The 5th Generation Fighter challenge [FAR]

[Halsfury]

Do you Get Extra points if you integrate VTOL-STOL engines like the F-35B because i have a design that works,And it meets the Requirements

Because in real life it's a real advantage to be able to lift of of Carriers

I don't know what image you wanted to show, but I think I might make VTOL worth some points.

On my end though I started to find that my aircraft, Now named the F-32 Hurricane II, was getting to be super manoeuvrable! but I lacked the finesse to pull off the pugachev's cobra manoeuvre.

As a result I thought why not show another super manoeuvre to collect the points? So here is the tail-slide for 10 points

Also I'm toying with the idea of making weapons an alternative to drop tanks in scoring

how many points per weapon do you guys think to make the score roughly equal with a drop tank score?

[tetryds]

About the weapons, just make it as an extra factor for poins, it would be too complicated to balance it in a way you can try one or the other.

I don't think that any of us would mind installing BDArmory, I would actually be surprised if any of us don't have it already.

For VTOLs, what about a 1.05x points multiplier?

Nice tailslide.

[FourGreenFields]

About the weapons, just make it as an extra factor for poins, it would be too complicated to balance it in a way you can try one or the other.

I don't think that any of us would mind installing BDArmory, I would actually be surprised if any of us don't have it already.

-> you are surprised.

[Gamer025]

Any limitations on part clipping?

[Endersmens]

Hmm... I wonder if my already released F-22 could score in this challenge.

[Gamer025]

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 +31P

supercruise with DTs for 2:35min +1.5P

Pull 12.5Gs, and sustain a 7.5G turn +5P

Droptank capacity is 251.5L each, holds 2 under wings so 503L of fuel. +10P

Not to mention is a single engine, and S/VTOL design.

Has an internal weapons bay to reduce its radar cross section.

You mean your total is 48 points? NOT 137?

Also I see no evidence that your plane is capable of a 2:35min super cruise. From the screenshot you have posted it looks more like 1:40. In fact I don't see a super cruise screenshot at all, the only "cruise" screenshot you have shwon, shows a drag value higher than your thrust so it's not actually cruising it's slowing down.

Edited July 4, 2015 by Gamer025

[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.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Hodo

[Gamer025]

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.

You have 117kn of drag with only 74kn of thrust, you're not even close to cruising with that. The scoring is based on math there is no room to argue, you simply did your math wrong.

[Halsfury]

About the weapons, just make it as an extra factor for poins, it would be too complicated to balance it in a way you can try one or the other.

I don't think that any of us would mind installing BDArmory, I would actually be surprised if any of us don't have it already.

For VTOLs, what about a 1.05x points multiplier?

Nice tailslide.

I'm going to institute 2 points per weapon or hard point which can safely carry and eject weapons.

I think this will fit nicely with the drop tank scoring.

Also don't worry the BD armoury parts are not that hard to balance. They do cause drag though, enough to make a cannons only combat measurably faster.

EDIT:

Also I changed the demerit points section of the rules to "A Helpful Note" with much the same basic purpose but without making a rule out of it, since it was unenforceable anyway.

I think it's better now

Edited July 5, 2015 by Halsfury

[tetryds]

I'm going to institute 2 points per weapon or hard point which can safely carry and eject weapons.

I think this will fit nicely with the drop tank scoring.

Also don't worry the BD armoury parts are not that hard to balance. They do cause drag though, enough to make a cannons only combat measurably faster

Then the design itself has to contain these hardpoints?

That would kind of invalidate all of the submissions so far.

Also, I have a very good reason to why "amount of weapons" is a bad choice for scoring...

100 points...

BAM, 1056 points.

Of course those are just examples, but I just wanted to show that adding more guns for more points can get silly very fast.

What about having different kinds of preset payloads, and earn points by being capable of carrying them?

"Carrying" would mean be able to supercruise with the given weapons and have them on a deployable state*.

*ammo boxes can be clipped internally as that does not really matter.

Some interesting payloads would be:

Interceptor: 4x Sidewinder, 2x AMRAAM, 1x hidden vulcan, 1x 20mm ammo box.

Air Support: 2x Maverick, 4x hellfire missile, 1x GAU-8, 2x 30mm ammo box.

Attacker: 2x Maverick, 2x S-8KOM rocket pod, 1x AGM-86B cruise missile, 1x hidden vulcan, 1x 20mm ammo box.

Each of them with the value of 5 points.

Edited July 5, 2015 by tetryds

[Halsfury]

Ok tetryds, I didn't fully understand what you intended when you first brought it up, but I see your point.

for now the weapons must be a super cruise payload, to avoid huge weapon spam.

Later we can add missions for points and build a package of crafts along with procedure for flying missions to test the aircraft.

[tetryds]

for now the weapons must be a super cruise payload, to avoid huge weapon spam.

Great, that is good enough.

Can we have the same craft on both with and without weapons leaderboards?

[Darren9]

Since it's incredibly easy to "spam" weapons on wings, and this is 5th gen where stealth should be a factor how about only internally carried weapons score points? Also maybe a differentiation in points between the short stuff that can go in a single bay (mk82/hellfire) and the long ones that need double or custom bays.

Coincidentally, would you believe , I have a (K)raptor that I may be able to drag up to spec with a generous IR custom weapon bay. Is procedural wing in the fuselage acceptable in this challenge?

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Halsfury]

Since it's incredibly easy to "spam" weapons on wings, and this is 5th gen where stealth should be a factor how about only internally carried weapons score points? Also maybe a differentiation in points between the short stuff that can go in a single bay (mk82/hellfire) and the long ones that need double or custom bays.

