Breaking Ground DLC aircraft challenge

[Klapaucius]

MAY 30th is only a few days away...

 

Build a gnarly aircraft using new DLC parts: hinges, servos, hydraulic cylinders, perhaps even robotic arms?? (We'll see if that works or not, but if things explode in the process, well that is very Kerbal, isn't it?)  And if you crash and burn, no worries, you will be contributing to scientific knowledge as long as you are taking readings with the new Grand Slam Passive Seismometer.  Extra bonus snacks for anyone who includes Seismometer readings from their fails.  Video and photos appreciated.

 

There is no competition, no leaderboard and no restrictions other than you need to incorporate new DLC parts into your plane. The only other rule is that it needs to actually fly and land.   The more parts you put into one plane the better.  Taking a cue from @322997am's challenge, if you can, upload your craft somewhere like KerbalX or dropbox so others can try it out.  If enough planes are shared, we can even get all the entries lined up on the runway for a group photo. 

 

I'm putting this up now so you have a few days to ponder and we can hit the ground running on May 30th.  Seasoned aircraft builders and newbies alike welcomed and encouraged!

 

Post pictures or video. I'll make a badge for everyone who submits something in the first two weeks of June.

 

 

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by Klapaucius

[Rocket In My Pocket]

This DLC is making me feel old, pretty soon I'll be like;

"Back in my day we made stock hinges, in the snow, up hill both ways, and we liked it!"

Looking forward to it though, and this great challenge!

[Mikenike]

@Klapaucius, cool challenge.

[Flying dutchman]

First thing i will do is make a turboprop. One that doesn't explode.

[Kergarin]

Does this one count?

Just a first test of Electric Motor power 

 

[Klapaucius]

5 hours ago, Kergarin said:

Does this one count?

Just a first test of Electric Motor power 

 

Of course!  That is very cool. 

[Klapaucius]

This is not at all what I expected to build the first day, but after some disappointing prop failures, I needed a small success.. I'm not really a replica kind of guy (and this is not much of a replica), but this was too hard to pass up.

 

X-WING!

I think a proper B-Wing is within the realm of the possible now.

 

 

[sturmhauke]

22 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

I think a proper B-Wing is within the realm of the possible now.

Dude. DUDE. Duuuude.

[Thor Wotansen]

I did this yesterday.  It handles surprisingly well.

KerbalX link

[Kergarin]

Evolved my coaxial helicopter to this so far 

 

[1101]

First 'nice' design:

There really isn't much speed in this thing.  Was trying to use a P-38 style design with props rotating opposite directions, as KSP does seem to give a realistic torque effect.  Also really nose heavy and gets through the batteries in about 90s, uses fuel cells to give endurance.

[Klapaucius]

3 hours ago, Kergarin said:

Evolved my coaxial helicopter to this so far 

 

I love this. Especially the tucked in wheels.

[1101]

Experiments with the P-38 thing led to some improvements in speed, but testing of smaller motors gave this (Proof of concept, about 5-6 minutes of electricity, no fuel cells):

Somehow it was able to fly through the big R&D bridge:

 

Amusingly, landing turned out to be too much of a challenge.  Approach started on the opposite bearing to this:

[sturmhauke]

I've been experimenting with stacks of rotors to get extra torque, and attempted to reinforce it with a stock bearing to keep the top of the stack in place. But even so, I can't seem to break 100 m/s before the bearing slips and the prop blades start wobbling. But I can at least slow down and get it to pop back into place - usually with a stock prop once the bearing slips it's just broken.

[1101]

27 minutes ago, sturmhauke said:

I've been experimenting with stacks of rotors to get extra torque, and attempted to reinforce it with a stock bearing to keep the top of the stack in place. But even so, I can't seem to break 100 m/s before the bearing slips and the prop blades start wobbling. But I can at least slow down and get it to pop back into place - usually with a stock prop once the bearing slips it's just broken.

Have you tried changing the rotor pitch?  I made a similar addition to my multi fuselage design, but by far the biggest improvement was to change the pitch of the blades.  I got up to 101m/s on a design that previously got 80 or so.  Best to constantly change it during flight, the altered pitch produces basically no thrust at low speeds.

