Lisias Posted October 3 Author Share Posted October 3 On 9/26/2024 at 10:19 AM, kerbiloid said: When you are first time trying to land the Hooligan Labs airship at the KSC. https://edge-upvideo.rbc.ru/archive/2024/09/26/335480.8___mp4/576p.mp4 (Today, Brazil, 1 injured.) Lightly injured, things could had ended way worse. I found this video, where the whole incident was recorded: I think that the elevator's cable broke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted October 4 Share Posted October 4 (edited) Russian army scarf, 1880s Apparently, any sort of educational literature would've been repurposed into rolling paper, so some officers got creative Edited October 4 by DDE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted October 9 Author Share Posted October 9 Remember the Japanese Kyushu J7W Shinden ? This is the XP-55 Ascender: Art imitates Life! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunlitZelkova Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 19 hours ago, Lisias said: Remember the Japanese Kyushu J7W Shinden ? This is the XP-55 Ascender: Art imitates Life! It's real life nickname was "A$$ender" (not censored obviously). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted October 10 Author Share Posted October 10 3 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said: It's real life nickname was "A$$ender" (not censored obviously). With good reasons - that thing was a death trap. The XP-56 didn't killed anyone, but was found lacking in performance and eventually abandoned. The XP-54 was ... hummm... "less unconventional", and probably the reason the US Military choose to pursue XP-55 instead. The British, however, proved this design was solid when equipped with jet engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunlitZelkova Posted October 12 Share Posted October 12 On 10/11/2024 at 4:41 AM, Lisias said: was ... hummm... "less unconventional", and probably the reason the US Military choose to pursue XP-55 instead. The British, however, proved this design was solid when equipped with jet engines. The Swedish did it too actually, but not only with jets but props as well! The SAAB J21 and A21 had a successful career in the Swedish Air Force after the military buildup begun during WWII began to actually come to fruition during the late 1940s. A jet-powered variant was built in small numbers (I didn't realize but apparently besides the Yak-3 to Yak-15 transition it was the only aircraft successfully converted from propeller to jet propulsion) until all of them were replaced by the Tunnan and Vampire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted October 31 Author Share Posted October 31 Daimler Benz DB Jäger http://www.luft46.com/db/dbjager.html A pretty "conventional" German plane for the WW2 that didn't saw the light of day, but got into mockup phase - it was canceled because the monstruous engine it would use wasn't expected to be ready before 1947 (she was conceived in '42). But Kerbals to the rescue, someone built her in KSP! Spoiler And someone built a RC controlled model (pretty loudy...): Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted November 4 Share Posted November 4 On 10/31/2024 at 11:40 PM, Lisias said: Daimler Benz DB Jäger http://www.luft46.com/db/dbjager.html A pretty "conventional" German plane for the WW2 that didn't saw the light of day, but got into mockup phase - it was canceled because the monstruous engine it would use wasn't expected to be ready before 1947 (she was conceived in '42). But Kerbals to the rescue, someone built her in KSP! Reveal hidden contents And someone built a RC controlled model (pretty loudy...): Where is the engine here? you have more hull in front of the propeller but propellers is behind cockpit? Now Germany build an fast propeller plane it had an forward and rear propeller and two engines. Much reduced drag over standard two engines planes. But the lightning had the two booms for turbos, inter-coolers and radiators. The German planes was very packed with stuff who had limited redundancy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted November 4 Author Share Posted November 4 (edited) 7 hours ago, magnemoe said: Where is the engine here? you have more hull in front of the propeller but propellers is behind cockpit? The engine is on the front, and it was planned to be a monster of an engine, the 609 from the Daimler Benz DB 600 series - 3400HP. Each one of the B29 engines, the Duplex Cyclone, were able to give 3500HP on the more powerful configurations - but the DB609 was liquid cooled, inverted V16 engine, way smaller. The double prop configuration was, surely, because a single set would not be able to harvest the huge power and still be sized for for a fighter. 7 hours ago, magnemoe said: Now Germany build an fast propeller plane it had an forward and rear propeller and two engines. Much reduced drag over standard two engines planes. Yep, but the DO-335 (the craft I think you are thinking of - with two engines, one pusher and another puller) was a (really) heavy fighter, meant to fight bombers. This thing was a sitting duck against light fighters, like the Mustang and the Spitfire (assuming they could reach it, of course). The P-38 was also a formidable heavy-fighter, but the FW-190 was able to make them sweat, and boy, sweat the Germans made them. The Mustang and the Spitfire could do a better job against the German light fighters (that were formidable), and the strongest points of the P-38 would be better exploited in the Pacific. So the P-38 sent to Europe that were most successful in their missions were for patrol and reconnaissance, where the higher altitude, long range and long loiter times of the craft would be useful and