning, SSTO's are ok but not to many but only mk2 and mk1 aircraft, Give it some detail saying it's origin and the company that the aircraft was made from, Last but not least send them in by this Wednesday. [you can send some in after that but I wan't some for a video coming out this Wednesday] plus I will credit you Here are some helpful tips for wing configuration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_configuration#Wing_sweep https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_configuration#Drag_reduction

A Concorde analogue I threw together, to get to Mach 2.0 you have to use afterburners, it is quite a stable plane and performs well. Altitude maximum is around 10km. Not sure how far it can go yet, but it does have quite a bit of fuel onboard and also a cargo space in the tail. Download