 

[ChaoticPheonix]

1 hour ago, 1101 said:

Have you tried changing the rotor pitch?  I made a similar addition to my multi fuselage design, but by far the biggest improvement was to change the pitch of the blades.  I got up to 101m/s on a design that previously got 80 or so.  Best to constantly change it during flight, the altered pitch produces basically no thrust at low speeds.

I actually used the servos to create variable pitch blades on my test aircraft. Works like a charm. I've found that the best angles for takeoff are somewhere between 42-60 degrees, whereas around 18 degrees is better for cruising. The difference is incredible. Imgur album below.

https://imgur.com/a/GEdG9

[Frozen_Heart]

Got an entry.  Duel prop autogyro which seems to fly pretty well.

 

 

 

[Klapaucius]

2 hours ago, Frozen_Heart said:

Got an entry.  Duel prop autogyro which seems to fly pretty well.

 

 

 

Nice landing!

[sturmhauke]

10 hours ago, 1101 said:

Have you tried changing the rotor pitch?  I made a similar addition to my multi fuselage design, but by far the biggest improvement was to change the pitch of the blades.  I got up to 101m/s on a design that previously got 80 or so.  Best to constantly change it during flight, the altered pitch produces basically no thrust at low speeds.

 

8 hours ago, ChaoticPheonix said:

I actually used the servos to create variable pitch blades on my test aircraft. Works like a charm. I've found that the best angles for takeoff are somewhere between 42-60 degrees, whereas around 18 degrees is better for cruising. The difference is incredible. Imgur album below.

https://imgur.com/a/GEdG9

I hadn't thought of using smaller rotors for variable pitch control, but that's a cool idea. But I did bind the prop blades to an action group to toggle deploy mode on or off. Default angle is 45 degrees, deployed is 15ish (I haven't calculated it exactly).

Still, someone around here made a supersonic rotor prop, so it's obviously possible. I haven't figured it out yet though.

[Jestersage]

10 hours ago, Frozen_Heart said:

Got an entry.  Duel prop autogyro which seems to fly pretty well.

 

 

 

So how does that RW-prop works? Do you just mount the RW onto motor and then mount the fins?

[neistridlar]

23 hours ago, sturmhauke said:

I've been experimenting with stacks of rotors to get extra torque,

Putting rotors in series shouldn't increase torque, only no-load rpm. This is because  of newton's 3. Law. Basically each rotor needs to counteract the torque from the next one in line.

[sturmhauke]

2 hours ago, neistridlar said:

Putting rotors in series shouldn't increase torque, only no-load rpm. This is because  of newton's 3. Law. Basically each rotor needs to counteract the torque from the next one in line.

Yeah, I dropped my prop engine down to one rotor per set of propeller blades, and it was much more stable. I'm not entirely sure KSP models the phenomenon you're talking about correctly, but at least I don't have to worry about crazy bearings and death wobbles.

[Tapeta]

After three days of constant tweaking and tuning I finally managed to converge to final iteration of this plane. Sweet mother of tentacles, the kraken visited me so many times (that's why I am calling this plane the Summoner). I was fighting with jumpy landing legs, my wing fell off during landing, engine mounts were doing breakdance and two ladders was able to reduce my maximum speed by one mach.

My intention was to build aeroplane which is VTOL capable, can fold its tail and wings and despite of that can achieve speed 2.2 Mach without afterburner and Mach 3 with afterburner.

craft file on kerbalx:

https://kerbalx.com/crafts/53762/edit

 

 

[Mignear]

Something that is simpler and incorporates only a single part from the DLC.

https://kerbalx.com/Mignear/F-14-Replica-GA-14VSW

Edited June 4, 2019 by Mignear

[neistridlar]

Definitively possible to go faster than 100m/s:

For the props I'm using two rotors, but in parallel, not in series. So, one rotor is fixed at the back, and the other is fixed at the front, by struts. That way they work together, but don't rotate each other, if that makes sense? I have tested with and without the second motor engaged, and it definitively makes a difference. It's all powered by 8 fuel cells in the fairing in the back. Also I used small servos for pitch trim, so the entire horizontal stabilizer moves, like on airliners.