Kerbal Express Airlines - Regional Jet Challenge (Reboot)

[logman]

I have discovered that the Mk3 Passenger module is the most expensive thing in history.

Edited September 12, 2017 by logman

[Mjp1050]

1 hour ago, Cabbink said:

So...
re afterburners allowed? Since afterburners are only allowed on military craft IRL, i think the panther should be limited.

Afterburners are fine. Realism isn't a big factor here.

[shdwlrd]

2 hours ago, Mjp1050 said:

21 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

Can we use the aerodynamics parts from the MK2 & MK3 expansions?

No, sorry. Airplane Plus is the only parts mod allowed.

I had to ask. Need to come up with a pretty nose for one design.

 

2 hours ago, Mjp1050 said:

The one I'm using is fuel capacity / burn rate * speed / 1000m. to get the theoretical range.

Thanks for the info.

[ImmaStegosaurus!]

Here's Factory No.653's offering in Seaplane category.

Part count is 55 and it can carry "16+2".
Recommended cruising altitude is 600-1200 metres. Due to large wings it is possible to reach 11 500 metres of altitude but it is advised against as it increases fuel consumption considerably. Engine stalls may occur at high altitudes.
Recommended cruising speed is 120-130 m/s for highest efficiency. While the plane can fly at nearly 200 m/s, it is advised against as it increases fuel consumption considerably. Engine stalls may occur at speeds above 200 m/s.
Theoretical max range with full fuel load of 2000 units is 780km.
2000 /0,32 * 125 / 1000m
Takeoff speed is about 75 m/s with full fuel load, landing speed around 40 m/s. Landing faster than 40 m/s in water voids the warranty.
Recommended fuel load is 800 units in hull and engine pod tanks. For longer flights it is possible to use wing tanks too for additional 1200 units but this makes water landings dangerous.

https://kerbalx.com/Wafflesforkrebs/Ka-24

These are recommended procedures for take-offs from water. Due to high mounted and powerful engines, Ka-24 may attempt diving if full throttle is applied too quickly.
1, Tail plane's maximum travel is to be increased to maximum and constant nose up input should be applied through take off.
2, Throttle should be increased to 50% of maximum rated power, until speed of 25-30m/s is achieved. 
3, Throttle can then be increased in 10-15% increments while applying sensible nose up input.
4, When in air, tail planes should be restricted back to max 100% travel.

Edited September 28, 2017 by ImmaStegosaurus!

[Mjp1050]

Test Pilot Review: Dusty Turboprop - AAC431-1

Dusty Turboprop - XL AAC431-2

Figures as Tested for AAC431-1:

• Price: 8,241,000
• Fuel: 150 kallons
• Cruising speed: 275 m/s
• Cruising altitude: 10000 m
• Fuel burn rate: 0.05 l/s
• Mass: 7.7 tons
• Range: 825 km

Figures as Tested for XL AAC431-2:

• Price: 9,551,000
• Fuel: 200 kallons
• Cruising speed: 225 m/s
• Cruising altitude: 10000 m
• Fuel burn rate: 0.05 l/s
• Mass: 9.1 tons
• Range: 900 km

Review Notes:

We at Kerbal Express Airlines were quite impressed by how much was done with so little with the AAC431 series. It has a top speed of 275 m/s, far higher than most other competing planes. Its incredibly low starting price of 8,241,000 is quite competitive, though that price comes with some trade-offs. In particular, the landing gear on both models was prone to snapping off during landings. The AAC431 series also lacks ailerons, instead relying on the cockpit's reaction wheels, which makes rolling the aircraft a difficult feat. However, at 22 parts, the XL AAC431-2 is very reliable and easy to maintain, and the AAC431-1 even more so, so we don't foresee spending much to keep the planes in the air. 

The Verdict:
The AAC431 series is about the lowest you can go and still qualify as a plane, but they are cheap and get the job done. We recommend upgrading the landing gear to something more durable, though. Ordering 10 of each model for use as short-range puddle jumpers.
 

[ImmaStegosaurus!]

