[ASC-IV] Air Superiority Challenge - King of the Hill (BDArmory 4v4 AI Duels: WW2 Theme)

[Wildcat111]

On 2016-08-21 at 0:40 PM, TorchedForever said:

Uhh.. Wildcat your plane has 8 guns. Is this going to be another rule change?

I copied and pasted the entire thread from ASC III, so I didn't notice some rules I wanted to change.

[JollyGreenGI]

Question/suggestion: On top of the KAX propellers, I think the allowance of the J-20 Juno engines (with limits) would fit quite nicely, as there are quite a few jet aircraft in World War 2. Thoughts?

[GDJ]

2 hours ago, JollyGreenGI said:

Question/suggestion: On top of the KAX propellers, I think the allowance of the J-20 Juno engines (with limits) would fit quite nicely, as there are quite a few jet aircraft in World War 2. Thoughts?

I thought of suggesting this, but there were actually very few jet fighters that saw actual service in WWII (Messerschmitt Me 262 and the Gloster Meteor for sure. The others may have had a skirmish or two) The US's Bell P-59 Airacomet was in the right time, but it never saw action.

I think they would be too heavy generally to compete with prop powered aircraft in this challenge. We all know that the top speed of any of these would pass a Spitfire easily, but the maneuverability might be questionable especially powered by a pair of Juno's (they ain't powerful).

BUT, we shall leave it to Wildcat111 to make the final decision.

Edited August 31, 2016 by GDJ

[GDJ]

I built a quick Twin-Juno plane in my KSP (3.8 tonnes, bare basics) and it did achieve a top speed of 316 m/s, but the takeoff was painfully slow compared to a prop plane. Maneuverability was surprisingly good, but the twin Juno's just don't seem to have the low speed grunt of the props. The plane lost alot of speed in a tight dogfight and was outmatched by everybody's submitted prop fighter (including mine).

[epicman81]

15 minutes ago, GDJ said:

I built a quick Twin-Juno plane in my KSP (3.8 tonnes, bare basics) and it did achieve a top speed of 316 m/s, but the takeoff was painfully slow compared to a prop plane. Maneuverability was surprisingly good, but the twin Juno's just don't seem to have the low speed grunt of the props. The plane lost alot of speed in a tight dogfight and was outmatched by everybody's submitted prop fighter (including mine).

how does my prop fighter do against yours so far

[GDJ]

51 minutes ago, epicman81 said:

how does my prop fighter do against yours so far

9 battles out of 10, it's a 10 minute cat-and-mouse hunt.
The other times it's a 1 minute near instakill......for either of us.

Edited September 1, 2016 by GDJ

[DaMachinator]

Interestingly enough, as far as low-speed jets go, the Wheesley might outperform the Juno - but that's definitely outside the scope of this competition.
 

[Wildcat111]

On 2016-08-31 at 0:52 PM, JollyGreenGI said:

Question/suggestion: On top of the KAX propellers, I think the allowance of the J-20 Juno engines (with limits) would fit quite nicely, as there are quite a few jet aircraft in World War 2. Thoughts?

Good Idea! Will add it.

On 2016-08-31 at 5:51 PM, epicman81 said:

how does my prop fighter do against yours so far

The planes are so fast they only have seconds to fire at each other and so it is like 10 minutes of passing very close to each other before one shoots down the other.

[Wildcat111]

@GDJ I'm just asking but when are you going to post your craft? I'm asking because I'm excited to see your craft.

[Mycroft]

Well this looks interesting, and I was planning on entering, but I'm sorry, there are just too many restrictions. You can't use closed cockpits?! What the heck? Come on! There were closed cockpits in WWII! No turrets? There were turrets in WWII! Take the B-17! Closed cockpits AND turrets! The B-24! Same thing! I'm sorry, but this is more WWI style. 

The only thing that makes it WWII style at all is that the Juno is allowed. And even that's not nearly as powerful as some of the jets they had in WWII. Take some of the German jets for example.

[GDJ]

13 minutes ago, Mycroft said:

Well this looks interesting, and I was planning on entering, but I'm sorry, there are just too many restrictions. You can't use closed cockpits?! What the heck? Come on! There were closed cockpits in WWII! No turrets? There were turrets in WWII! Take the B-17! Closed cockpits AND turrets! The B-24! Same thing! I'm sorry, but this is more WWI style. 

The only thing that makes it WWII style at all is that the Juno is allowed. And even that's not nearly as powerful as some of the jets they had in WWII. Take some of the German jets for example.

You should have read the whole thread.

-closed cockpits are allowed
-Jet engines allowed
 

1 hour ago, Wildcat111 said:

@GDJ I'm just asking but when are you going to post your craft? I'm asking because I'm excited to see your craft.

