Kerbin Circumnavigation 1.0.4/1.0.5 - Aviator Challenge Continuation

[ExaltedDuck]

Maiden voyage of a new [unnamed] prototype turned into a successful expedition circumnavigation. I wasn't sure how it would handle. The power to weight ratio was better than I initially realized. It felt sluggish on the runway but got right up to mach speeds in the air. I was worried about fuel capacity after my first half lap. I though it might only have enough for 2 and a small fraction. It burnt about half by the first time around. But I still had about half of that at the end of the second lap. So I kept on truckin'. About 2/3 around the third lap, I started experience dutch rolls I couldn't quite trim out. But the speed held and fuel consumption didn't drastically increase. It threw me 2-3 degree off course by the time I reached the KSC, but it was still running strong on a bit more than fumes. I cut the power and autopilot and realized I'd done so way too late for comfort. But she's built for speed. So nose down, straight down, land or die trying. It was rough. I never did quite line it up but managed to steer it straight with a last second boost to the brake torque on the starboard gear. But once the smoke cleared, you would never have known the drama that had just unfolded.

I really wish I'd been capturing a video. The landing was just harrowing.

Three times around, in just over 2 hours, and with less than a third as much fuel as any of my smallest previous concepts (about 85% less than my biggest yet serious and nearly successful contenders).

She deserves a good name.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

And one came to me.

Mighty Steed.

Edited June 28, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[Xannari Ferrows]

How close to KSC do we have to land? (i.e., can one land in the water within, say, 1 km offshore?)

You must have at least traveled the distance of 1 Kerbin circumference, so a water landing would be acceptable only if you took a prograde route. A landing must happen within 1.1 Km of the runway.

- - - Updated - - -

Maiden voyage of a new [unnamed] prototype turned into a successful expedition circumnavigation. I wasn't sure how it would handle. The power to weight ratio was better than I initially realized. It felt sluggish on the runway but got right up to mach speeds in the air. I was worried about fuel capacity after my first half lap. I though it might only have enough for 2 and a small fraction. It burnt about half by the first time around. But I still had about half of that at the end of the second lap. So I kept on truckin'. About 2/3 around the third lap, I started experience dutch rolls I couldn't quite trim out. But the speed held and fuel consumption didn't drastically increase. It threw me 2-3 degree off course by the time I reached the KSC, but it was still running strong on a bit more than fumes. I cut the power and autopilot and realized I'd done so way too late for comfort. But she's built for speed. So nose down, straight down, land or die trying. It was rough. I never did quite line it up but managed to steer it straight with a last second boost to the brake torque on the starboard gear. But once the smoke cleared, you would never have known the drama that had just unfolded.

Three times around, in just over 2 hours, and with less than a third as much fuel as any of my smallest previous concepts (about 85% less than my biggest yet serious and nearly successful contenders).

She deserves a good name.

http://imgur.com/a/KjMEQ

Jeb takes orders? Doesn't he show the experts how to do things?

Looks like 1 too many RAPIERS to me, but that's for you to rectify. I'll have too see about a BigS plane like this myself. I've only been racing!

Looks like you get another mention. Just you wait!

[ExaltedDuck]

Jeb and I have an understanding built on mutual respect.

(And that was actually an expedition run, not grand. That thing HAULED. )

[Xannari Ferrows]

Jeb and I have an understanding built on mutual respect.

(And that was actually an expedition run, not grand. That thing HAULED. )

Expedition requires 3 or more.

[GraviTykillz]

My Attempt.

On Runway:Black Betty

Almost out of fuel and Electric. So im powerin the last of my fuel to help bring up the battery and give me the final push over the KSC mountains.

Out of Fuel..that was close

Final Time:

Fun TImes! I think if i had clipped some Air intakes in I could have made a better time by flying at an altitude closer to 30,000.

Weeeeeee! God i love KSp

Edited June 29, 2015 by GraviTykillz

[ExaltedDuck]

Expedition requires 3 or more.

