WW2 BAD-T - World War 2 BDArmory AI Dogfight Tournament [FINISHED]

[qromodynmc]

The longest match so far was 5 battles on a total of 30 minutes.

I believe that the max that one battle is going to last is about 12 minutes, 8 minutes for long ones and average 4 minutes.

So 7minutes of fuel is enough for one battle, you refuel them for every battle right?

The big question, reduce fuel and fly better, or keep it and fight longer.

Yeah, from my all testing, weight is real problem, maybe he should categorize them by weight 4-5 tons, 5-6 tons and over 6 ton planes. Otherwise I dont think 6 ton plane has a chance of beating 4 ton plane.

[Phearlock]

I don't think we'd need 3 types so close together in weight. A single version at 5kg should be plenty good. Even if you then require biplanes to run 6 of them, it's only 30kg.

@Qromodynmc, funnily enough, fuel is one of the lightest resources around for this category. Though it's a bit worse for D-25 engine planes as a single radial has about 9 times the fuel consumption as twin sport engine setups. Fueling my 4kg aircraft up to max (90 units, usual combat load of 20-30) would barely add any weight. The gun ammo is much heavier.

Edited August 9, 2015 by Phearlock

[qromodynmc]

I don't think we'd need 3 types so close together in weight. A single version at 5kg should be plenty good. Even if you then require biplanes to run 6 of them, it's only 30kg.

@Qromodynmc, funnily enough, fuel is one of the lightest resources around for this category. Though it's a bit worse for D-25 engine planes as a single radial has about 9 times the fuel consumption as twin sport engine setups. Fueling my 4kg aircraft up to max (90 units, usual combat load of 20-30) would barely add any weight. The gun ammo is much heavier.

Never checked fuel weight tho. What suprised me is wing weight, they are so heavy. Later I discovered mass/strenght ratio from right click menu, that helped me a bit.

[Azimech]

All Weapon Manager modules are set to 1s scan interval, 360 degrees view angle and 5km range.

@Darren9: Eh, that cockpit is not really "safe".

would be better to have something in front of the pilot.

I am adding this as a rule now, open cockpits must be safe.

This does not affect any of the already submitted craft that did not receive a notice for it, by the way.

So, if you already submitted and didn't receive one when you did, you continue to be fine.

By the way, I really dislike people using wings so thin.

Such wings would not have enough structural integrity, and some submissions are starting to force me to add a rule to limit min thickness.

True ... even the lightest WW2 planes did have a minimum wing thickness, although the amount of materials was huge compared to what we have. They used plywood, sheet steel or aluminium for the wings covers, some used plywood for the airframe but mostly aluminium or Elektron, Most used aluminium for the main spar although wood was used a lot in the first years.

For a future contest I propose the use of my mod: Other Construction Materials, I will expand this with more materials with their own special qualities. This means I hope we can grow into building real complex airframes, with a slightly increased max part count. (Let's say 120).

I've built this in 20 minutes as an example of where we ought to go some day. This one is a bit too complex for today's computers because it's already 174 parts. Orange parts are the fuel tanks. This airframe would be a combination of stretched skin and space frame in a semi-geodesic structure. Just add paneling for the fuselage and wings and you're done. The aluminium is a much lighter colour than the steel, it's got a third of it's density, impact tolerance and strength. Much easier to melt, too.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

- - - Updated - - -

Stock struts are heavy to the point that I am almost making custom ones for this pack using MM, really.

What do you guys think? Custom struts would be good?

They would be in three types: 1kg, 5kg and 10kg.

Any other part modification that fits this challenge can be added to this pack.

Okay, this is funny. Yes, aluminium struts :-)

And if someone can find the code to change the size of them, the current strut connectors are much too bulky when building small. And I want to build small. Really small like in centimeter range.

[TUKE]

True ... even the lightest WW2 planes did have a minimum wing thickness, although the amount of materials was huge compared to what we have. They used plywood, sheet steel or aluminium for the wings covers, some used plywood for the airframe but mostly aluminium or Elektron, Most used aluminium for the main spar although wood was used a lot in the first years.

For a future contest I propose the use of my mod: Other Construction Materials, I will expand this with more materials with their own special qualities. This means I hope we can grow into building real complex airframes, with a slightly increased max part count. (Let's say 120).

