KC-505 Medium Airliner (Stock)

[KestrelAerospace]

The KC-505 'Barn Owl' was created as a reliable, cheap, and relatively simple airliner for use in ferrying 22 Kerbals on medium to long-haul routes. The Kestrel Civil Division opted for a very part-minimal design whilst trying to maintain as many features as possible. The end result is 74 parts, capable of carrying 2300 liquid fuel, and with a maximum range of over 3000 kilometres. The KC-505 cruises at a leisurely 230m/s at 6700m above sea level, and thanks to both speedbrakes and flaps can operate out of small or unprepared airstrips. Feel free to post any feedback and criticisms you might have about this craft, and enjoy using it for all your Kerbal-carrying shenanigans. 

 

Download it at KerbalX: https://kerbalx.com/Kestrel/KC-505-Barn-Owl

Edited November 5, 2018 by KestrelAerospace

[Chel]

I will be using this in my future missions! Thanks : )

[KestrelAerospace]

3 hours ago, The_Cat_In_Space said:

I will be using this in my future missions! Thanks : )

Glad to hear it! Let me know how it handles them!

[DualDesertEagle]

The wings and CG seem to be awfully far forward. I smell tail strike. 

U may wanna put more weight to the rear and move the CG and wings back a bit to increase the tail clearance at an angle with the nose gear off the ground.

EDIT: I've made a crude edit to the side view of the plane to show the difference:

 

It may not look like much, but for a plane that's a pretty noticable change in its angle of attack and, as we all know, the way from an undamaged part to an exploded part (as long as it's not a landing gear) is MUCH shorter even when it touches the runway ever so slightly at speed.

Edited November 6, 2018 by DualDesertEagle

[KestrelAerospace]

53 minutes ago, DualDesertEagle said:

The wings and CG seem to be awfully far forward. I smell tail strike. 

U may wanna put more weight to the rear and move the CG and wings back a bit to increase the tail clearance at an angle with the nose gear off the ground.

Thanks for the feedback. I'll look into it. 

[KestrelAerospace]

1 hour ago, DualDesertEagle said:

The wings and CG seem to be awfully far forward. I smell tail strike. 

U may wanna put more weight to the rear and move the CG and wings back a bit to increase the tail clearance at an angle with the nose gear off the ground.

EDIT: I've made a crude edit to the side view of the plane to show the difference:



 

It may not look like much, but for a plane that's a pretty noticable change in its angle of attack and, as we all know, the way from an undamaged part to an exploded part (as long as it's not a landing gear) is MUCH shorter even when it touches the runway ever so slightly at speed.

After some testing, I was completely unable to induce a tailstrike on level/semi-level surfaces with the original design. It seems that there simply isn't enough control authority at takeoff speed to force the tail into the ground before the craft lifts off.

The wings and CoM are also far forward to give better pitch control from the elevator (although I know this isn't the most elegant solution.) So I am slightly retouching the gear to move it back a bit for safety and to widen it so it handles rough surfaces better. Thank you for your detailed input!

 

 

 

 

[DualDesertEagle]

On 11/6/2018 at 1:25 PM, KestrelAerospace said:

It seems that there simply isn't enough control authority at takeoff speed to force the tail into the ground before the craft lifts off.

As hard as it may be to believe when looking at the position of the wheels relative to the fuselage, that could actually mean u've got the main landing gear too far aft of the CG. In this case this prevents tail strike on take-off, but on landing u still have to be careful to land at a shallow angle of attack coz the main landing gear of course only takes effect after touchdown.

 

If it was me I'd just clip a full ore tank into the tail (and maybe add some more cabins at the rear), adjust the position of the wings and landing gear accordingly and see what that does. My guess is that the higher angle of attack allowed by the better clearance reduces the required landing speed and having the main wheels closer to the CG will get rid of the elevator authority problem.

Edited November 7, 2018 by DualDesertEagle