Here's Factory No.653's offering (24) in Turboprop category

Part count is 51, Dry mass is 40 tonnes and it can carry "24+4". Flyout cost is 126,326,000 Funds. Aircraft has a cargo hold in the rear.
Recommended cruising altitude is 4000 metres. Engines tend to stall above 4200 m.
Recommended cruising speed is 155 m/s. 
Theoretical max range with full fuel load of 4373+1440 units is 2500 km. Reserve tanks hold total of 1440 units of fuel, which is good for 620 km.
5813 /0,36 * 155 / 1000m with full fuel. 1440 /0,36 * 155 / 1000m with reserve fuel.
Takeoff speed is about 70 m/s with full fuel load, landing speed around 40 m/s. Pilot should raise the nose gently to avoid tail strikes. 


https://kerbalx.com/Wafflesforkrebs/Ka-1224


Here's the (32) variant with additional cabin

Part count is 54, Dry mass is 45 tonnes and it can carry "48+4". Flyout cost is 155,660,000 Funds. Aircraft has small cargo hold in the rear.
Recommended cruising altitude is 3200 metres.
Recommended cruising speed is 155 m/s. 
Theoretical max range with full fuel load of 4373+1440 units is 2500 km. Reserve tanks hold total of 1440 units of fuel, which is good for 620 km.
5813 /0,36 * 155 / 1000m with full fuel. 1440 /0,36 * 155 / 1000m with reserve fuel.
Takeoff speed is about 70 m/s with full fuel load, landing speed around 40 m/s. Pilot should raise the nose gently to avoid tail strikes. 

https://kerbalx.com/Wafflesforkrebs/Ka-1248

Edited September 14, 2017 by ImmaStegosaurus!

[TheEpicSquared]

@Mjp1050 Suggestion: There shouldn't be an altitude limit of 15,000m for the supersonic category. For me at least, it's incredibly difficult to get a supersonic cruise at a good fuel burn rate and speed (not to mention overheating) at an altitude of less than 15km. 

13 hours ago, Mjp1050 said:

Are you two thinking of something along these lines? I approve!

Yeah, I guess. I was thinking basically something that would make us build bigger planes. But I think 120+ passengers is a good amount.   

[sevenperforce]

Wanna reiterate the need for cabin count rebalancing.

[AeroGav]

On 11/09/2017 at 8:30 AM, Mjp1050 said:

Test Pilot Review: Screechcraft Corporation - Screechcraft Starship

 

The Verdict:
The Screechcraft Starship's winning feature is its range. It will fly you anywhere you want it to, and very quickly at that, but you will need to avoid mountains. Ordering 3 for use on trans-oceanic routes.

Glad nobody mentioned the view.    In the rear cabin you can look at the engines or the fin,  up front the strakes cover most of the window.   Cockpit visibility must be good though !

Work has started on a subsonic variant, powered by Wheesley engines.   Valentina Kerman offered to assist the development program.   I need to see how they're getting along, but with such an experienced test pilot at their disposal, I can't imagine there being any issues. 

Spoiler

 

Edited September 12, 2017 by AeroGav

[aerodis]

Hi ! 

Let me present the AerLeeker 3.6 . This plane is the most costly one of the AerLeeker wich are normally small regional planes. This is of course because it's been developped with another airplane company that deals mostly with private jets, and this is why the inside of our AerLeeker is much more comfortable than in other planes of the same models. This is typically a plane for rich kerbals that needs to fly all over the world. With it's 900 units of fuel, you can be sure to arrive on the other side of the planet in a single trip without refueling (That' not true but just imagine that it is).

 

 

This plane costs 51 900 000 and carries 900 units of fuel.

It is recommended to fly this little plane at 6000 meter of altitude at maximum speed (of about 350 to 400 m/s)

 

Download link : https://kerbalx.com/aerodis/aerleeker-36

[Cabbink]

4 hours ago, TheEpicSquared said:

@Mjp1050 Suggestion: There shouldn't be an altitude limit of 15,000m for the supersonic category. For me at least, it's incredibly difficult to get a supersonic cruise at a good fuel burn rate and speed (not to mention overheating) at an altitude of less than 15km. 

I think they want it to be low enough for the physics of the distance calc not to be obsolete.  Also, scaled to earth, that's flying at 64 km. That's about where UV radiation gets harmful in normal planes. So keep them below 15 km for realisim.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Cabbink

[Bob_Saget54]

Introducing the SAI Concorde Mk. II!

This beautiful machine not only combines sleek lines and high fashion into a supersonic marvel, but with a maximum range of over 7,000 kerbo-meters in the stock variant alone, can get you anywhere in the world with style. 

Some advantages of this aircraft are:

• Comfort seating for 40 passengers, with snack bar and restroom located in rear-most passenger compartment
• Beautiful views of Kerbin from the upper atmosphere
• An incredibly high TWR Ratio
• Extended tanks containing over 2700 gallons of fuel
• An extended service ceiling of 20,000 m (Optimal operating altitude is between 17,000 and 19,000 m)
• An impressive cruising speed of 1,050 m/s while sipping only .40 gallons of fuel
• Impressive handling characteristics in both sub and supersonic speeds
• Beautiful Phoenix pictures

Some Disadvantages of this aircraft:

• Low Landing gear
• High part count of 80 parts (Mostly individual wing segments)
• Price tag of $41,354,000 per machine
• High take-off speed of ~70 m/s

With the range, speed, and power to transport passengers across the globe safely and efficiently, the Concorde Mk. II is a must-have in the roster of any air company!

