Kerbin Circumnavigation 1.0.4/1.0.5 - Aviator Challenge Continuation

[SpaceplaneAddict]

DO IT! JUST DO IT! DONT LET YOUR DREAMS BE DREAMS AND JUST DO IT!

Let your dreams be dreams

[Xannari Ferrows]

Well, of course I can remove them. It will only be easier without that dead mass. I just wanted to submit the "equiped" plane for advertizing purpose )

Well, bon voyage.

[Maukse]

Ok, made it, but not the way I wanted.

Qualification flight ... parameters were good enough to make it under an hour so I kept flying.

Just, I wanted to make the whole flight in IVA - but external cameras (RPM) did not survive long enough.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Maukse]

Ewww, I did it so bad ?

[Xannari Ferrows]

Ewww, I did it so bad ?

Why do you say that? It's a cool looking aircraft. I'd like to see it on a valid entry sometime.

[Maukse]

So what do you need ? Same thing, without part losses ?

Or to remove the external cameras from the beginning ?

[Xannari Ferrows]

Every part you take off with, you have to land with. The cameras can't be there as well [which may actually be beneficial given the last circumstance]

[mythic_fci]

Just a suggestion - I recommend adding in an entry rule for Velocity-class circumnavigations, such as "Under 1 hour" or "Top 10" or something like that. Right now, the only real "entry limit" for Velocity is to be faster than 59:22 (the slowest Velocity entry at the moment).

[Xannari Ferrows]

Just a suggestion - I recommend adding in an entry rule for Velocity-class circumnavigations, such as "Under 1 hour" or "Top 10" or something like that. Right now, the only real "entry limit" for Velocity is to be faster than 59:22 (the slowest Velocity entry at the moment).

To be listed under for Velocity, your time must be 1:00:00 or below. I feel like a top 10 board would start creating chaos due to potential rapid changes.

[darth_bachious]

Is it allowed to use a KOs script? It's the same thing as autopilot mod.

If it is allowed I'll include the script in my submission.

[mythic_fci]

To be listed under for Velocity, your time must be 1:00:00 or below. I feel like a top 10 board would start creating chaos due to potential rapid changes.

That's what I expected, judging by the leaderboard. In that case, my only suggestion is for you to put that above the leaderboard where it currently says "Speed Circumnavigations", to avoid confusion.

[Xannari Ferrows]

Is it allowed to use a KOs script? It's the same thing as autopilot mod.

If it is allowed I'll include the script in my submission.

That is alright. To be honest, this is more about the design than the flight itself.

[SpaceplaneAddict]

That is alright. To be honest, this is more about the design than the flight itself.

So true, it's hard to minimize drag you know. Anyway, the tiny mini fighter seems to be OK for now, just not fast enough to break -40 minutes.

[Xannari Ferrows]

So true, it's hard to minimize drag you know. Anyway, the tiny mini fighter seems to be OK for now, just not fast enough to break -40 minutes.

No it's not. Just fly a photon. Although getting crew on board might be difficult...

[RA3236]

Okay, I've just flown the Aeris 4A on a sub-orbital 3/4 circumnavigation, but no proof because imgur hates me. I miscalculated the Pe and landed in the desert near the pyramids. About 40 in-game minutes. Don't put this in the leaderboards it isn't an entry since stock craft and not a full one!!!

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, proof:

imgur.com/a/26d5Q

[ExaltedDuck]

Simplicity is key. Try a mk-I pit with a nose mounted intake, rear mounted liquid fuel tank and pushed by a rapier. Then canards, delta wings (with or without elevons), a tail, gear, and either drogues or air brakes. Alternatively, the pointy mk-ii with a fuel tank, bicoupler, two preschoolers, and a couple of rapiers can also make a pretty good sausage.

On take off, hold the brakes and spool up your motors. With a high thrust to weight ratio, you might somersault if you hold it too long. If you want to hold it long, launch clamps are required. The single engine outputting 40kN or the the twin engines each at 30 kN will provide a nice brisk launch. But if you let them get up to 80+, you'll be through the sound barrier before you pass the tower.

I like to to get up to 300+ m/s relatively level then ease up to 45 deg. If I get heating effects below 10000m, I throttle down. Getting past 800-900m/s at this phase can be deadly. Ease the nose down to be able to reinitiate full throttle at 10-12 km alt. Then use pitch controls to accelerate as much as possible while keeping speed in m/s less than 1/10 the altitude in m. (That is, getting above 1300m/s below 13000m for example is dangerous). Over about 16000m it doesn't matter so much anymore.

