[cb_co] F-4 Phantom II

[VR_Dev]

My first attempt at an F-4 Phantom II. This craft holds it's own in combat, despite the extra cockpit. The added weight isn't great but I'm extremely happy with how I clipped them together. Due to the lack of wing structures in the fuselage it has extremely low drag, making it super fast. It's speed in addition to the tuning I've done allow it to remain highly maneuverable at low-to-mid altitude. The video has excellent combat using the newest BDArmory plugin.

Right now there is no advantage to having an extra cockpit, so I'm gonna release a single pilot, "5th Gen Concept" F-4. Be on the lookout for that.

[cb_co] F-4 Phantom II Stock Model by clown_baby on Sketchfab

Armed Phantom

Parts: 76

Weight: 13.6t

Length: 12m

Wingspan: 9.5m

Top Speed at 100m: 338.2

Top Speed at 10,000m: 1055.3 m/s

Acceleration: 40.28 m/s^2

AI Standby Circle: -mph @ -G's (tbd)

Stock Phantom

Parts: 62

Weight: 11.8t

Length: 11.4m

Wingspan: 9.5m

Top Speed at 100m: 343.2

Top Speed at 10,000m:

Acceleration: 46.83 m/s^2

Action Keys:

1) Toggle Both Engines

2) Toggle Starboard Engine

3) Toggle Port Engine

4) Toggle Autopilot

5) Fire

6) Toggle Team

7) Toggle Guard Mode

8) Fire sidewinder x2

9) Fire AIM x2

0) Fire Chaff/Flairs

Downloads

F-4 Phantom II

F-4 Phantom II Armed

Edited August 27, 2015 by clown_baby

[eorin]

This craft is too small, i think you can scale it up a bit so the engines and nosecone can fit better togeter with the plane, because now they looks too big. I don't like the wings either to be honest. Sorry for my criticism but i think i can help you to design a better craft if i say what i think.

[Rune]

Awesome! I think it shows how you can still get creative with the new aero model. Very faithful! And fun to fly with BD, it seems!

Rune. You are getting good at this planes thing! (There's an understatement...)

[pTrevTrevs]

I think the wings need a little work, the rest looks good though!

[Yukon0009]

Hey clownbaby this ship will probably be broken by the next updates nice plane by the way.

[Columbia]

Looks good, clown_baby!

This is another reason why we should start a forum strike on keeping both old and new Mk1 cockpits.

This craft is too small, i think you can scale it up a bit so the engines and nosecone can fit better togeter with the plane, because now they looks too big. I don't like the wings either to be honest. Sorry for my criticism but i think i can help you to design a better craft if i say what i think.

I don't think it could be scaled up appropriately without some sort of design complications. But IMHO, yes, the wings still have a bit of potential.

[VR_Dev]

This craft is too small, i think you can scale it up a bit so the engines and nosecone can fit better togeter with the plane, because now they looks too big. I don't like the wings either to be honest. Sorry for my criticism but i think i can help you to design a better craft if i say what i think.

Yeah dude I super appreciate criticism. However I think the length is pretty perfect. I look at how many cockpit lengths it is from the back of the cockpit to the tail to try and judge my length. Going by that I think mine is pretty good. I think you don't like how big the engines are, and I agree, but it's because I chose to use turbojet engines. You can see here the basic jet engines allow me to suck the intakes in further, making it look more realistic.

But it's no fun to fly or combat. The basic engines don't have enough umph to move the extra cockpit around. I want all my craft to be extremely even in performance, each with it's own advantages and disadvantages. This thing can kill any of my craft if flown well. My craft are a delicate balance of replica and well performing dogfighter.

Awesome! I think it shows how you can still get creative with the new aero model. Very faithful! And fun to fly with BD, it seems!

Rune. You are getting good at this planes thing! (There's an understatement...)

Thanks a lot, I really like this one.

Hey clownbaby this ship will probably be broken by the next updates nice plane by the way.

Yeah I know, which is why I rushed to get it out. It wouldn't be KSP if all your hours of hard work got erased every couple months. I impressed myself clipping the cockpits together. I'll enjoy it while it lasts.

Looks good, clown_baby!

This is another reason why we should start a forum strike on keeping both old and new Mk1 cockpits.

I don't think it could be scaled up appropriately without some sort of design complications. But IMHO, yes, the wings still have a bit of potential.

I think the wings need a little work, the rest looks good though!

I appreciate the criticism gentlemen, but I think the wings are super dope. They're my favorite part, and I think they look accurate. It wasn't easy designing wings that you could fold up at the end.

Edited August 27, 2015 by clown_baby

[Deutherius]

It's really missing the anhedral tail elevators, which (at least for me) were always the staple of the Phantom. And the rudder is way too short. Other than that, it looks really good, especially the cockpit, good job!

[VR_Dev]

It's really missing the anhedral tail elevators, which (at least for me) were always the staple of the Phantom. And the rudder is way too short. Other than that, it looks really good, especially the cockpit, good job!

I had to look that up. So just big ol flaps instead of winglets? And the tail was hard to do. I thought about building a longer rudder out of a d wing and a flap, but the it didn't look great. Maybe if I build both the tail and elevators out of wing parts the textures won't look so mismatched.

I definitely noticed the rudder though, tail wings your always just at the mercy of the stock parts.

[Columbia]

Maybe you could add the tiny wing strakes on the edge of the wings? To me, it's the ends. They're too.. straight.

[Deutherius]

I had to look that up. So just big ol flaps instead of winglets? And the tail was hard to do. I thought about building a longer rudder out of a d wing and a flap, but the it didn't look great. Maybe if I build both the tail and elevators out of wing parts the textures won't look so mismatched.

