For The Stealthiest...

[Dman979]

Ghostbuzzer, meet Desktop.

280 parts.

Anyhoo, tallying my craft as is...

1 Crew Member -- 100 points

Fly By Wire AVH - 50 Points

Two Engines -- 100 Points

BtB1 (20m Length) -- 10 Points

BtB2 (13.2m Width) -- 10 Points

BtB3 (3.7m Height) -- 10 Points

Signed by the Author -- 15 Points

F-19 -- 5 Points

JDAM -- 10 Points

Grand Total -- 310 Points

I can get pics up tomorrow.

EDIT:

Nevermind.

http://i61.tinypic.com/15h20hw.png

http://i57.tinypic.com/11r7tip.png

http://i62.tinypic.com/ftfrr5.png

http://i58.tinypic.com/s2cxsx.png

EDIT:

A name.... name, name, name...

Well, how about the Strike Kite?

Yeah, I like that!

Added with 310 points, and second place! Nice job!

[Dman979]

I'm still working on my entry. I think that the I-beams frame is the way to go.

[Starwhip]

I'm still working on my entry. I think that the I-beams frame is the way to go.

I can vouch for that.

[Dman979]

Although I may just use antennas to extend my size. Physicsless, you know!

[sgt_flyer]

Oh well, here's my entry (though it's more for the replica aspect of it than it's performances ^^)

Javascript is disabled. View full album

1 crew member +100

CH-J3 +50

two engines +100

GTFO +10

BtB 1 +10

BtB 2 +10

BtB 3 +10

Signed by the author +15

JDAM +10

maybe JSOW, you tell me ^^

wobblin'goblin i don't really know it's not the nicest plane to fly, with or without SAS ^^ (go too much in one direction with or without SAS , and the plane will want to fly upside down ^^)

so, 315 points for now

Now, there's sooo much drag in this plane that this plane cannot exceed 42m/s of level flight at 500m (and with a 10m/s maximum ascent rate, couldn't test it at high altitude unfortunately - was going to run out of fuel before that ^^)

here's the .craft, with the landing can attached to the side. (get the pilot out, walk toward the cockpit and board the seat - you can then eject the landing can through normal staging)

http://www./download/4vacc01t153g01v/F-117+Nighthawk.craft

Action group 1 to open / close the bomb bay.

Edited May 23, 2015 by sgt_flyer

[Dman979]

ha ha, 42 m/s top speed! wow!

Ill check you entry as soon as i can see the pictures. not your fault, school blocked them.

[sgt_flyer]

Yeh guess it would earn the 'for the slowest' badge if there was one ^^

Basically, i've built the hull out of numerous wing parts, which create a lot of downforce & drag by it's own.

So when you clip in additionnal control surfaces to counteract that, things get interesting ^^

Edited May 22, 2015 by sgt_flyer

[Starwhip]

Oh well, here's my entry (though it's more for the replica aspect of it than it's performances ^^)

http://imgur.com/a/zxqDf

1 crew member +100

CH-J3 +50

two engines +100

GTFO +10

BtB 1 +10

BtB 2 +10

BtB 3 +10

Signed by the author +15

JDAM +10

maybe JSOW, you tell me ^^

wobblin'goblin i don't really know it's not the nicest plane to fly, with or without SAS ^^ (go too much in one direction with or without SAS , and the plane will want to fly upside down ^^)

so, 315 points for now

Now, there's sooo much drag in this plane that this plane cannot exceed 42m/s of level flight at 1000 m/s (and with a 10m/s maximum ascent rate, couldn't test it at high altitude unfortunately - was going to run out of fuel before that ^^)

here's the .craft, with the landing can attached to the side. (get the pilot out, walk toward the cockpit and board the seat - you can then eject the landing can through normal staging)

http://www./download/4vacc01t153g01v/F-117+Nighthawk.craft

Wow, that looks good!

Darn you, now I have to do better!

[sgt_flyer]

well i lacked several things for it to be almost perfect ^^ - taller landing gear, and the correct form factor for the rear control surfaces ^^ (WTB black paint for the wing parts too ) - oh, and a bomb bay which articulates it's doors in the middle instead of on the sides (we need to be able to tweak control surfaces movement range ^^ they would make excellent doors for bomb bays ) (not that i haven't tried but the mecanisms were either too big and did not fit the airframe, or unreliable. And anyway, way too high partcounts )

The hull itself is as close to the real thing as i could

Hint, the ladders are fully physicless and don't block thrust that's how i built those engine exhausts

Besides, at 383 parts, it already slows down the game by a good chunk

Edited May 22, 2015 by sgt_flyer

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

[...]

Ill check you entry as soon as i can see the pictures. not your fault, school blocked them.

Just imagine a white F-117, perfect in every detail. Also, I must spread rep around before I rep you, sorry.

