Asymmetrical Aircraft Challenge

[KingDominoIII]

Does this count?

[Klapaucius]

2 hours ago, KingDominoIII said:

Does this count?

Yes it does.  Grab your badge 

[JERONIMO]

i'll try, brb uninstalling mods

[DRAG0Nmon]

Hope your still taking entries, that badge is cool

https://imgur.com/a/nATBf7m

The wings are different, if you look closely at the borders you'll realize quickly. The fuel tanks are a regular liquid fuel one, and then 2 different rocket ones drained of oxidizer. The craft is entirely stock. Hope you see this!

[Klapaucius]

14 minutes ago, DRAG0Nmon said:

Hope your still taking entries, that badge is cool

https://imgur.com/a/nATBf7m

The wings are different, if you look closely at the borders you'll realize quickly. The fuel tanks are a regular liquid fuel one, and then 2 different rocket ones drained of oxidizer. The craft is entirely stock. Hope you see this!

My challenges never expire   Thanks for the entry!

[FahmiRBLX]

Made an airliner for Kerbal Express Airlines (Not yet uploaded there).

Frontinco Aerospace & Vehicle Manufacturing Corporation, a subsidiary of Frontinco Group

So Kerbals are kerbals, and madness must be madness, hence this. Meet,

Liner-NoSym-1

As Frontinco's first airwrothy assymetrical aircraft,we're happy that airlines started to show interest, literally. But the public turned their heads towards the sky to see such an oddball.

User Manual

Spoiler

Frontinco Liner-NoSym-1

Introduction

Spoiler

As an assymetricalaircraft, pilots must fly the plane carefully. Think of flying NASA's Boeing NB-52 Stratofortress carrying a North American X-15 or Qantas's VH-OJM that once flew with a 5th engine. However, that doesn't mean you need to apply full input to compensate the unbalanced lift / weight / thrust; it's made to minimize so. Basically something like flicking SAS on can cope with that.

Action Groups

Spoiler

1. Engine  (On / Off)

2. Engine (Forwards / Reverse Thrust)

3. Flaps (Lower / Raise)

Flight Instructions

Spoiler

The introduction describes it all, I'm writing at night and can't wait to try out Breaking Grounds lol (As well as the need to go to toilet)

 

Get a unit for you airline (Or agency), or just grab one and fly it today!

Available on 

Edited June 14, 2019 by FahmiRBLXian

[Rocket In My Pocket]

6 hours ago, FahmiRBLXian said:

-snip-

While I do really like your entry, and your enthusiasm..I think it breaks the rules a bit.

It's very asymmetrical, but you use parts more than once.

The plus side is, now you get to make an even better one!

[Speeding Mullet]

Still taking my first tentative steps in KSP and on this forum after a year out.  This looked like a fun challenge that wouldn't see me bogged down in my usual ridiculous over designing.

I made one first that broke the rules (I didn't read the rules), you will note how smooth takeoff is with SCS on:

Then I settled down and designed a simple but definitely asymmetrical plane:

Link to Gallery - https://imgur.com/a/zXzBxLO

Thanks @Klapaucius I had fun, and that's been missing for a while.

SM

[Klapaucius]

1 hour ago, Speeding Mullet said:

Still taking my first tentative steps in KSP and on this forum after a year out.  This looked like a fun challenge that wouldn't see me bogged down in my usual ridiculous over designing.

I made one first that broke the rules (I didn't read the rules), you will note how smooth takeoff is with SCS on:

Then I settled down and designed a simple but definitely asymmetrical plane:

Link to Gallery - https://imgur.com/a/zXzBxLO

Thanks @Klapaucius I had fun, and that's been missing for a while.

SM

I love it!  

[ffx]

my asymmetrical aicraft challenge

https://imgur.com/a/CMQqckP

Edited September 16, 2019 by ffx

[PositronLance001]

My plane:

why is it not showing

[Klapaucius]

1 hour ago, PositronLance001 said:

My plane:

 

why is it not showing

Thanks for keeping the challenge alive!

 

How are you trying to upload it?

On 7/1/2019 at 12:36 PM, Speeding Mullet said:

Still taking my first tentative steps in KSP and on this forum after a year out.  This looked like a fun challenge that wouldn't see me bogged down in my usual ridiculous over designing.