I've built this in 20 minutes as an example of where we ought to go some day. This one is a bit too complex for today's computers because it's already 174 parts. Orange parts are the fuel tanks. This airframe would be a combination of stretched skin and space frame in a semi-geodesic structure. Just add paneling for the fuselage and wings and you're done. The aluminium is a much lighter colour than the steel, it's got a third of it's density, impact tolerance and strength. Much easier to melt, too.

http://imgur.com/a/Y4zpe

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, this is funny. Yes, aluminium struts :-)

And if someone can find the code to change the size of them, the current strut connectors are much too bulky when building small. And I want to build small. Really small like in centimeter range.

Wow...................................................................................This is the point where i throw away the ideas of doing any modding what so ever.

[Azimech]

Why? All I did was take the Squad parts, made the textures lighter and changed their stats. Anyone can do this :-)

 

Edited May 23, 2021 by Snark
Link to defunct website removed by moderator

[tetryds]

For a future contest I propose the use of my mod: Other Construction Materials, I will expand this with more materials with their own special qualities. This means I hope we can grow into building real complex airframes, with a slightly increased max part count. (Let's say 120).

But first we need KSP 1.1, FAR wing overhaul and me on my desktop pc.

After KSP updates and I get to my desktop, we will be able to go to 250-ish parts per craft, or more, up to 4x4 battles (thats 2k parts, who cares.).

Then add scatterer, EVE ultra high res and record at 1440p 30+fps :3 (1440 in case I get a monitor of such resolution, not sure yet which res will be available for me).

But for now I am tracking down this major issue where FAR occlusion on biplanes is way higher than it should, to the point where removing a pair of wings increases total lift (lift on the remaining wing is like 250% higher).

[TUKE]

Azimech said:

Why? All I did was take the Squad parts, made the textures lighter and changed their stats. Anyone can do this :-)

Oh, whoops, they looked like awesome custom parts. All i have made so far is a set of floats that don't mirror correctly.

[qromodynmc]

Well, here is my submission to tournament; Deithwen mk1. Small,agile and fast. (also clipped 2 oscarb to fuselage, it has bit more fuel now while maintaining same agility. )

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jye9ou821o32qn6/deithwen%201-a.craft?dl=0

it has 3 50cal m2 browning, I read the rules carefully again and again, hope there is nothing wrong.

(btw do I have to send pm to you?)

[TUKE]

Well, here is my submission to tournament; Deithwen mk1. Small,agile and fast. (also clipped 2 oscarb to fuselage, it has bit more fuel now while maintaining same agility. )

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jye9ou821o32qn6/deithwen%201-a.craft?dl=0

http://i.hizliresim.com/lyjvWp.jpg

it has 3 50cal m2 browning, I read the rules carefully again and again, hope there is nothing wrong.

(btw do I have to send pm to you?)

Probably wouldn't hurt to PM him, but he should get it when he scans through the forums, but yeah probs PM would make his life nicer

[tetryds]

Probably wouldn't hurt to PM him, but he should get it when he scans through the forums, but yeah probs PM would make his life nicer

Nah, it's fine, I am already done with that.

What is keeping me busy is the FAR bug I mentioned above.

By the way, private submissions always have higher priority so if someone updates a craft and posts it here but already sent it through PM the PM version is going to be used.

I will not check the sending dates to verify which one is the latest.

We will have a hold on biplanes by now until that bug is sorted out, by the way.

Kerbals will also receive an aerodynamic model from FAR, a feature made specially for this challenge.

Right now FAR simply ignores them, increasing drag of open cockpits, but not a lot.

@qromodynmc: got it

Now i just need to verify it, which I will do later.

There will be a battle today, there was none yesterday because of that damned bug, it was going to be a biplane battle, hence the problems.

Edited August 9, 2015 by tetryds

[Littlerift]

Well I've been tinkering around with a few designs with some success. However, I can't help but notice that in the monoplane category using the D-25 is universally superior to using the PT100. Switching from the PT100 to the D-25 results in a massive increase in thrust to weight that outweighs any disadvantage using the D-25 might have.

Edit: I did a little more thorough testing and in 5 battles with two planes that were identical - but for the engine and a few control tweaks to prevent the D-25 equipped plane from snapping its wings - the D-25 comfortably one every single one. In all but one, where it strangely drove off of the runway and slowed down, it reached altitude, turned around, and destroyed the other aircraft before the PT-100 equipped plane had even reached combat altitude.

Edited August 9, 2015 by Littlerift

[qromodynmc]

Well I've been tinkering around with a few designs with some success. However, I can't help but notice that in the monoplane category using the D-25 is universally superior to using the PT100. Switching from the PT100 to the D-25 results in a massive increase in thrust to weight that outweighs any disadvantage using the D-25 might have.