Optimal cruising is usually around 21-24 km for rapiers. Coming home, stay high and fast until ksp is on the horizon. Set SAS prograde and when altitude is around 20km, cut engines either set SAS to hold attitude or off.if you have airbrakes, use them. If not, lower your gear. Goal is similar to ascent, keep speed below 1/10 altitude. Below 10000mm, 1000m/s is safe down to sea level. If you've timed things well, you should be in about a 45 deg dive to the landing strip.

Line up and get ready for a very dicey landing. Hold as much speed as you can as long as you can. Use pitch controls or airbrakes below 1000 m to slow to around 400. Try to flare down to 200-300 a few meters off the strip and airbrake and or deploy chutes when you're low and level enough for them and hopefully you to survive. If you have any piloting sense, you will not get used to landing this way. . I guarantee a simple single engine rapier craft can do this in the 38:20's.

Edited October 6, 2015 by ExaltedDuck
Break up ye olde wall o text

[Xannari Ferrows]

Alternatively, the pointy mk-ii with a fuel tank, bicoupler, two preschoolers, ...

Isn't that illegal?

[SpaceplaneAddict]

[Noname117]

Isn't that illegal?

I'm still curious why you need them to make a "pretty good sausage." I'm beginning to think that's really illegal.

Please tell me this was the result of auro-correct.

[zolotiyeruki]

I finally got around to completing my 4x circumnavigation. Started at 23.5k, ended at 26k. Landed with 90 units of fuel left, enough for 40% of a 5th circle. Used Kerbal Engineer for calculating efficiency, and Pilot Assistant to keep me sane. The craft is pretty simple--shock cone intake, Mk1 inline cockpit, four fuel tanks, one rapier, a 1k battery. R8 Winglets in the front and as the vertical stabilizer, wing strakes and small control surfaces in the back. On the last lap, my fuel consumption dipped to 0.09 units/second.

First time attempting to embed an imgur album. Let's see if this works...

Javascript is disabled. View full album

So....I have enough fuel for almost half another circle. I also noticed that my AoA at altitude started near 8 degrees at the beginning of the flight, and was still over 3 degrees at the end. That meant my tail was a full diameter lower than my nose, and with my (limited) understanding of KSP aerodynamics, that makes it draggier.

So, this morning, I took the same craft, and angled all the lifting surfaces by 5%. A quick test showed a 30% increase (!) in MPG at full take-off weight, and a much higher speed (1676m/s vs 1615). That gives me hope for an easy 5x circumnavigation. I also noticed that using time acceleration incurred a slight (1-3%) efficiency penalty, which means the next flight will need to happen in real-time. 40 minutes/circle, 5 circles...It's gonna be a long night.

EDIT: crud, I went back and re-read the rules, and I took my screenshots on the wrong side of the planet. doh! C'mon, just look at my speed, my fuel flow, and my flight time in each screenshot, and that should be proof enough, right?

EDIT2: I now realize that my craft is awful similar to ExaltedDuck's. I guess that means I just need to either A) beat his 5 circle time, do it with a smaller/lighter craft, or C) get 6 circles. Hmmm. If I can do 5 circles on 4 tanks, I wonder if I could manage 6 circles on 5 tanks...

Edited October 7, 2015 by zolotiyeruki

[ExaltedDuck]

preschoolers

Well too late to fix that one. Lol. I should know better than to submit a post typed on Android keyboard without thorough proofreading. Gads.

Edited October 7, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[SpaceplaneAddict]

#AutocorrectIsRuiningUs

[Noname117]

Well too late to fix that one. Lol. I should know better than to submit a post typed on Android keyboard without thorough proofreading. Gads.

I'm assuming the "sausage" wasn't intentional either.

[gag09]

Well you never know...

[ExaltedDuck]

I'm assuming the "sausage" wasn't intentional either.

I can only guess how it got there from fuselage. Still kinda makes sense in that context though.

- - - Updated - - -

Back to the flying, though:

So, this morning, I took the same craft, and angled all the lifting surfaces by 5%.

I'll wish you luck with that. I tried to use wing pitch to correct the AOA on a few designs but never had much success. It felt to me like they were inducing more drag than I felt with a high AOA on a craft with wings parallel to the fuselage.

I now realize that my craft is awful similar to ExaltedDuck's. I guess that means I just need to either A) beat his 5 circle time, do it with a smaller/lighter craft, or C) get 6 circles. Hmmm. If I can do 5 circles on 4 tanks, I wonder if I could manage 6 circles on 5 tanks...

I'd consider it convergent evolution. Like how Buran ended up looking so much like STS. Believe me when I say I tried a LOT of sizes and shapes to pull that flight off and would not be one bit surprised if anyone else trying the same ended up with a very similar craft. I'm sure you've realized that going that distance requires more than just a well designed craft. It will test your skills as a flight captain as well. And it will be ever so rewarding when you finally touch down.

Edited October 7, 2015 by ExaltedDuck