WW2 BAD-T 2 - BDA AI Dogfight Tournament [SEMIFINALS]

[tetryds]

Well, it would be ok if it was, say, monday, but now it's too late, I'm sorry.

You should have submitted then updated the file with time, that way you wouldn't miss the deadline.

By the way, we got the neat number of 28 submissions this time!

[Pds314]

25 minutes ago, tetryds said:

Well, it would be ok if it was, say, monday, but now it's too late, I'm sorry.

You should have submitted then updated the file with time, that way you wouldn't miss the deadline.

By the way, we got the neat number of 28 submissions this time!

Oh.... alright... I kinda just submitted it in the form. It's basically the same as it was weeks ago, but with minor control tweaks.



The one on the upper left. I understand that it's quite late and that I am by no means entitled to a submission. I would greatly appreciate seeing it compete if I could though.



Basically, I had finals monday and was studying for them all weekend.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Pds314

[Pds314]

In any case, I'm gonna upload my illegal crafts as I said I would. I make no guarantee of optimized performance, but both are very lethal and very light, and have a tendency to defy sanity.

Annular wing (fused biplane): https://kerbalx.com/pds314/STOL-1 - easily kills everything I've thrown it at. Sometimes 1 vs. 3.

Ultimate short-span (4 meters): https://kerbalx.com/pds314/Tritail-madness - Orange super-boxed-wing multiplane with fused triplane tail. Fiddled around with it until ideal lift conditions were achieved. Very lethal and maneuverable and even more unstable. Has a tendency to explode if it pitches down.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Pds314

[DoctorDavinci]

1 hour ago, tetryds said:

By the way, we got the neat number of 28 submissions this time!

28 ... well that is fantastic

If you require assistance with recording fights for a second tier using the defeated planes then send me a PM and we can discuss it ... I easily run 2v2 battles on my system and don't think adding a few visual enhancement mods would bog me down all that much

A8 quad @ 3.7 Ghz using OBS to record

[gridghost]

7 hours ago, tetryds said:

But I didn't say next will be jets

The only problem with jets is that there is much less dogfighting and much more sniping, not as fun.

</snip>

I said i'm looking into making a similar challenge but with jets (though i didn't say WW2, just jets) but think i'll hold that thought 'til 1.1 and updated versions of, at least, FAR and BD armory is released. 

And "properly" designed fighters without AMRAAMs actually dogfights pretty good  with AMRAAMs though, you get one pass, maybe two, and boom...

[Pds314]

55 minutes ago, gridghost said:

I said i'm looking into making a similar challenge but with jets (though i didn't say WW2, just jets) but think i'll hold that thought 'til 1.1 and updated versions of, at least, FAR and BD armory is released. 

And "properly" designed fighters without AMRAAMs actually dogfights pretty good  with AMRAAMs though, you get one pass, maybe two, and boom...

I've found the main thing with AMRAAMs is that if you're going under ~Mach 0.8, you have no hope unless you're as maneuverable as the missile.

[gridghost]

23 minutes ago, Pds314 said:

I've found the main thing with AMRAAMs is that if you're going under ~Mach 0.8, you have no hope unless you're as maneuverable as the missile.

And with a speed limit of 399 m/s (Mach 1.17) which is what we had in the former challenge, you probably have you highest maneuverability at 160 - 200 m/s which mostly means boom. But that's a consideration for later. Now i eagerly await the outcome of this challenge.

[Pds314]

1 hour ago, gridghost said:

And with a speed limit of 399 m/s (Mach 1.17) which is what we had in the former challenge, you probably have you highest maneuverability at 160 - 200 m/s which mostly means boom. But that's a consideration for later. Now i eagerly await the outcome of this challenge.

I've found that when allowing 2x Panthers, high-wing-area turnfighters dominate if you don't let the speed go up higher than that. The problem is that people design constructions that can just pull a continuous 20-Gee turn at 300+ m/s. Hopefully Ferram4's B&Z code makes that A BIT better.