Craft File: https://kerbalx.com/Bob_Saget54/Concorde-Mk-II 

Edited September 12, 2017 by Bob_Saget54

[Cabbink]

7 minutes ago, Bob_Saget54 said:

Introducing the SAI Concorde Mk. II!

This beautiful machine not only combines sleek lines and high fashion into a supersonic marvel, but with a maximum range of over 7,000 kerbo-meters in the stock variant alone, can get you anywhere in the world with style. 

Some advantages of this aircraft are:

• Comfort seating for 40 passengers, with snack bar and restroom located in rear-most passenger compartment
• Beautiful views of Kerbin from the upper atmosphere
• An incredibly high TWR Ratio
• Extended tanks containing over 2700 gallons of fuel
• An extended service ceiling of 20,000 m (Optimal operating altitude is between 17,000 and 19,000 m)
• An impressive cruising speed of 1,050 m/s while sipping only .40 gallons of fuel
• Impressive handling characteristics in both sub and supersonic speeds
• Beautiful Phoenix pictures

Some Disadvantages of this aircraft:

• Low Landing gear
• High part count of 80 parts (Mostly individual wing segments)
• Price tag of $41,354,000 per machine
• High take-off speed of ~70 m/s

With the range, speed, and power to transport passengers across the globe safely and efficiently, the Concorde Mk. II is a must-have in the roster of any air company!

Craft File: https://kerbalx.com/Bob_Saget54/Concorde-Mk-II 

Sorry to break it to ya. Scaled to earth, you are in areas with poisonous levels of UV and other light(as well as being dangerously close to the thermosphere). Try to fly lower, maybe down at 15km at the max.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Cabbink

[Bob_Saget54]

1 minute ago, Cabbink said:

Sorry to break it to ya. Scaled to earth, you are in areas with poisonous levels of UV and other light. Try to fly lower, maybe down at 15km at the max.

It is also capable of doing that, however, the OP removed the 15,000m altitude limit for supersonic aircraft.

The craft is more than capable of flying at reduced altitude, however, it suffers in a loss of efficency

[Cabbink]

2 minutes ago, Bob_Saget54 said:

It is also capable of doing that, however, the OP removed the 15,000m altitude limit for supersonic aircraft.

The craft is more than capable of flying at reduced altitude, however, it suffers in a loss of efficency

Yeah, but do you really want civilian passengers at the border of the THERMOSPHERE? Xrays get in there.

 Earths atmosphere: 

Edited September 12, 2017 by Cabbink

[AeroGav]

2 minutes ago, Cabbink said:

Sorry to break it to ya. Scaled to earth, you are in areas with poisonous levels of UV and other light. Try to fly lower, maybe down at 15km at the max.

I think there should be a separate category for realistic, subsonic transports with maybe the SST operating between mach 1-2 with the engines on dry power in cruise (Concorde used afterburner for crossing mach 1, but there were plans for a mk2 that didn't use AB).      Then another category for the sci fi stuff,   like the Whiplash transports going mach 4 with permanent afterburners (can't even turn them off when in the holding pattern for landing - i bet the residents of New York will love the noise!)  and cruising along with glowing plasma around the windows. 

[Bob_Saget54]

Just now, Cabbink said:

Yeah, but do you really want civilian passengers at the border of the THERMOSPHERE?

Do not worry @Cabbink, there have been proper safety measures put into place in order to protect our passengers at all altitudes

(This was all Jebidiah's idea by the way )

[TheEpicSquared]

IRIDIUM AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGIES - AIRCRAFT DIVISION PRESENTS:

Its very own Supersonic Jet Aircraft:

The ISSJ-40!

Presenting the Iridium SuperSonic Jet - the ISSJ-40!

The ISSJ-40 offers the best in supersonic aircraft technologies. The single Rapier engine provides plenty of thrust to propel the 40-passenger craft to supersonic speeds, while at the same time being quiet and relatively fuel efficient at it's cruising altitude. The presence of only one Rapier, of course, simplifies maintenance enormously, especially for a relatively complicated engine like this one. The four air intakes provide plenty of oxygen for the Rapier, even at its high cruising altitude of 19-23 kilometers.The high landing gear has been installed to reduce the chance of tailstrikes (learning from Iridium's previous aircraft, the ISRJ-32), but a protective I-beam has been attached to the rear of the fuselage just in case of a tailstrike on takeoff.

