Kerbin Circumnavigation 1.0.4/1.0.5 - Aviator Challenge Continuation

[nicky4096]

ok, so i did some more calculations on wings, this time looking at lift-to-weight ratio.

the basic fin has the best ratio(12 IIRC), but is useless as it has such a low heat tolerance.

after the basic fin, a bunch of wings have a lift-to-weight of 10. these are: AV-T1, Big-S Delta wing, Big-S wing strake, Delta wing, Structural wing type A and D, wing connector type A and D, and the wing strake.

^ note that i left out some because they were basically sideways versions of wings that i mentioned, and so have a much worse drag coefficient.

anyway, since so many were tied, i then looked at the lift-to-drag coefficients for all of them. wing connector type A has a lift-to-weight ratio of 10 and a lift-to-drag coef. of 5.555. second is the AV-T1, with the same lift-to-weight and a lift-to-drag of 4.31

hopefully this helps someone. I'm off to test!

[etopsirhc]

my first attempt: total flight time under 1 minute. of course that was about the time i hit mach 4 and all 6 engines instantly explode....

all tests lead to the same result, at mach 4 those ram jets explode, despite the mach 6 rating.

my plane, named Too Much Thrust ( because in the SPH, KER said i only had 0.03/0.04 TWR and i assumed i broke it some how )

http://i.imgur.com/IlAGWFN.jpg

Edited July 7, 2015 by etopsirhc

[nicky4096]

that thing looks AWESOME.

but - xannari, 39:29. and only 1 quickload! YEAH!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

also, almost forgot to ditch that extra useless body... threw valentina off at about mach 6. "Valentina Kerman exploded to overheating"

as you can tell, i am a very nice person.

[ExaltedDuck]

[h=3]etopsirhc[/h]Nice plane. I've been starting to think along the same lines (more power) since most of the velocity competitors are now so similar. Hopefully I'll be able to set a new record with my existing craft before then though. I'm close, just have to get the landing sorted out.

[Xannari Ferrows]

that thing looks AWESOME.

but - xannari, 39:29. and only 1 quickload! YEAH!

http://imgur.com/a/SBEP7

also, almost forgot to ditch that extra useless body... threw valentina off at about mach 6. "Valentina Kerman exploded to overheating"

as you can tell, i am a very nice person.

Remind me never to fly with you in any aircraft.

I hope you've enjoyed that victory! As we speak, the crew of Carson's new Sky Arrow is writing a report of the flight!

But you'll be going up regardless, so there's no loss involved.

- - - Updated - - -

Aha! Even while tangoing with the NaNo virus, I still managed to take the lead by a surprising time, if I do say so myself!

Nicky, your move.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[nicky4096]

nice. ill be back...

edit: might take me longer. new WWK episode!

Edited July 7, 2015 by nicky4096

[HelmutK]

Concratulations to your results @all.

But i'm back

and i'm standing on the runway:wink:

I do'nt know what happened with the parachutes. They've worked well.

Have a look at the video:

[nicky4096]

xannari and helmut, while i am very impressed with your designs and flying and don't doubt you managed it, but xannari your album shows 39:17 not 38:50 and helmut you need a halfway picture... just saying

but i'm not trying to be a stickler, i don't doubt your records

[Xannari Ferrows]

xannari and helmut, while i am very impressed with your designs and flying and don't doubt you managed it, but xannari your album shows 39:17 not 38:50 and helmut you need a halfway picture... just saying

but i'm not trying to be a stickler, i don't doubt your records

Yeah, I just noticed that myself. I don't know why I put that there.

I'll also let Helmut's entry slide this time, seeing as his track record is good, but this'll be the only time that happens.

[ExaltedDuck]

That's weird. That splash down must mean the launch clamp loaded before the terrain or under it. Either way, clear grounds for a DQ. (kidding )

Edited July 7, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[HelmutK]

Sorry, that was a testflight.

There was no halfway picture, but counts this picture over the waste?

[nicky4096]

oh god. my new plane has a TWR of nearly 10 and vaporizes very quickly...

[HelmutK]

oh god. my new plane has a TWR of nearly 10 and vaporizes very quickly...

My new result:

Halfway picture

To land in the dark on time is cruel . I'm sure that could be even better. I'll try it tomorrow.

Edited July 8, 2015 by HelmutK

[kmMango]

Mother of Kraken, what is that in Mach? You may have broken Mach 6!

[Xannari Ferrows]

Mother of Kraken, what is that in Mach? You may have broken Mach 6!

Mach 5.081

[HelmutK]

update: Same flight new quickload near the mountains.

That was my target for this flight. No more speed landings at the dark

[ExaltedDuck]

[Edited to add] Good job Helmut!

[Original message] My best with my previously record holding craft has been a 39:25. I've tried a few newer prototypes but I'm running into severe heat issues below about 23000m. They'll go fast enogh to win at 22500 but tend to fall apart after about 25-30 minutes. I had one that I think might have been capable of sub 39 but I needed about 3 more minutes of fuel and my attempted fixes put me so high to avoid heating that my speeds suffered.

[nicky4096]

what about radiator panels?

edit: also, helmut, for night landings i turn up my monitor brightness

Edited July 9, 2015 by nicky4096

[HelmutK]

[Edited to add] Good job Helmut!

[Original message] My best with my previously record holding craft has been a 39:25. I've tried a few newer prototypes but I'm running into severe heat issues below about 23000m. They'll go fast enogh to win at 22500 but tend to fall apart after about 25-30 minutes. I had one that I think might have been capable of sub 39 but I needed about 3 more minutes of fuel and my attempted fixes put me so high to avoid heating that my speeds suffered.

THX. This craft is very stable at highspeed. I can hold the speed every time over 1720 at 22300m (remember no mods). Heat is not a problem. Average speed at begin cruising is 1721 and goes up to 1724 at reaching the crater.

@nicky4096

They doesn't work

Edited July 9, 2015 by HelmutK

[nicky4096]

oh oops...

[HelmutK]

The radiators not my monitor...

I tryed it, but they give a lot more drag and don't cool the shell

Edited July 9, 2015 by HelmutK

[nicky4096]

i know

also, i think eventually there should be categories for different engine "classes", like 1 engine, 2 engines etc.

the reason is that with more engines you will always be able to go faster because the weight of parts that you only need once (command pod etc.) gets more and more insignificant, so it ends up being basically the person with the beefiest computer wins because they can handle more parts.

with engine categories it would certainly be very interesting at the very least.

not saying there is anything wrong with it right now, but eventually...

oh well, we'll see

[HelmutK]

the difference between 2 and 4 engine is not as big as you think.

4 engine + more fuel = more weight + more drag

And to control a bigger plane is more difficult.

Edited July 9, 2015 by HelmutK

[Xannari Ferrows]

Gotcha!

I think this is just slowly becoming sad in a way, but I've got another record!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

This time, it is actually 38:50! How coincidental. [4 quickloads to perfect the parachute timing]

And worth it. I could not have timed them better!

[nicky4096]

interesting! although, is there a point in the nacellles? just wondering