I made one first that broke the rules (I didn't read the rules), you will note how smooth takeoff is with SCS on:

Then I settled down and designed a simple but definitely asymmetrical plane:

Link to Gallery - https://imgur.com/a/zXzBxLO

Thanks @Klapaucius I had fun, and that's been missing for a while.

SM

BTW: Any chance of uploading it to KerbalX?  I'd love to take it for a spin. (well, perhaps not literally).

[PositronLance001]

I will try to upload, it is almost impossible to fly, and has one wing, do not attempt with kerbals you value.

[vyznev]

On 9/23/2019 at 8:35 PM, PositronLance001 said:

I will try to upload, it is almost impossible to fly, and has one wing, do not attempt with kerbals you value.

Sounds like something you might want to share in this thread, then. 

[AHHans]

On 6/7/2019 at 10:27 PM, Klapaucius said:

My challenges never expire

Well, I take your word for it.

Here is my try to make a propeller powered plane with the parts from the BG DLC. While using each size of propeller blades only once,
the Gauche:

Documenting this craft posed an extra challenge for me: it turns out I can either keep this plane steady during take off and landing - assuming you accept "nothing actually broke" as a working definition of "steady" - or I can hit <F1> to take screenshots. Trying to do both lead to lots of work for the clean-up crew. (But fortunately not to dead Kerbals.)

This craft doesn't want to stay still even at rest on the runway with with the brakes set.

Due to the asymmetric thrust it is recommended to carefully advance the throttle during take-off while trying to keep the craft steady. Once you are sure that you'll loose that fight pull back on the stick and increase the throttle (= prop. blade pitch) to two thirds. In nine times out of ten this results in getting the craft into the air without loosing too many parts in the process.

Once in the air the craft is comparatively easy to fly. It is consistent enough that you can trim it with manual trim into a fairly steady flight.

The second safest way to land it is to choose a wide flat area and land at a relatively high speed, about twice the take-off speed.

Once on the ground set the throttle to zero to use the propellers for reverse thrust.

 

Spoiler

 

The safest way to land is to fly over the target area and then get out and use your parachute to get down.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 9, 2020 by AHHans
Added name of the plane

[Klapaucius]

5 minutes ago, AHHans said:

Well, I take your word for it.

Here is my try to make a propeller powered plane with the parts from the BG DLC. While using each size of propeller blades only once!

Wow, thanks for resurrecting this!  Asymmetrical propellers make a whole new level!

 

 Only one thing, is that a probe core on the fuselage?   If it is, that technically disqualifies you, though considering what you did with the props, I think you still get major kudos.

[AHHans]

6 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

 Only one thing, is that a probe core on the fuselage? 

Yes, I included it because it can store 1000 EC. That's all it is used for (well, and as ballast). As you can see from the PAWs I disabled the reaction wheels on both cockpits and the probe core.

[Edit:] I also didn't find anything about probe cores in the rules in the first post.

Edited March 9, 2020 by AHHans

[Klapaucius]

2 minutes ago, AHHans said:

Yes, I included it because it can store 1000 EC. That's all it is used for (well, and as ballast). As you can see from the PAWs I disabled the reaction wheels on both cockpits and the probe core.

Then I congratulate you sir on a truly unique (if somewhat unsafe) entry! Please grab your badge.

[AHHans]

O.K. So here is the "Gauche 2", now with less battery and more fuel cell:

Flies even worse than the Gauche, but only slightly. And - of course - a single fuel cell is not enough to power the rotors.  But it does extend the battery lifetime.

37 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

Then I congratulate you sir on a truly unique (if somewhat unsafe) entry! Please grab your badge.

Thanks! And I want to confirm that no Kerbals were harmed during the development of the craft.

But what is the policy about probe cores? The rules only mention reaction wheels, but the cockpits have reaction wheels with the same strength.

[AHHans]

Well, may I present the

More Gauche

In many ways she handles nicer than her predecessor the Gauche,  she doesn't fight the controls in the same way and is much more willing to fly in a straight line. But once in the air she feels a bit underpowered, one has to actively manage the propeller blade pitch to get her up to speed, she is a lot less nimble when doing aerobatics, and will stall out if one looses too much speed. Maybe I need more solar cells.

But the better handling together with the sturdy undercarriage means that she is quite easy to land without breaking off pieces. Even landing on the runway is not a big deal with her. (Actually the biggest problem is not veering off the runway after landing.)

P.S. Th full imgur album for both craft is at: https://imgur.com/a/QOJX5mu

Edited March 10, 2020 by AHHans
corrected link

[ralanboyle]

Its big, it's dumb, its asymmetric, and it uses 1 or each type of engine. 