[Wildcat111]

26 minutes ago, GDJ said:

Haha, very funny.

[Mycroft]

25 minutes ago, GDJ said:

You should have read the whole thread.

-closed cockpits are allowed
-Jet engines allowed

I know the Juno is allowed, but the OP specifically bars closed cockpits. The OP overrides the rest of the thread. If they are actually allowed according to @Wildcat111, then I would appreciate the OP being updated to reflect it. 

[Wildcat111]

48 minutes ago, Mycroft said:

No turrets? There were turrets in WWII!

This is more of a single seater competition, with planes like the Spitfire and stuff.

5 minutes ago, Mycroft said:

If they are actually allowed according to @Wildcat111, then I would appreciate the OP being updated to reflect it. 

Did I say that closed cockpits are allowed on the post? If I didn't, then I forgot to mention it in the OP. Sorry.

EDIT: Fixed it.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Wildcat111

[Mycroft]

4 minutes ago, Wildcat111 said:

This is more of a single seater competition, with planes like the Spitfire nd stuff.

Did I say that closed cockpits are allowed on the post? If I didn't, then I forgot to mention it in the OP. Sorry.

Soooo what if like the .50cal turrets were allowed, but only on big planes, (you might limit it by weight or crew capacity) and limited to like 4 a plane? It would open it up for bigger, less maneuverable planes without giving them a huge advantage. I understand that there needs to be limits, but I simply don't believe that we need this many. Also rocket powered planes were sorta common in WWII, maybe allow the Swivel and Reliant alongside the Flea and Hammer?

[The Optimist]

2 minutes ago, Mycroft said:

Soooo what if like the .50cal turrets were allowed, but only on big planes, (you might limit it by weight or crew capacity) and limited to like 4 a plane? It would open it up for bigger, less maneuverable planes without giving them a huge advantage. I understand that there needs to be limits, but I simply don't believe that we need this many. Also rocket powered planes were sorta common in WWII, maybe allow the Swivel and Reliant alongside the Flea and Hammer?

The only notable rocket powered fighter I know of was the german ME-163, which used a hydrazine mixture rocket engine for roughly 8 minutes of flight time. The only engine suitable for such an aircraft would be either the Q-10 engines, or the Spark.

[GDJ]

Teaser pic. She's almost done.

[Wildcat111]

16 minutes ago, GDJ said:

Teaser pic. She's almost done.

Ooh nice. Plus, a Kraken! Me and @epicman81 ussed two Marlins clipped into each other.

1 hour ago, Mycroft said:

Soooo what if like the .50cal turrets were allowed, but only on big planes, (you might limit it by weight or crew capacity) and limited to like 4 a plane? It would open it up for bigger, less maneuverable planes without giving them a huge advantage.

Good point. Will add it.

[GDJ]

1 hour ago, Wildcat111 said:

Ooh nice. Plus, a Kraken! Me and @epicman81 ussed two Marlins clipped into each other.

Thought about that too, but I wanted a plane that was below 3.8 tonnes total mass. This engine had the power and the low mass.

[GDJ]

Placeholder

Edited September 3, 2016 by GDJ

[Wildcat111]

3 hours ago, GDJ said:

Thought about that too, but I wanted a plane that was below 3.8 tonnes total mass. This engine had the power and the low mass.

I see you have uploaded your craft to KerbalX. Nice description! Also, can you upload your craft to my ASC IV Hangar?

Edited September 3, 2016 by Wildcat111

[GDJ]

2 hours ago, Wildcat111 said:

I see you have uploaded your craft to KerbalX. Nice description! Also, can you upload your craft to my ASC IV Hangar?

I've already done some updating over that one, but download that one and play away.

I'll put the final challenger in your hanger soon......just as soon as I figure out why the 7.62mm's have more hitting power than the 7.7mm's. I may have to be unoriginal and go with the BDA's .50 cal Brownings.

The 7.7mm's are like shooting a B-52 with a .22 short.

Edited September 3, 2016 by GDJ

[Wildcat111]

Just now, GDJ said:

I've already done some updating over that one, but download that one and play away.

I'll put the final challenger in your hanger soon......just as soon as I figure out why the 7.62mm's have more hitting power than the 7.7mm's.

The 7.7mm's are like shooting a B-52 with a .22 short.

Ok.

[GDJ]

2 hours ago, Wildcat111 said:

Nice description! 

Meh. The spelling mistakes makes it look like a 12 year old wrote it.
Besides, I like the description for the Super-Bee better.

[Wildcat111]

14 minutes ago, GDJ said:

Meh. The spelling mistakes makes it look like a 12 year old wrote it.
Besides, I like the description for the Super-Bee better.

What?! A twelve year old? I'm 11!