[builder396]

Okay, this may be my first time at a competition, but here is my shot at it.

Weight: 23.8 t

Height (gear up): 3.4m

Width: 13.0m (close enough)

Length: 19.9m (close enough)

All musts are met.

And as follows these are the optional requirements that are met:

Should:

• Carry one crew member maximum (+100)
  
• Have a CH-J3 Fly-By-Wire Avionics Hub (+50)
  
• Have two engines maximum (+100)
  
• Have a 1720 Km Combat range (+25)
  
• GTFO: contain a ejector seat (+10)
  
• By the Book 1: Have a length of 20 m (+10)
  
• By the Book 2: Have a wingspan of 13.2 m (+10)
  
• By the Book 3: Have a height of 3.7 m with wheels up (+10)
  
• Signed by the Author: Meet BtB 1,2, and 3 (+15)
  

Total Points: 330

Assuming the dimensions have space for tolerance (ksp editor is only this accurate).

http://imgur.com/a/eV37C#0

Edited May 24, 2015 by builder396
Miscalculated the points. 330 should be correct

[sgt_flyer]

Hmm - did you forgot to write down some of the optional bonus points ? You are only at 330 points (including the By the book) with the bonuses you wrote down

[Starwhip]

Hmm - did you forgot to write down some of the optional bonus points ? You are only at 330 points (including the By the book) with the bonuses you wrote down

Yeah, you're a wee bit short of 400 points, my friend...

[builder396]

Sorry, I mistakenly added 70 points for being operational at 14000 meters (which is near damn impossible without ramjets), i just didnt check properly whether what I added was actually all fulfilled. I corrected it now.

[Dman979]

Just checking it now, will be added shortly!

edit: added with 330 points and Second place!

Can no one beat TheLongRun?!? Still running strong!

edit2: You have a lot of weight there. Do you want to tell me if you got Slow and Steady?

Edited May 25, 2015 by Dman979

[ihtoit]

Two "Gatecrasher" entries, since I can't be bothered to run up scores, at least one of them is powered by Rapiers, and I don't actually have screenshots of my replica showing the important stats. Speaking of which:

The Bat: 1/2 length internal bomb bay, undetermined capacity for external hardpoints, global range.

The Stealth: 2m internal bomb bay, planned for 6x external hardpoints shared between munitions and external fuel tanks for global range and multiple strike capability.

Additionally, this should be disqualified from actual entry as an entry because these aircraft were created in version 0.24.

First, my "Bat" concept, giving it some belly:

On the runway:

Wheels up in <100m!

Turns like a fighter:

She'll even go suborbital:

...And back for the "Wow!" shot:

And now for my F-117A Stealth replica:

Climbs like a spider up a curtain. Yes, those are ion engines:

You wanted silly short takeoff run? How about 28m/s rotation at <50m?

The Bat and the Stealth sharing apron space:

Bonus: parked with the Scarab, another concept airframe (no wings!) which went full-on suborbital on stock jets!

[Dman979]

I'll add you as a gatecrasher.

You also seemed to use non-stock struts! Naughty, Naughty...

[ihtoit]

ty, and yes, I used invisible struts because otherwise they'd've looked like mutant Kittyhawks.

[Dman979]

But the USAF wants mutant Kittyhawks!!

[builder396]

Just checking it now, will be added shortly!

edit: added with 330 points and Second place!

Can no one beat TheLongRun?!? Still running strong!

edit2: You have a lot of weight there. Do you want to tell me if you got Slow and Steady?

I actually dont really know, because the thrust varies depending on speed and altitude. So I actually dont know how you would calculate that.

It still feels pretty heavy when flying though, and the top speed at 10km is only about 250 m/s, so i might still score that one.

[Dman979]

Calculate it at takeoff. I.e., after 1 minute of flying at the most, check your engine thrust at 500 meters and see what the info says your weight is. Use that to see your TWR.

I'll update the rules on that one.

[ihtoit]

MJ will tell you your current TWR in real time.

My next challenge will be to make a straight-wing aircraft which has a TWR of <0.4 yet will make 155m/s cruise at sea level.

[Dman979]

Thanks for the tip! Added in rules!

You do really like the Gatecrashers spot, don't ya?

[builder396]

Calculate it at takeoff. I.e., after 1 minute of flying at the most, check your engine thrust at 500 meters and see what the info says your weight is. Use that to see your TWR.

I'll update the rules on that one.

Thrust on the runway with engaged brakes is 105kN max, so the TWR as per ksp wiki (thrust/(mass*gravity of kerbin)) is 0.89, so not even close. Too bad.

By the way, I would enjoy more of these replica challenges, especially if it went towards WWII or something.

Edited May 28, 2015 by builder396

[Dman979]

More replica challenges, huh? I can try.

Build a stock F-111 with variable-sweep wings XD