 

[AHHans]

@Klapaucius, about my question:

Quote

But what is the policy about probe cores?

In the rules it says:

On 10/21/2018 at 5:24 AM, Klapaucius said:

2. No reaction wheels or fly-by-wire.  Internal SAS only, and bonus kudos if you can fly it with SAS off.

Does this mean that using the reaction wheels in the - well, in one - cockpit is O.K. but that using extra reaction wheels is not allowed? That would explain your reaction, adding extra cockpits and probe-cores to add more reaction wheels would violate the spirit of that rule.

I though that means that no reaction wheels - internal in a cockpit, command pod, or explicit reaction wheel parts - are allowed and the only steering-assist allowed is the KSP SAS (as compared to mechjeb or whatever).

[AHHans]

A sneak peak of the latest iteration, the Most Gauche:

Now with complete mining equipment!

[vyznev]

So I realized that I never submitted anything for this challenge back when it was first posted. I remember trying to build an asymmetrical SSTO without using the Rapier engine, but finding it really hard to keep a stable heading while switching over to rocket propulsion in the upper atmosphere. Eventually I just gave up on that particular project and just kind of forgot about this thread.

Anyway, looking at all the crazy weird-looking contraptions people have designed here, I thought about trying to subvert the challenge by designing the most normal-looking and airworthy plane possible that would still technically qualify for this challenge. Thus, let me hereby present the Hapax — a plane built out of 18 parts, each of them unique:

It flies great with SAS off — in fact, it flies better with SAS off than on, as the stock SAS for some reason doesn't seem to like my use of the FAT-455 control surface as a tailplane, and tends to develop pitch oscillations. Or maybe it just doesn't like that fact that this plane has no reaction wheels at all — even the cockpit's built-in reaction wheel is disabled. With SAS off, the plane does have a slight tendency to roll spontaneously, but it's slow and easy to correct for.

Spoiler

 

A tiny tendency to veer to the right during takeoff can also be observed, but it tends to spontaneously correct itself as the plane picks up speed. In any case, the plane responds well to yaw inputs during takeoff, so staying on the runway should be no problem. Also, you don't really need much runway at all. At full throttle, this plane takes off like it was goosed.

Despite being optimized for low-speed flight, the massively overpowered Wheesley engine can easily push this plane supersonic, topping out at about Mach 1.8 in level flight. The large wing area also permits stable flight well above 10 km ASL. Of course, true Kerbal pilots are happy to know that the engine, overpowered as it already is for this plane, is easily replaceable with something even more powerful. Replacing the Wheesley with a Panther or a Whiplash may void the warranty, but that's surely a small price to pay for speed.

If you don't feel like pushing the envelope quite that far, the plane will take off and cruise just fine at low altitudes at just 10% to 20% throttle. For taxiing, the tiniest nudge of the throttle is more than sufficient. The minimum takeoff speed is something like 30–40 m/s, although I'd recommend at least 50 m/s for reasonably stable flight.

For landing, the plane has an advanced aerodynamic braking system. When activated using the standard B key, it deploys the ailerons and an additional dorsal flap as lift spoilers, as well as a tail-mounted airbrake. The braking system can be used both during the approach to shed excess velocity as well as on the ground to greatly reduce the stopping distance.

Water landing is possible at low speed, although not recommended. The plane cannot take off from water, but it can slowly and awkwardly crawl ashore if necessary. There's a significant tendency to veer to the left in water, but it can be counteracted with a combination of roll and yaw inputs.

 

In any case, this is a very nice and agile plane, capable of going both fast and slow as the situation demands. Flying perfectly well under physics warp, and with enough fuel to cruise for several hours, this might just become my new favorite survey plane.

Craft file: https://pastebin.com/Brg0YYy1

 

[vyznev]

By the way, while experimenting with asymmetrical propellers, as inspired by @AHHans's planes above, I noticed something funny:

Apparently the Breaking Ground propeller blades have their center of mass well outside the blade itself!

I assume this is a kluge intended to reduce instability and/or centripetal stresses — when mounted on an appropriately sized rotor, the offset CoM ends up pretty close to the rotor axis. It's as if all the blades had built-in invisible counterweights.

Conveniently, it also means that designing a well balanced asymmetrical propeller isn't nearly as hard as it might seem. I wonder if an asymmetrical helicopter could work…