The problem is that almost literally anything with 2x Panthers can do 400 and reach that speed in a matter of seconds. I have a passenger jet that does 660 with 2x Panthers supercruising. I got it past 1000 on full afterburner before I had to shut down the engines so they wouldn't melt.

So unlike this challenge, everything with 2x Panthers has exactly the same top speed. This also means purpose-built B&Z-ers are basically pointless.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Pds314

[gridghost]

Ya, I know. That's why I probably will up the minimum speed to at least 450, but it's up to testing to see if its good or not. The thing is to make a fun and intresting challenge, and at the same time make videos that are fun to watch. 2 or 4 planes that are kilometers apart slinging missiles is not that fun, imo.

[Pds314]

18 minutes ago, gridghost said:

Ya, I know. That's why I probably will up the minimum speed to at least 450, but it's up to testing to see if its good or not. The thing is to make a fun and intresting challenge, and at the same time make videos that are fun to watch. 2 or 4 planes that are kilometers apart slinging missiles is not that fun, imo.

If we're allowing high speed B&Z and no AMRAAMs, I question whether we'll see a single AIM-9 kill. My experience says those things have a hit probability of close to nil against something over a certain speed and maneuverability.

Also, if you do make such a challenge, it would be somewhat nice to see real-size fighters. I.E. For something using panther-sized engines, dry masses in the 6+ tonne range for lights and 12+ tonne range for heavies. (I'd say like 15+ tonnes, but the YF-23 was 13, though I expect it might've gotten heavier if it had been adopted).

It'd also be interesting to see multiple viable engine options. I.E. Some with TVC, some with different thrust curves, different sizes, etc. (If I remember right, the last challenge basically had 4 options, but the Panthers beat all of them in just about every conceivable way).

Also, it'd be nice to see realistic SFC. Panthers have about/at least double the SFC they should. Actually having to carry enough fuel is a good thing.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Pds314

[Van Disaster]

It'd be better to wait for the g-limiter to work properly & set a max g-limit that won't mulch a pilot than try and limit physical designs somehow - just set performance specs ( range, payload ) rather than weight limits. B&Z doesn't work yet - as soon as a turnfighter gets up to a B&Z'ers default alt it's won, the B&Z craft doesn't really attempt to use it's strengths. The biggest problem is turn-fights are large amounts about design, B&Z - or at least less maneuverable - fighters rely a lot on tactics. When I see a couple of heavy fighters doing a thatch weave & taking out a turnfighter then we've got somewhere awesome. Currently the AI is mired in indecision

Run it with AJE if you want engine choices.

[Pds314]

6 minutes ago, Van Disaster said:

It'd be better to wait for the g-limiter to work properly & set a max g-limit that won't mulch a pilot than try and limit physical designs somehow - just set performance specs ( range, payload ) rather than weight limits. B&Z doesn't work yet - as soon as a turnfighter gets up to a B&Z'ers default alt it's won, the B&Z craft doesn't really attempt to use it's strengths. The biggest problem is turn-fights are large amounts about design, B&Z - or at least less maneuverable - fighters rely a lot on tactics. When I see a couple of heavy fighters doing a thatch weave & taking out a turnfighter then we've got somewhere awesome. Currently the AI is mired in indecision

Run it with AJE if you want engine choices.

That's actually probably a better idea. I think supersonic range with payload should probably be the qualification.

(Which will also tend to favor designs that utilize internal payload bays, area ruling, etc)

Edited March 16, 2016 by Pds314

[gridghost]

As I've said, i'm holding this challenge back atleast until we have 1.1 and updated versions of FAR, Dynamic Controls and BD Armory. 

But i'm pretty sure there will be funding restrictions, range requirements and payload points restriction.

[Ironsights]

I just found out about this! 

Will you do this again in the near future, and will you let me join if you do?

Thx

Edit: What mods should i be building my design on?

