Jump to content

WWII Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress Bomber

Columbia

By Columbia
in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange

 Share

Recommended Posts

Majorjim!

Majorjim!

Posted
Posted
Update 1.5 released!

Changes:

-Improved nose (less sharp)

-More struts! (Notably on wings and tail)

-Better-looking cockpit

-Empennage revised

-Improved performance

Cons:

-Higher part count

-Less visibility in Cupola module

Download links will be up soon.

- - - Updated - - -

Download links up!

Awesome man! I don't think it has too much lift, it felt very nice and floaty in a glide, very enjoyable. I will test the new one a bit later and report back! Good work man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Columbia

Columbia

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Awesome man! I don't think it has too much lift, it felt very nice and floaty in a glide, very enjoyable. I will test the new one a bit later and report back! Good work man.

Thanks, Majorjim! :D Hopefully it will be better.

And hopefully the wing struts will survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Majorjim!

Majorjim!

Posted
Posted

Ok I tested it again and here are my findings:

The tail is still not secure, needs strutting, the pod is also attached to the loose part so it acts like a pendulum, increasing the alarming movement and every time I lower the gear the rear section explodes due to the rear wheel pushing down on the fairing

So I fixed it. I attached two struts from the pod to the frame inside the fairing. I think you thought it was attached to the frame but it was attached to the tail connector A File:Tail_connector.png

Its solid now.

Also I centered the tail and rear pod as they where off center. I also cleaned up the section behind the cockpit, the parts where slightly off. I also removed two shimmering areas on the wings and tail. Not the tail plane.

I added two smaller wheels in the spot your single one was. They are at the same height and will never explode the rear fairing.

Give it a go mate and let me know what you think. Here are some pics to show what I did.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Download, mediafire

MJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Azimech

Azimech

Posted
Posted

I'm having a control problem. And 110 tons? Whoa... the original had a max take off weight of 29t.

I see some more things ... the engine pods are pointing outwards. Tip: choose angle snap, rotate gizmo, choose the root part of the engine pod then press F: this toggles between local snap and absolute snap. Choose absolute snap and rotate until they're pointing straight ahead. Better engine thrust efficiency this way.

The trick with local snap and absolute snap also works with the offset gizmo.

The real engines have 9 cylinders instead of 6. With Editor Extensions you can choose uneven radial placement.

You've placed the propeller blades using cubic struts. Not needed, they attach directly.

Control surfaces placed inside the fuselage are less effective than stacking control surfaces onto each other and use the offset gizmo to make them appear single. This might look like cheating but in real life you can adapt the shape.

Don't use heavy parts like rocket fuel tanks and space shuttle cockpit, they're unsuitable for relatively light airplanes like WW2 bombers.

For the strongest building style, use triangles. For example, the amount of struts isn't important, it's how you use them. Same with girders and beams.

The front of your horizontal stabilizer is pointing upwards, this means your tail wants to go up, thus your nose wants to go down. You've counteracted it with extra control surfaces in the nose - don't do that. If your having problems pitching up or down, first try adjusting the control surfaces. If you're not satisfied (for example it will pitch up but not down due to extreme control surface angle) then change the horizontal stabilizer, but only a few degrees. Test again, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Columbia

Columbia

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I'm having a control problem. And 110 tons? Whoa... the original had a max take off weight of 29t.

Control problem? And I wasn't intending to replicate the weight and everything, so it may be slightly too heavy.

I see some more things ... the engine pods are pointing outwards. Tip: choose angle snap, rotate gizmo, choose the root part of the engine pod then press F: this toggles between local snap and absolute snap. Choose absolute snap and rotate until they're pointing straight ahead. Better engine thrust efficiency this way.

The trick with local snap and absolute snap also works with the offset gizmo.

Good trick, I'll try that. Hopefully the radial/mirror symmetry doesn't mess it up (Even when I place all parts in mirror, the game always insists on radial placement on the wings.)

The real engines have 9 cylinders instead of 6. With Editor Extensions you can choose uneven radial placement.

Good idea, but this might increase the already deadly part count.

