Advanced Air Superiority Fighter Competition

[Kagame]

The Kerbal Alliance military, in their infinite wisdom, has decided to open yet another competition for the best BDArmory fighter design on the planet, disregarding the fact that the entire planet has been at peace for decades. Entrants are restricted, but barely, by what’s noted down in appendix one. Since the Kerbal Alliance is not a terribly pro-active organization, they’re probably never going to get around to determining the winner, so the competition is running in a “beat the best” format with challengers going up one-on-one against whatever beat the last champion, with both designs controlled by the idiot AI that took over the control tower last week. Competitions will be broadcast via the state-approved TV channels when Real Housekerbs isn’t on.

APPENDIX ONE: DESIGN RESTRICTIONS

1a: You MUST USE FAR, BDArmory,and Dynamic Deflection. Dissenters will be processed into delicious snacks.

1b: Other Allowed Mods List: Adjustable Landing Gear, B9 Procedural Wings, Procedural Parts, and any visual/audio mods you want. In fact, if you can record at a respectable framerate while using visual mods, please submit your rig to the Kerbal Alliance for usage in recording the dogfights, in return for the Alliance’s everlasting gratitude.

1c: Entrants are limited to using a single  20mm hidden Vulcan for the guns, as per KOSPAR regulations.

1d: Entrants are limited to a maximum missile count of ten, none of which can be PAC-3s, and all of which must be faced forwards. We don’t want a repeat of the Monkey Flight incident.

1e: Entrants shall program their AI autopilots to a minimum altitude of 1400, default altitude of 2000, and maximum speed of 400. All other settings are up for grabs, but AI settings resulting in unstable flight will be glared at disapprovingly. If you can’t get the slider to exactly the stated settings, “close enough” is good enough.

1f: Entrants shall limit their engine choices to one of the following: up to four Junos, up to two J-33s, up to two Panthers, one turbo-ramjet limited to 50% of throttle. Any fighters using other engines will be laughed off.

1g: Entrants may use one ECM pod, two chaff dispensers, and two flare dispensers, and are limited to one forward-facing radar array [required for entry].

1h: Manned fighters only. The Kerbal Alliance is still not comfortable with the moral ramifications of automated killing machines, especially when they’re using probe cores developed last Tuesday.

 

Video of first "match" because I can't find the YouTube embed button on this new forum interface

 

Download the F-12 now to get started!

 

 

Edited December 31, 2015 by Kagame
links work now

[ihtoit]

nope, that's me out, I don't use FAR.

[Astrain]

On 1/1/2016 at 10:19 PM, ihtoit said:

nope, that's me out, I don't use FAR.

Same here - makes stuff WAY to laggy.

If this wasn't using FAR, people may be more interested.

Or wait until 1.1.

Just sayin'.

[Kagame]

...Maybe y'all have too many parts packs.

[ihtoit]

I run entirely stock. No parts packs whatsoever.

[DoctorDavinci]

I think your F-12 Aggressor needs a bit of work, I consistently eat her for breakfast even when I let her get airborne first. I would suggest changing the mode of her engine to wet, however I tried that and she ends up out of control and either breaks apart in a turn or slams into the ground.

So yeah, I uploaded this video about a 10 minutes ago with no changes to the Aggressor 2 other than taking her off standby mode ... F-12 Aggressor 2 vs CANUKWorks DF-47 Happy Tail

[Van Disaster]

On 02/01/2016 at 8:12 PM, Astrain said:

Same here - makes stuff WAY to laggy.

If this wasn't using FAR, people may be more interested.

Or wait until 1.1.

Just sayin'.

We had plenty of entrants in the 1.0.4 version. FAR works fine for most of us, just sayin'.

I had a 1.0.5 edition of my competition winner somewhere, I'll try and find it & stop it breaking up.

[Van Disaster]

OK, 1.0.5 version of my last craft from Wanderfound's 1.0.4 competition; not really optimised, just made sure it didn't fall apart. Hummingbird F4

[gridghost]

I'm working on a prototype craft that will fall to pieces in front of the Hummingbird

[Van Disaster]

I Panther'd it out of curiosity, so it's now semi-supermaneuverable ( if that horribly mangled phrase makes any sense ). The AI will still happily lose to the older one at times, but it's good fun watching it pull silly tight turns and not spin out.

Wouldn't really be an entrant if I had time to fully test and tune it properly, but here's the prototype Hummingbird P8.12 just for fun.

Edited January 18, 2016 by Van Disaster

[gridghost]

I have a hard time getting my crafts to pull 30+ AoA w/o stalling out, so i guess my craft will be obliterated in a heartbeat. Have to test it when i get home

[gridghost]

GG HRF-1x-p (right click and save as...)

GG HRF-2x-p (right click and save as...)

One singleengine and one twinengine craft for your testing pleasures... pulls some G-s and explodes in funny ways. Enjoy.

[Van Disaster]

I like the single engined one, very pointy & does maneuver. The twin is a bit tubby.

