Kerbin Circumnavigation 1.2 - Aviator Challenge Continuation

[zolotiyeruki]

Can I just say how much I HATE the post editor?  I keep running into issues where the reply contents get corrupted and the forum javascript pukes.

3 hours ago, Foxster said:

Oh, go on then, one last try with a capsule (38m20s)...

Album: http://imgur.com/a/kqbbe

I swear, I get a stupid grin on my face every time I see your tiny craft.  The last pic in that album made me chuckle.  Any landing you walk away from is a good landing, right?

[Foxster]

17 minutes ago, zolotiyeruki said:

 Any landing you walk away from is a good landing, right?

More of a limp than a walk but yes, if nothing actually falls off the craft or the pilot then its a good landing. 

Thing is, the clock is ticking down. It says nearly 38 mins and you have about 30 seconds to land or you are going to have fly all the way around Kerbin - again! So you leave dropping the gear for air braking until you can see the whites of the eyes of the guys in the Astronaut Complex. Then you wrench up the nose to dump more speed. You are still doing 80m/s and just hoping its going to be OK anyway.  You are wobbling all over the sky and the chance of actually hitting the runway is a distant dream - anywhere flattish is good now.

I mean, it only weighs about 3t at the end. Even with the craft upside down, a couple of strong chaps with a bit of robe and we are ready to go again! 

Edited February 16, 2017 by Foxster

[Foxster]

Just to share the favourite craft of mine for this challenge...

Yes, I know it has stuff on the back of the engine, but its only surface mounted and offset into place, it doesn't mess with the engine. Thing is, it looks sooo much cuter with the control surfaces tidied away like that

Great challenge. Really enjoyed it. Thanks!

 

[zolotiyeruki]

The intent of that rule is to prevent the nosecone-on-the-back-of-an-engine exploit, so you're good there.  56G's on the final approach :eek:

Edited February 16, 2017 by zolotiyeruki

[Foxster]

35 minutes ago, zolotiyeruki said:

56G's on the final approach :eek:

Kerbal pâté anyone?

[GDJ]

Well boys, I thought I may have the fastest plane here, but Foxter beat me to it by 0.8 m/s. 

1750.2 m/s, and the engine was still running. No mods, no cheats. Straight stock parts.

 

Unfortunately I entered a flat spin during descent but recovered and did land nicely but the time was horrid. So I shall try again......and see if I can beat my speed record.

Edited February 17, 2017 by GDJ

[Foxster]

6 hours ago, GDJ said:

Well boys, I thought I may have the fastest plane here, but Foxter beat me to it by 0.8 m/s. 

1750.2 m/s, and the engine was still running. No mods, no cheats. Straight stock parts.

Unfortunately I entered a flat spin during descent but recovered and did land nicely but the time was horrid. So I shall try again......and see if I can beat my speed record.

Yup, getting these little craft down in one piece is the tricky bit. 

Got a couple of close-up pics of your craft?

Is your 1750.2m/s flat out? With my craft I was running at 2/3 throttle when cruising but the engine flames out at 1751m/s and there's nothing I've been able to do about that, otherwise I could probably go quicker. 

[zolotiyeruki]

3 hours ago, Foxster said:

Yup, getting these little craft down in one piece is the tricky bit. 

Got a couple of close-up pics of your craft?

Is your 1750.2m/s flat out? With my craft I was running at 2/3 throttle when cruising but the engine flames out at 1751m/s and there's nothing I've been able to do about that, otherwise I could probably go quicker. 

My guess is that with the heavier cockpit and larger control surfaces/wings, he's got a bit more induced drag, and that's pulling down his top speed slightly.

[GDJ]

1 hour ago, zolotiyeruki said:

My guess is that with the heavier cockpit and larger control surfaces/wings, he's got a bit more induced drag, and that's pulling down his top speed slightly.

Yeah, that and my plane is about 5X larger and considerably heavier (7.4 tonnes at take-off) compared to Foxster's aircraft!

Here's a better pic, taken 2 minutes earlier while it was still "accelerating".



So I did use the Mk1 cockpit, but it was wrapped in a shroud, and with the shape I was pushing a 1.4m cockpit assembly. Advantage is that it kept most of the heat away from the fuel tanks, engine, nacelle and it protected the cockpit very well. Disadvantage is that I'm pushing a larger piece thru the air. Using the large and smaller control surfaces as airfoils works rather well, and they can take the heat. Disadvantage is that the plane needs very specific adjustment to the airfoils actions and it's touchy, but controllable during takeoff's/landings despite my flat spin incident (fixed that. Yaw control set too high).

But 1750.2 isn't too slouchy. I'm happy.