That was three. I was holding about 1600 m/s through most of the flight (about 40 minutes per lap), and flew twice over KSC before landing on the third approach.

Edited June 28, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[Xannari Ferrows]

That was three. I was holding about 1600 m/s through most of the flight (about 40 minutes per lap), and flew twice over KSC before landing on the third approach.

Oh it was? I guess the text fooled me or something. +1 gullible points.

[ExaltedDuck]

And I'll take +2 rambling points. I really should try to be more straight to the point.

[Xannari Ferrows]

My Attempt.

On Runway:Black Betty

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/447329129849981510/F13D2FE81F2F115E3BA06402C727E24DBB041237/

Almost out of fuel and Electric. So im powerin the last of my fuel to help bring up the battery and give me the final push over the KSC mountains.

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/447329129849987143/055F23898040F3CFA087C0F746871CD12AF27558/

Out of Fuel..that was close

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/447329129849988281/A1A68AA08D015D2A357CF9B4D5B91C3F046582DC/

Final Time:

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/447329129849988553/9860BF5EF7BDB76621941234A3FBDA84BA66BCA6/

Fun TImes! I think if i had clipped some Air intakes in I could have made a better time by flying at an altitude closer to 30,000.

Weeeeeee! God i love KSp

Is the black coating from the speed tests?

That thing looks super sleek! This could be a worthy racer if remodulated correctly, or at least I think so. You might want to look into that.

Shall I paint the badge black as well?

Just kidding, I can't give it to you.

You thought going down another time would work?

http://www.datainterlock.com/Kerbal/circumnavigator%20resized.png

[Triop]

Q: Is flying lower gonna make you faster circumnavigate ?

[Xannari Ferrows]

Q: Is flying lower gonna make you faster circumnavigate ?

You'll have less distance to cover overall, but you better get the sleekest and most thermal resistant aircraft possible. Higher drag as you go lower.

That's why most of us fly high; it's a good balance of low drag, temperature, and still solid speeds.

[Triop]

You'll have less distance to cover overall, but you better get the sleekest and most thermal resistant aircraft possible. Higher drag as you go lower.

That's why most of us fly high; it's a good balance of low drag, temperature, and still solid speeds.

Thank you, maybe I will test some "rocket" planes.

If only I had more time...so much to do in KSP.

Congratz on your fastest RAPIER b.t.w.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Triop

[ExaltedDuck]

Q: Is flying lower gonna make you faster circumnavigate ?

That's a very relevant question with a complicated answer. The short and skinny is, "It depends." Every craft will be a little different. They will all produce more thrust with higher intake pressure (lower altitude/higher speed) but they will all experience less drag at higher altitudes. Since top speed is where drag equals thrust, it's hard to say with precision where that altitude will be without test flights. What I've been noticing in performing prograde speed dives for your single engine speed challenge is that there does seem to be a point somewhere around 18000-20000m while descending where the speed actually starts decreasing (I use it as a signal to pull up. Waiting to see the temperature gauge rise is often too late)

For circumnavigation, it gets even more complicated since you have to be mindful of fuel economy. The lower you fly, the more you're going to have to burn, and flying low enough to maximize your speed versus drag heating, you might find that you end up going slower on account of having more weight and more drag from added fuel capacity. On my expedition flight, I had to climb by about 3000 m to make it around the last lap. That made me lose about 3-5% of my speed but improve the fuel consumption rate by about 8-10%. I'd have gone dry otherwise. Most of my velocity flights have ended up at about 20000-21000m but this is more to avoid excessive heating than anything else. But I have also been limiting my intakes to just enough for continued operation. More intakes means drastically more drag, and a higher altitude and very likely lower surface speed to run with very high fuel efficiency.