I definitely noticed the rudder though, tail wings your always just at the mercy of the stock parts.

I would recommend the Standard Canard for the elevators, I think that's about as close as you can get with stock. Just give them the angle and it's gonna look superb.

I agree that the rudder is a bit harder. I would normally go for a small delta wing, give it some angle, slap an Elevon 2 at the end and push the whole thing into the body...

But that's not going to work here, because the tail connector is too thin towards the end. You can probably use what you have right now. Dunno, this is above my skills

[AlexanderTeaH]

Nice craft, but I do have one observation I'd like to point out - it seems to be missing the signature downward V shaped elevators. Other than that, I think it looks quite good!

[VR_Dev]

I would recommend the Standard Canard for the elevators, I think that's about as close as you can get with stock. Just give them the angle and it's gonna look superb.

I agree that the rudder is a bit harder. I would normally go for a small delta wing, give it some angle, slap an Elevon 2 at the end and push the whole thing into the body...

http://i.imgur.com/DuMzV3M.jpg

But that's not going to work here, because the tail connector is too thin towards the end. You can probably use what you have right now. Dunno, this is above my skills

Yeah I tried that too. The shape of the canard is correct but it was too large for the scale I'm working at. I also did the exact thing you described. But use the d wing instead of the small delta.

Nice craft, but I do have one observation I'd like to point out - it seems to be missing the signature downward V shaped elevators. Other than that, I think it looks quite good!

Yep, I know that too. Rotating them up brought the lift forward, which was necessary to get it up to combat standards. Couldn't shift the COM around anymore so it was either move the wings forward(which I didn't want to do, I like where they're at) or rotate the elevators up.

Function over form on that decision.

[eorin]

Yeah I tried that too. The shape of the canard is correct but it was too large for the scale I'm working at. I also did the exact thing you described. But use the d wing instead of the small delta.

Yep, I know that too. Rotating them up brought the lift forward, which was necessary to get it up to combat standards. Couldn't shift the COM around anymore so it was either move the wings forward(which I didn't want to do, I like where they're at) or rotate the elevators up.

Function over form on that decision.

You can easily solve lift balance by clipping lifting surfaces inside the body so you can rotate the tail in the right position, why chose function or form when you can have both?

Edited August 27, 2015 by eorin

[VR_Dev]

You can easily solve lift balance by clipping lifting surfaces inside the body so you can rotate the tail in the right position

I know there's no cheating in sandbox, but that sounds an awful lot like cheating.

Maybe you could add the tiny wing strakes on the edge of the wings? To me, it's the ends. They're too.. straight.

Missed this comment. I also kind of missed that detail, I didn't notice it on the pictures I saw. I would included that in the update but 1.1 is gonna break this craft.

[FlipNascar]

snip.... I would included that in the update but 1.1 is gonna break this craft.

Sounds like the perfect excuse to craft a custom two seat cockpit...

Also on a more serious note, I would agree with eorin - hiding control surfaces or lift generators is perfectly acceptable if you're building a replica. Heck, I'll do it on an original if I run out of "proper engineering" solutions.

[eorin]

Sounds like the perfect excuse to craft a custom two seat cockpit...

Also on a more serious note, I would agree with eorin - hiding control surfaces or lift generators is perfectly acceptable if you're building a replica. Heck, I'll do it on an original if I run out of "proper engineering" solutions.

And to add another thing: if you are building a replica function shouldn't be before form.

[VR_Dev]

Sounds like the perfect excuse to craft a custom two seat cockpit...

Also on a more serious note, I would agree with eorin - hiding control surfaces or lift generators is perfectly acceptable if you're building a replica. Heck, I'll do it on an original if I run out of "proper engineering" solutions.

And to add another thing: if you are building a replica function shouldn't be before form.

Well to each his own gentlemen, but the clowbaby mantra is no clip cheating with flaps or fuel. To me it's more challenging and fun to try and work within the constraints and get the actual design to fly & combat well. If I have to do some minor tweaks to get it to perform legit, I'm ok with it. You guys don't have to be.

Edited August 27, 2015 by clown_baby

[selfish_meme]

I don't think clipping control surfaces is a great idea either, it will degrade your performance. One thing you could you, which is kind of cheaty but not as well is clip a non-working basic jet engine inside, you can offset it around to balance your CoM.

[Majorjim!]

I don't think clipping control surfaces is a great idea either, it will degrade your performance. One thing you could you, which is kind of cheaty but not as well is clip a non-working basic jet engine inside, you can offset it around to balance your CoM.

There is no possible combination of stock parts that could ever reasonably be called 'cheating'. Do anything you can imagine with the parts to make it work.

[eorin]

Clipping lifting surfaces is not cheating to me, because if a replica is perfectly made and still it don t fly properly it s squad fault (in some way) why in real life 1 surface per wings is enough to well perform and in ksp we have to put 4 surfaces to have the same effect as in real life? If you consider this clipping is totallly legit. Hope you understand what i mean

Still is all up to us to decide if we want to clip or not so if you are happy with your replica i am too.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

There is no possible combination of stock parts that could ever reasonably be called 'cheating'. Do anything you can imagine with the parts to make it work.

Yep, I'm happy to clip 500 wings, if that makes it look and work like original.

[Majorjim!]

Yep, I'm happy to clip 500 wings, if that makes it look and work like original.

Now that's the spirit!

Edited August 28, 2015 by Majorjim

[VR_Dev]

Wings I don't care about if they serve a stylistic purpose. I frown upon hiding flaps inside the fuselage. But I hate this argument, I've had it a bunch of times, so I'm gonna leave it alone.

When we get multiplayer and we start judging craft performance as much as style I'll start it back up.