Edited February 17, 2017 by GDJ

[fourfa]

On 2/16/2017 at 1:15 PM, Foxster said:

Just to share the favourite craft of mine for this challenge...

I love the glowing hot intake!

I've been tucking control surfaces like that up in the engine, between the Rapier nozzles.  Looks cool, and with the limited authority with wee planes like these, they don't even clip through the nozzles.

Did you find that the fairing over the engine helped survive better at lower altitude? Or are you cruising at 21km anyway?

One more trick that might help with landing stability or aesthetics: the ramp intake upside down as a gear mounting point:

(that's my 5t SSTO that can't take the sustained heat of this particular challenge)

Edited February 18, 2017 by fourfa

[[ Jeremy ]]

I actually have two candidates for this one, so I'll see which ones you deem "better"

Now I tend to put aesthetics over raw speed, but that doesn't mean that I can't claim my Velocity badge all over again!

First off is the Raven, coming in at 48:43, cruising in at a hair under 1400 m/s - surprised a big bird like this can go sub hour actually

Secondly is the Peregrine, a much prettier craft in my opinion, but I would think less of it as it clips a pair of wings in the centre for looks (you can probably spot it with a good look at it.)
Another thing about this craft was that I found a way to cool the cockpit by transferring the fuel from the ncs adapter to the intakes, which would cool the fuel down and then be pumped back to the nose to cool the cockpit when things get a little too toasty up front - it allowed me to cruise quite comfortably at around Mach 4.7, at least according to KER.

And here's an example of the "active cooling helping to keep the plane from the exploding on the descent back to KSC:

Remember folks, you can have speed with a little bit of style, just see what you can come up with!

Edited March 30, 2017 by [ Jeremy ]

[zolotiyeruki]

Hmm--I didn't realize those supersonic intakes had fuel capacity in them!  I've added your second entry to the leaderboard, since it was slightly faster.

[HelmutK]

Hello @ all,

nice to see the old topic in new style is still alive.

It is almost 2 years ago that I have fought for the best times

I think its time to make a new run now

No mods

Not the best time, but we will see

By the way, youre planes are very impressive.

[zolotiyeruki]

38:23?  That's VERY impressive!

[HelmutK]

New design and 1.62 fuel left 

That was a testflight with some mistakes and i think that could be better with this plane

Tomorrow i'll try a new turn

[zolotiyeruki]

Yeesh.  Do you think sub-38 minutes is possible?

[Foxster]

Just now, zolotiyeruki said:

Yeesh.  Do you think sub-38 minutes is possible?

There's a max speed you can travel at, so there's now little to be shaved off the main part of the flight. The differentiation is in getting to cruising altitude/speed and then landing. Nail those and you can save a bit of time. Maybe a suicide dive at the end and a short parachute drop?

[HelmutK]

Next turn

You can save some seconds in a good altitude/speed relationship. But it's like foxter say, perfect ascent and descent/landing is the most importent thing

sub-38 will be difficult but i try a new turn on an other altitude

 

 

[HelmutK]

There is no difference in time between several altitudes.

So I have redesigned the craft and its realy 1.5 m/s faster at the same altitudes

This is not so much but maybe it makes the sub-38 possible

My current best time is now 38.02

https://youtu.be/jdrGnBIgJ_g

Unfortunately the best landing with 37.59 is a fail

https://youtu.be/0xTxW-FV_bY

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by HelmutK

[zolotiyeruki]

You were sooooooo close!  That descent is certainly hair-raising, with all the overheating bars in the red!

[Tidus Klein]

Finding it hard to get past 1751.2 with out rapier flame out. I have no idea why I can't go faster any ideas on how to squeeze more speed out of them?

 

[Foxster]

5 hours ago, Tidus Klein said:

Finding it hard to get past 1751.2 with out rapier flame out. I have no idea why I can't go faster any ideas on how to squeeze more speed out of them?

Nope. Not as far as I'm aware. It's a built-in design limit of the Rapier engines. 

[Tidus Klein]

15 hours ago, Foxster said:

Nope. Not as far as I'm aware. It's a built-in design limit of the Rapier engines. 

I get that but the current record holder has a max speed of 1755 m/s 4m/s higher then the rapiers supposed limit

[Foxster]

1 hour ago, Tidus Klein said:

I get that but the current record holder has a max speed of 1755 m/s 4m/s higher then the rapiers supposed limit

Might have been during a dive?

[Jarin]

3 hours ago, Tidus Klein said:

I get that but the current record holder has a max speed of 1755 m/s 4m/s higher then the rapiers supposed limit

What record is this? Highest sustained I was able to find at any altitude band was 1751.6