Edit: I did a little more thorough testing and in 5 battles with two planes that were identical - but for the engine and a few control tweaks to prevent the D-25 equipped plane from snapping its wings - the D-25 comfortably one every single one. In all but one, where it strangely drove off of the runway and slowed down, it reached altitude, turned around, and destroyed the other aircraft before the PT-100 equipped plane had even reached combat altitude.

d-25 is pretty superior to others. but pt-100 may work on ultralight planes.

Other than that I just installed that procedural wings mod because weight of stock wings are too high, and managed to build a small fighter with 0.90 twr, also built a 0.60 little bigger one (similar to ta-152)

and it beat my deithwen

[sal_vager]

You know you can reduce your wing strength (and mass) in FAR right? No need to go crazy with razor thin wings...

[qromodynmc]

You know you can reduce your wing strength (and mass) in FAR right? No need to go crazy with razor thin wings...

I know, they are still too heavy.

[tetryds]

I know, they are still too heavy.

Also, no precoolers, they are past rocket grade tech

@Littlerift: testing the same design under different engine configs is not the best way to compare the engines.

Each engine fits a niche, that consists on completely different designs.

Try to build an airplane to make use of what the turboprop has to offer and you will notice that the other engines won't be as good for that design.

There is no "plain better" here, just design choices.

But of course I will not tell what it's meant for.

[Darren9]

~snip~

@Darren9: Eh, that cockpit is not really "safe".

would be better to have something in front of the pilot.

I am adding this as a rule now, open cockpits must be safe.

This does not affect any of the already submitted craft that did not receive a notice for it, by the way.

So, if you already submitted and didn't receive one when you did, you continue to be fine.

By the way, I really dislike people using wings so thin.

Such wings would not have enough structural integrity, and some submissions are starting to force me to add a rule to limit min thickness.

What looks safe and what is safe are two different things. The radiators offer higher protection than a similar sized procedural part, higher mass (0.01 vs 0.004), higher max temp (2500 vs 2000), higher impact tolerance (12 vs 7). I have to open a gap in the front of the stronger protection and add weaker protection in it's place. As well as double the size of the cockpit area so it's easier to hit. As well as add extra drag which decreases top speed, climb rate and handling so easier to shoot down. To make it look safer and qualify I can make it less safe for the pilot in every possible way

I think you'd need to set a minimum "protection" level (mass/max temp/whatever BD uses) of components in the cockpit area instead of "doesn't look safe" and it'll get complicated quickly.

[tetryds]

@Darren9: It's not that complicated, just one question:

Would you ride that airplane?

If the answer is no, you need a more enclosed cockpit.

That one seems fine, but have you checked the thickness?

[qromodynmc]

Also, no precoolers, they are past rocket grade tech

Just a quick question, does precoolers have any effect on flight charasteristics? I use them regularly while building planes in ksp, not that they are useful but they look cool

[tetryds]

Just a quick question, does precoolers have any effect on flight charasteristics? I use them regularly while building planes in ksp, not that they are useful but they look cool

Not really, but still.

If I allowed it I would have to allow a lot of stuff, and that would be a problem.

Announcement: Leaderboard added.

After today's battle I will look into updating the weapons pack to the new BDArmory 0.9.1

We will be using legacy targeting for the battles.

Edited August 9, 2015 by tetryds

[tetryds]

New battle out!

Was a good one.

[TUKE]

So i mainly died through the head on's. Funny i even thought "The engine might be a bit vulnerable, should i put a spinner on it? Nah, she'll be right, there isn't supposed to be head on's." However in the first round the plane that survived did pretty much what it meant too. Because excluding the spelling mistake, Vordach Scoldat translates from German to Canopy Soldier.

[tetryds]

@TUKE: yes the first round was the best one, I wish all rounds lasted exactly as long as that one.

Was good to see a match where one does not simply turn around early and tear the other to shreds.

This was a very balanced match.

But both planes climbing like that caused the head-ons, which were beautiful, IMO.

I will update the Leaderboard later today.

[TUKE]

@TUKE: yes the first round was the best one, I wish all rounds lasted exactly as long as that one.

Was good to see a match where one does not simply turn around early and tear the other to shreds.

This was a very balanced match.

But both planes climbing like that caused the head-ons, which were beautiful, IMO.

I will update the Leaderboard later today.

I built that when everybody was only using twin areosports. So it was designed to climb like crazy then BnZ the bigger slower planes.

[qromodynmc]

The way ai fly is makes me crazy. I play war thunder realistic mode, i have bit of idea about energy fight, stall fight etc, watching my plane tests is just nightmare. (They are doing scissors,which is nice though)