 

Edited March 16, 2016 by Ironsights

[gridghost]

26 minutes ago, Ironsights said:

I just found out about this! 

Will you do this again in the near future, and will you let me join if you do?

Thx

Edit: What mods should i be building my design on?

 

See the first post.

[Van Disaster]

1 hour ago, Pds314 said:

That's actually probably a better idea. I think supersonic range with payload should probably be the qualification.

(Which will also tend to favor designs that utilize internal payload bays, area ruling, etc)

Usable supercruise for fighters is a rare thing - currently looks like F-22, Typhoon, Rafale & current model Gripen. Even for those I doubt it's a general procedure.

Anyone area-rule their BAD entry? had a couple of test fighters that easily hit critical mach. That's a bit of a cheat for WW2, but it's hard to unlearn things

Edited March 16, 2016 by Van Disaster

[tetryds]

If you all want to run a jet fighter challenge I can set up the rules for you, as long as someone is commited to run all of them.

I notice that you are coming up with the same rules and solutions as a few other tournaments, and they often didn't get work out as expected.

For example, range doens't really relate to overall battle capacity, there are better ways to define these limits.

@DoctorDavinci if everybody is fine with it, I would be glad to send you the craft files.

[DoctorDavinci]

@tetryds ... by all means, let the community decide

 

[TangerineSedge]

@tetryds I see no problem with other people seeing my craft at least. Maybe it'll give them some tips on how not to design a fighter

[tetryds]

Just to note that I would give the files of the airplanes which lose on the first battle only, this would ensure that everybody fights at least twice.

I would be really glad if that happened, and will let you decide before I start running them, I'm currently reviewing everything.

I also reserve the rights to make modifications, for instance if someone used stock BDArmory AI and Weapons Manager it's much faster that I port the settings to the antenna myself.

Any effect that this kind of change may have on the aircraft performance can be considered a minor penalty.

I will pm you if that happens to your craft.

[SuicidalInsanity]

I too have no problem with my craft getting redistributed, especially if it means more battles for us to watch.

[MarvinCZ]

Sure, I don't mind my craft being shared.

[DoctorDavinci]

59 minutes ago, tetryds said:

Just to note that I would give the files of the airplanes which lose on the first battle only, this would ensure that everybody fights at least twice.

That's what I was thinking as I would be serving as a cameraman for the second tier only so I wouldn't need to have all the crafts and I would be recording under your specific directions ... an extra pair of hands so to speak

 

[Van Disaster]

I did a lot of fight captures for a previous tournament ( and have a massively larger upload now ), I can help out if needed - although I'd prefer to see a few fights to get some idea of the style of this one. Here's the video of the final as a sort of CV. We had some reasonably well defined rules ( rather tighter than this contest ), anyone can feel free to pilfer those too.

Range doesn't necessarily define battle capacity but it does given an interesting flexible minimum constraint, just like finding a good solution to building a rocket for a given planet. The more dubious aspect in my eyes is a minimum loadout. The worst part of running a fight with a range constraint would be testing all the entries

[MightyDarkStar]

I suppose that since the submissions are closed I can fully reveal mine...well, a variant of it.

This is the Type 353 'Tanfiir' low-level strike aircraft.

Spoiler

 

 

Spoiler

That is the Warspite F. 19 ^...

It is fitted with a non-detachable 120 gallon fuel tank on the starboard wing, whilst the port wing can support a missile, bomb or other payload at up to two tons in weight. 

There are only four differences between this variant and the Type 350 'Warspite' submission: 

1. Removal of the guns, with an external hard-point in their place.
2. Wings shortened, clipped and redesigned to a thicker chord.
3. Larger spinner with broader chord elevators.
4. Wing-struts shortened and fitted higher.

The thing can do 442 mph in level flight, the submission you'll see can do 468. If any of you guys want to try out this craft I have a handy download link right here: :-D

Edited March 16, 2016 by MightyDarkStar