You've placed the propeller blades using cubic struts. Not needed, they attach directly.

I don't remember placing the blades with cubic struts. I'll look into this.

Control surfaces placed inside the fuselage are less effective than stacking control surfaces onto each other and use the offset gizmo to make them appear single. This might look like cheating but in real life you can adapt the shape.

Yes, but it might require more strutting. Noted too.

Don't use heavy parts like rocket fuel tanks and space shuttle cockpit, they're unsuitable for relatively light airplanes like WW2 bombers.

But, but.. the cargo bay!

In all seriousness, I wanted to replicate shape and functionality, not really part sizes. Maybe a (huge) rebuild would be possible.

For the strongest building style, use triangles. For example, the amount of struts isn't important, it's how you use them. Same with girders and beams.

Yes, you're right. It might be exposed too much (And as FlipNascar said) look too scruffy when the struts literally go through the whole fuselage, etc.

The front of your horizontal stabilizer is pointing upwards, this means your tail wants to go up, thus your nose wants to go down. You've counteracted it with extra control surfaces in the nose - don't do that. If your having problems pitching up or down, first try adjusting the control surfaces. If you're not satisfied (for example it will pitch up but not down due to extreme control surface angle) then change the horizontal stabilizer, but only a few degrees. Test again, etc.

Damn, you guys are smart! I never thought of angling the stabilizers myself.

Thanks for the feedback :)

Ok I tested it again and here are my findings:

The tail is still not secure, needs strutting, the pod is also attached to the loose part so it acts like a pendulum, increasing the alarming movement and every time I lower the gear the rear section explodes due to the rear wheel pushing down on the fairing

So I fixed it. I attached two struts from the pod to the frame inside the fairing. I think you thought it was attached to the frame but it was attached to the tail connector A http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/File:Tail_connector.png

Its solid now.

Also I centered the tail and rear pod as they where off center. I also cleaned up the section behind the cockpit, the parts where slightly off. I also removed two shimmering areas on the wings and tail. Not the tail plane.

I added two smaller wheels in the spot your single one was. They are at the same height and will never explode the rear fairing.

Give it a go mate and let me know what you think. Here are some pics to show what I did.

http://imgur.com/a/PdIEB

Download, mediafire

MJ

Oh, thank you, Majorjim! You guys are geniuses! I'll immediately test this.

I'll be back with results! :)

- - - Updated - - -

Darn, I forgot about all the other replies!

Looks awesome.

I will try it out when I have the time... granted that I am allowed to actually weaponize it (BDArmory) and use it in war? A heavy bomber would be a nice addition to my forces you see :P

Thanks! Oh yes, I think seeing it in an actually useful state would be really nice :P

Azimech, I think Columbia was going more for the aesthetics rather than the size and weight; by b-17, somewhere on pg.2 of the spacecraft exchange was built for dimensional accuracy; try it out! (shameless advertizing, anyone? :P)

Eh, I've done worse. :sticktongue:

Columbia, I challenge you to build a plane like this, it's complex but satisfying. And perfect for BDArmory! This one is a bit boxy but flies perfectly!

http://kerbalx.com/Azimech/77I-B25-Mitchell-10

Oooh, man.. Wing-based construction.. my worst enemy.

​Why not? XD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Columbia

Columbia

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Wow, thanks, selfish_meme! I'm hoping I can incorporate both into one. (After extensive testing, of course.)

I definitely need to make a contributor's list.

Now I feel bad for not being skilled enough to do these myself!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
selfish_meme

selfish_meme

Posted
Posted
Wow, thanks, selfish_meme! I'm hoping I can incorporate both into one. (After extensive testing, of course.)

I definitely need to make a contributor's list.

Now I feel bad for not being skilled enough to do these myself!

I used MajorJims so they should already be combined

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Columbia

Columbia

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I have to say, you've improved it tremendously over the course of a few days!

Thanks! Admittedly, I have so much stuff to still work on with this.

I guess you can call it a WIP.

- - - Updated - - -

List of acknowledgements added to OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...