What would be a good rule, one I'd have put in the old comtest eventually would be a minimum endurance requirement. Say half an hour on full throttle at 10km alt ( unless you want to pick a cruise throttle setting but then the test would be even longer! ), or 10 mins on full Panther AB. Just examples though. That Hummingbird is hilarious if it's left in AB mode but it's got an endurance of nothing without adding fuel...

[gridghost]

10 minutes on full Panther AB would qualify my single engine craft  . But, ya, it would be a good rule to add.

[Van Disaster]

Heh, mine blew up after 5 mins on full AB. Half an hour duration is a bit low though - just fill up the p8.12 and it makes that easily on normal power, I'm going to try for 90 mins ( on 4x speed! ). The old Tornado F3 would have failed the AB test and that was a dedicated interceptor ( and amusingly, that's actually worse duration than the infamous EE Lightning ).

[colmo]

Nothing to see here.

Edited January 26, 2016 by colmo

[Van Disaster]

Well, last prototype thing until I get round to trying the procedural parts ( also I ran out of airframes from the last contest! ): Arrow II P1

I think it might make my 10 mins on AB, but it overheats on low fuel so fast I can't keep it going. Off AB seems about right. The airframe was a bit nuts with the old engines, seems to have taken to the new one rather well.

[Hodo]

What about the use of a Rapier engine?  As most of my fighters are SSTO in nature.

[Hodo]

I like your Aggressor but it didnt last long vs my last generation atmospheric fighter, F-154A.

 

First kill.

Just prior to the second kill

Second kill

Final image of the second kill.

 

Nothing was changed on the Aggressor, my settings were exactly as set, they are the same from the previous BD Armory challenge with FAR. 

Will post the craft file a bit later. 3:30AM here.

 

Edited January 21, 2016 by Hodo

[Van Disaster]

16 hours ago, Hodo said:

What about the use of a Rapier engine?  As most of my fighters are SSTO in nature.

Jet mode of the Rapier is basically a clone of the Whiplash up to speeds that matter, isn't it? it can go a bit quicker without overheating & it's less efficient ( and slightly heavier ), but should be ok to swap out I'd imagine.

[Dwerto]

Are reaction wheels and cockpit torque allowed or are they banned like in the last challenge?

[Van Disaster]

The rules don't say anything but more fun without, I think - I'm sticking to my self-imposed duration rules too. Kagame's not been here for a while though.

Hodo I pulled the old version of your craft out and it managed to shoot another plane down *after it had crashed and exploded*.

[Pds314]

Might try a duel panther entry. Currently trying to get slat-camber and LERX to behave nicely.

 

WARNING: rant against engine choices ahead.

Also, might I suggest that having a limit of half a turboramjet vs. 2 of every other normal-sized engine makes them pretty unviable?

I mean, they weigh 1.5 times as much as a panther, but their Mach 1 thrust is 325 kN, vs. The Panther's 185 or so on Afterburner. At half throttle, there is no speed under 400 m/s in which a Whiplash has higher thrust.

 

The fuel economy is the same. The Panther has much better gimbling range, and better altitude performance for any altitude at which combat is likely to take place. The same goes for the Wheesly. The panther is lighter, and with full afterburner, has better acceleration across the board.

 

The only reason I see to use a Wheesly instead of a panther for a dogfight is if you want low-speed thrust without compromising fuel economy, or if you want to exploit the thrust reverser and use it as a tractor jet to keep a linear profile. Neither of these are all that compelling reasons to use anything but 1 or 2 Panthers. As for 4 Junos, they're small, light and redundant, but I question whether a plane with a serious armament would gain a real advantage from this, seeing as it's likely to weigh only about 3 to 6 tonnes depending on design, while it's armament would weigh substantially more.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Pds314

[Kagame]

Holy crap people actually replied to this topic.

 

*looks at his notifications settings funny*

I'd actually like to see if Van Disaster could run, or at least help run, this competition? My interests tend to oscillate wildly, and right now a BD AI competition would bore me stiff. And yeah, the F-12 was made to be beaten, basically.

[Van Disaster]

2 hours ago, Kagame said:

Holy crap people actually replied to this topic.

 

*looks at his notifications settings funny*

I'd actually like to see if Van Disaster could run, or at least help run, this competition? My interests tend to oscillate wildly, and right now a BD AI competition would bore me stiff. And yeah, the F-12 was made to be beaten, basically.

No time at the moment to get properly involved, I'm afraid, I don't really even have time to sort out craft properly at the moment :S and using the forums is physically painful without modding it ( time again ), so I'm not here much. Feel free to steal anything from the old contest though - like the rules list - and don't forget we changed rules by consensus ( or at least by the application of common sense! ). You could try experimenting with different top speeds as well as endurance rules, for instance, or just keep the whole thing as an extension of last time with new engine regulations.

Here's the 1.0.4 contest for reference: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/122347-far-fighter-challenge-bd-armoury-ai-2/ . The new forum has got at it a bit.