Coincidentally, would you believe , I have a (K)raptor that I may be able to drag up to spec with a generous IR custom weapon bay. Is procedural wing in the fuselage acceptable in this challenge?

Yes you can use procedural wings & mod parts so long as FAR takes them into account

Also I'm not going to make stealth a necessity because it's still an open question as to how much stealth helps. The Russians and the French don't believe it is 100% necessary for example. Instead they rely on offensive electronic warfare measures like ECM pods, and of course chaffe and flares, which is more traditional but has the advantage of being proven.

Also it's hard to make KSP aircraft stealthy in stock, and we have no way of measuring stealth in KSP

[Darren9]

Thanks, FAR does pretty well with IR and B9 Pwing, moving an IR joint causes FAR to recalculate the voxels, it's counted as a sealed box when it's closed and if I open it at too high speed the change in area and drag cause the last third of the craft to detach

I'm not finished yet but I just want to check I've got this correct. I set 50% max thrust on the turbo jets and launched with 350l in droptanks and 6 weapons (4 sidewinder/2 hidden vulcan cannons), climbed to 11,000 and settled to a level 1/3 throttle supercruise at mach 1.141 (FAR reported around 1.67hr endurance). Dropped the droptanks and accelerated to max speed of mach 3.931. Pulled a sustained 10-15g pitch while slowing down. Opened the bay and fired the four missiles and each gun had 650 ammo (one crate for each gun).

That's all that's needed? And the score would be:

Droptanks - 7

Supercruise - Speed 1, Range 1

Top Speed - 38

Weapons - 12

TWR - (untested but suspected good) 5

Sustained pitch G - 5

Super manoeuvrable - (untested but suspected good) 10

Total - 79

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[FourGreenFields]

Am I right to assume that tweakscaled engines are allowed?

[Hodo]

You have 117kn of drag with only 74kn of thrust, you're not even close to cruising with that. The scoring is based on math there is no room to argue, you simply did your math wrong.

Are you just being a male genitalia member or did I wrong you in some way?

If you really want I will redo the test and post a pic of it just to make you happy, even though you are a non-factor in this challenge.

[Gamer025]

Are you just being a male genitalia member or did I wrong you in some way?

If you really want I will redo the test and post a pic of it just to make you happy, even though you are a non-factor in this challenge.

I just don't like seeing people cheating in any challenge.

[Halsfury]

Alright that's enough of that, Hodo, please redo to make gamer happy, if you want help tallying up your score post all the relevant data and I'll add it up.

Yes tweak scale is fine.

Darren9 I will add your score, it sounds pretty reasonable, I have around 74 points so far, also you can keep improving on it and have your score changed later

[Hodo]

ok... Now that I have that answer.

Here for you.

And the score was wrong. I dont know where I got 137 from.

It should be 48.

And to continue to hammer the point home...

40min into the flight and I STILL am not out of the DT fuel.

EDIT again

At 1hour into the flight without the forward tank filled

And I still didn't have the bay tanks filled, which can be placed in place of the missiles in the weapons bay.

2:13min without 90L of fuel in one tank.

At a speed of Mach 1.031

Any more questions?

Edited July 5, 2015 by Hodo

[ABalazs]

Hmm... I heavily doubt this challenge is doable with basic jet engines. Those simply cant reach more then 420 m/s in level flight, 430 in shallow dive. I tried it, built a plane with wave drag area of 0.47 and a single engine, and this was my best result. Any double engine build more then doubled the drag, so that was even slower, near 370 or so. Mach 2 seems unreachable.

Turbojet is the only viable way, but what a way! One of my 1/3 thrust supercruse tests ended with slow but unstoppable acceleration - I lost my patience at about 700 m/s, after at least 10 minutes of wrestling with the damned FAR SAS wobble. No documentation yet, maybe later...

[Cinocal]

Trimmed down my design. Initial testing looks promising. Got up to 10.7G no problem, going to try for SM.

SC @ Mach 3.1 with tanks.

[Darren9]

~snip~

Darren9 I will add your score, it sounds pretty reasonable, I have around 74 points so far, also you can keep improving on it and have your score changed later

When you get above 80 I'll be removing the sidewinders and adding a load more of the smaller lighter hellfires in their place

[FourGreenFields]

Hmm... I heavily doubt this challenge is doable with basic jet engines. Those simply cant reach more then 420 m/s in level flight, 430 in shallow dive. I tried it, built a plane with wave drag area of 0.47 and a single engine, and this was my best result. Any double engine build more then doubled the drag, so that was even slower, near 370 or so. Mach 2 seems unreachable.

Thing is that they lose thrust above Mach 1.7 or so. Highest I got was just below Mach 1.9, still accelerating very, very slowly.

Nonetheless, I plan to at least succesfully participate in that part of the challenge.

[Emilio]

Ok, I admit, this is harder than I had expected.

I thought I needed to go ultralight to reach the required supercruise and TWR specs, so I found a body design that seemed good and went trough three wing designs to try to find an optimal configuration, which seemed to be a delta wing with a couple degrees of dihedral.

After a few hours of design and flight, testing shows that the TWR rarely reaches > 1:1, the supercruise ability is barely functional even without drop tanks and it tends to be unstable in roll while the stability dérivatives indicate it shouldn't. Also I started designing before I actually installed BD Armoury, so the bay is too small for anything but the Hydra pods and some cannon ammo.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Back to the drawing board, I guess ! Luckily not all was lost, a slightly modified variant with leading edge slats showed some degree of supermanoeuverability.