Speaking of takeoff, because of the plane's swept wings, which are optimized for supersonic cruise, takeoff speed has increased to roughly 60-80m/s. Pitch authority is controlled solely by the front canards, and it is recommended that the control authority of the canards should gradually be lowered as speed increases, to prevent excessive g-forces. While takeoff speed is a bit on the high side, the plane can comfortably land at 60m/s. The lack of a thrust reverser has been compensated for by four airbrakes and a powerful set of wheel brakes.

The ISSJ-40 is rated for a maximum cruise speed of 1550m/s. Under no circumstances should the plane be flown above these speeds! The aircraft has been tested to over 1650m/s but this dangerously overheats the plane. 1550m/s is the fastest you should fly with this in a cruise.

The plane should be easy to learn for pilots, because it retains the same cockpit as the ISRJ-32. 

Overall, the ISSJ-40 can comfortably shuttle 40 passengers and 2 crew members at Mach 4+ speeds all over the globe. With a higher range, service ceiling, cruise speed, fuel efficiency and a lower cost than the nearest competitor (as of writing this), the ISSJ-40 is a must-have for any airline venturing into the realm of supersonic passenger travel.

 

Numerical data:

Price: 29,023,000 kerbucks 

Recommended cruising altitude: 19-23km. Don't worry about the radiation, the plane has been designed with that in mind.  

Recommended cruising speed: 1500-1550m/s. Do NOT, under any circumstances, fly above 1600m/s. The chances of fatal overheating are through the roof at those speeds. Keep it at 1550m/s and it should be fine.

Range: 800 / 0.30 * 1550 / 1000 = 4133.34km

 

Flying instructions:

Fairly straightforward.

1. Take off, turn to desired heading.

2. Pitch 20 degrees. Prograde should be about 15 degrees at this point.

3. Leave the plane to ascend. At about 13km of altitude, gently start tapping the F key to gently level off the plane by 20km. 

4. At this point the plane should start accelerating. Keep the speed in check, and don't fly above 1550m/s.

5. Land again.

 

 

Action groups:

2 - Toggle engine on/off

3 - Toggle airbrakes

 

Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/TheEpicSquared/ISSJ-40

That should be everything. Enjoy!  

Edited September 12, 2017 by TheEpicSquared

[Cabbink]

8 minutes ago, Bob_Saget54 said:

Do not worry @Cabbink, there have been proper safety measures put into place in order to protect our passengers at all altitudes

(This was all Jebidiah's idea by the way )

Xrays protection (ammounts that can give you cancer) and 1500 C temperatures  hard to protect. You know those lead Vests for xrays?  That's to protect from a small chunk of radiation you get up at the thermopause. You would have to make 1/3 of the plane into lead. How does flying that sound?

Edited September 12, 2017 by Cabbink

[Bob_Saget54]

4 minutes ago, Cabbink said:

Xrays protection (ammounts that can give you cancer) and 1500 C temperatures  hard to protect. You know those lead Vests for xrays?  That's to protect from a small chunk of radiation you get up at the thermopause. You would havr to mske 1/3 of the plane into lead. How does flying that sound?

The craft would still perform quite well due to the TWR being extremely high, with a decrease in efficiency.

Also, as the OP states in a previous statement:

16 hours ago, Mjp1050 said:

Afterburners are fine. Realism isn't a big factor here.

With emphasis on "Realism isn't a big factor here". I'm quite aware of the prospective dangers of taking an aircraft and pushing it towards thermosphere levels of atmosphere, however, seeing as this is Kerbal Space Program and not real life, I'm willing to assume that the passenger cabins already contain all protection needed for a venture into this high atmosphere.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Bob_Saget54

[Cabbink]

@Mjp1050Is thrust editing  (editing the engine so it burns faster, and stronger). It does not change the isp or  fuel consumption ratio. Just makes it burn faster.

[AeroGav]

12 minutes ago, Cabbink said:

Is thrust editing  (editing the engine so it burns faster, and stronger). It does not change the isp or  fuel consumption ratio. Just makes it burn faster.

Surely not OK.  You're getting the power of two engines with the weight and drag of just one .   I think Tweakscale is allowed in the rules, but i didn't use it.    It's a royal pain in the butt though, when you've got to completely redesign your plane from a twin to a triple because you've got about 5% less thrust than you need to go supersonic.  All part of the challenge.

[Cabbink]

How about saftey features as a catagory? It could be a good add-on to any plane. 

[logman]

6 minutes ago, Cabbink said:

How about saftey features as a catagory? It could be a good add-on to any plane. 

Agreed

[AeroGav]

18 minutes ago, Cabbink said:

How about saftey features as a catagory? It could be a good add-on to any plane. 

I vote for Euro-NCAP style crash testing.    Screechcraft Corporation already conducts its own internal validation.    Here are the results of the frontal impact test, conducted at stall speed :

Edited September 12, 2017 by AeroGav