saving the bombers that would be used for these tasks for... bombing. The Jäger was almost surely meant to survive the allied light fighters, beside still being a heavy fighter - but more maneuverable. I wonder how it would compare to the FW-190. Now, why in hell they decided to put the props middle craft, it's anyone guess. Getting rid of the props from the front has some advantages for armament, as you would not have to sync the guns with the propellers and could gather them pretty closely, making them deadly on any range (as was did with the P-38). But the DB609 was huge, and so the nose would not have space for the cannons (this thing was meant to be a Bomber killer, after all), and so most (if not all) of the armament would be mounted on the wings anyway. Not to mention that making spam from ejecting pilots is not exactly the best message you can send to your pilots about how you value them as a war asset... 7 hours ago, magnemoe said: But the lightning had the two booms for turbos, inter-coolers and radiators. The German planes was very packed with stuff who had limited redundancy. Yep, but the Germans were fighting "at home", and so such redundancy weren't so useful. They prioritized the firepower and maneuverability. With good results, given the beat they gave to the P-38. The Lightning, on the other hand, had to come home if beaten otherwise the pilot would be killed or captured. So it made sense for it to sacrifice some "fighter capabilities" with redundancies. Given that the Jäger would have only one engine, it would be surely lighter than the DO-335 and with more space for armament - and less of a fuel guzzler too. Edited November 5 by Lisias brute force post merge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 5 Share Posted November 5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrier_Boat Spoiler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanamonde Posted November 5 Share Posted November 5 It's so cute! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gargamel Posted November 6 Share Posted November 6 22 hours ago, Vanamonde said: It's so cute! That’s a Navy ship of war you’re talking about there buddy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted November 6 Share Posted November 6 3 hours ago, Gargamel said: That’s a Navy ship of war you’re talking about there buddy. Boat by any definition. Think the one in first image is used as an tug for Constitution as she don't have an secondary engine being an museum and artifact. Unfortunately you do not an captain title piloting it. You need to command an real ship for that, and not an to large one capital ships tend to require an admiral. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted November 7 Share Posted November 7 7 hours ago, Gargamel said: That’s a Navy ship of war you’re talking about there buddy. You say that but I say IT'S A WIDDLE BA-BY! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 7 Share Posted November 7 (edited) 9 hours ago, Gargamel said: That’s a Navy ship of war you’re talking about there buddy. If add some naughty dread and iron onboard, it will be a whole ironclad dreadnaught. Spoiler Edited November 7 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted November 7 Author Share Posted November 7 Since we are talking about boats... Never laugh again when someone shoves 3 Junos on a boat on KSP!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted November 7 Share Posted November 7 In the 1970s, you could have the whole Internet in your pocket! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 7 Share Posted November 7 4 hours ago, DDE said: In the 1970s, you could have the whole Internet in your pocket! Soon we may have, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted November 10 Author Share Posted November 10 Do you like levers and gear boxes? And this is the vehicle: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 10 Share Posted November 10 1 hour ago, Lisias said: Do you like levers and gear boxes? Yes. Spoiler (From Myst V: End Of Ages.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted November 14 Author Share Posted November 14 Kistler 1, a Fully Reusable Launch Vehicle. That enjoys trampolines. It was supposed to be a Space-X competitor. Apparently, landing huge rockets on chopsticks isn't the wildest of the ideas after all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 15 Share Posted November 15 Wan Hu did it right... Spoiler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted November 15 Share Posted November 15 20 minutes ago, kerbiloid said: Wan Hu did it right... Hide contents Translation of text: "So long, LOSERS!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted November 17 Author Share Posted November 17 (edited) I don't have a clue if the Chinese will manage to pull this one, but... Impressive. It's a copy of the X-37, but at the same time, isn't. Completely different roles. I really think USA should seriously rethink the way they are planning the current and future LEO missions... They may be the ones creating new technologies, but they are risking getting behind on making them profitable. It's about the money. It's always about the money! For comparison: Edited November 19 by Lisias Forum borked on me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 19 Share Posted November 19 The Soviet/Russian high-explosive bombs (1500..9000 kg). Spoiler When the designer had forgotten to remove from the 3d model the axially flapped clipping cone, which he was using for the proper, symmetric positioning, and they started using the same scaled model for everything... Available with various texture sets. Default is smooth gray. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.