Edited June 29, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[Xannari Ferrows]

To add to ExaltedDucks explanation, fuel consumption is not proportional velocity, nor lift/drag, but acceleration. Lift/drag are not scaled linearly with altitude [inverse square law], however, intake air is. This means you have a linearly scaling thrust output and exponential scaling lift/drag effects. This is the perfect equation for better efficiency at higher altitudes.

[Triop]

Thanks for all the info guys, saves me some testflights.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Triop

[t3hJimmer]

I dont think I'm going to break the 40 minute mark. I spent the better part of the day trying for it and the best I could manage was 42:25.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Aircraft specs:

name: F-420 Blazeit Mk2

parts: 22

mass: 14.8 t

length: 8.8 m

wingspan: 5.0 m

[Xannari Ferrows]

I dont think I'm going to break the 40 minute mark. I spent the better part of the day trying for it and the best I could manage was 42:25.

http://imgur.com/a/ZnBKf

Aircraft specs:

name: F-420 Blazeit Mk2

parts: 22

mass: 14.8 t

length: 8.8 m

wingspan: 5.0 m

Why do my attempts at a double-RAPIER craft always result in one flaming out? I don't understand this.

Cutting it really close there! I wonder if Mk2 parts would work with something like this...

Onto the board you go!

[t3hJimmer]

Why do my attempts at a double-RAPIER craft always result in one flaming out? I don't understand this.

Cutting it really close there! I wonder if Mk2 parts would work with something like this...

Onto the board you go!

I had to manage the throttle carefully to keep them from flaming out, once I got up to speed, I locked in the altitude and it wasn't a problem.

I tried the mk2 parts, but I couldnt go fast enough; too much drag.

[Xannari Ferrows]

I think the drag parameters of my game changed or something... I just went out with the SaM and it's very slow now, and it appears drag is being applies to every part rather than accounting for the flow of the airstream.

I might have to be out for a while to fix this...

[nicky4096]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

so. close.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

yeah. i forgot to ditch the monoprop >.<

also, did my imgur embed work?

Edited June 29, 2015 by nicky4096
did imgur work?

[Oxytropis]

1:18:56, 1 time around.

[nicky4096]

nicely done.

may i ask what the name of the song is?

also, why fly so high? at 21km turbojets will run fine, and even that low heat shouldn't be an issue (particularly at the speed you were going .

nice in anycase though

[nicky4096]

finally, 44:07.

my plane relies almost purely on the lifting-body thing that the SP+ parts have, so landing it normally is out of the question. instead i did an extremely dodgy parachute landing that took 4 or 5 quicksaves to perfect

but it worked!

edit: hey! my imgur link didn't work!

here is a proper link: http://imgur.com/gallery/J21Sj/new

Edited June 29, 2015 by nicky4096
dangit, imgur!

[Xannari Ferrows]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

so. close.

http://imgur.com/a/Pe4uF

yeah. i forgot to ditch the monoprop >.<

also, did my imgur embed work?

You had a pretty good glideslope. You sure you couldn't have coasted your way there?

- - - Updated - - -

1:18:56, 1 time around.

6 TURBOJETS!?

Certainty one of the biggest planes so far. I'm quite surprised you didn't use the Nacells, to be honest...

In the meantime, how's it going up there?

http://www.datainterlock.com/Kerbal/circumnavigator%20resized.png

- - - Updated - - -

finally, 44:07.

my plane relies almost purely on the lifting-body thing that the SP+ parts have, so landing it normally is out of the question. instead i did an extremely dodgy parachute landing that took 4 or 5 quicksaves to perfect

but it worked!

edit: hey! my imgur link didn't work!

here is a proper link: http://imgur.com/gallery/J21Sj/new

How far are you from the runway? It looks like you may exceed 1.1 Km, but I can't be sure. I'll go see it myself...

EDIT:

Well, how can I put this...

It's too far away

Edited June 29, 2015 by Xannari Ferrows

[nicky4096]

yes, i was a bit far, but i wasn't able to check because for some reason, going to the space center moved my plane to the runway...

but don't worry, i'm re-running anyway!