Naval Aviation Challenge

[chadgaskerman]

 

The aim of this challenge is simple, create a naval aircraft capable of full carrier operations.

 

Rules;

1. Hard part limit of 70.

2. Maximum stall speed of 65m/s.

3. Take up a stowed foot print of less than 14m long by 8m wide.

Inspiration

Spoiler

 

Further Guidance;

DLC's are allowed and encouraged

VTOL, STOL, SSTO, Helicopter. If it's Naval oriented I want it

No Part Mods

 

Optional Contracts

Fixed Wing

Spoiler

Contract No.001A

By Chadgaskerman

 

With the exponential increase in both Aircraft Carrier and Aeronautical construction techniques, a new High speed scout and light science plane is required for carrier duty. The aircraft should have a minimum range of 1000km with a preference towards a 'Supercruise' capability and a top speed of at least Mach 2. Stowed Dimensions should not exceed 14 metres of length by 8 metres wide by 4.5 metres Tall. For inspiration look towards the NATF concepts for both the F-22 and YF-23 as well as the next generation of Chinese and Russian Naval Fighters.

Spoiler

Contract No.003A

By Chadgaskerman

 

To complement the current Fleet air wing, the Fleet has requested a high speed VIP transport Capable of transporting 4-8 Kerbals at least 750km, preferably being subsonic however an argument could be made for a supersonic transport.Stowed Dimensions should not exceed 12 metres of length by 6 metres wide by 4.5 metres Tall. For inspiration, Look towards aircraft such as the S-3 Viking, Fairey Gannet and S-2 Tracker.

Spoiler

Contract No.003B

By Chadgaskerman

 

Using the same airframe as contract No.003A with some modifications, This aircraft should function as primarily an airborne laboratory as well as an airborne Relay for beyond the horizon communication. The aircraft should be able to carry 2-4 Kerbals with the remaining space of the crew cabins being used for storage of science and communications equipment. For inspiration, Look towards aircraft such as the S-3 Viking, Fairey Gannet and S-2 Tracker as well as other electronic warfare and ASW variants.

Spoiler

Contract No.006

By Chadgaskerman

 

Due to the Fleet's choice to field Lighter carriers than previous generations, the pilots aren't too comfortable on landing a full sized strike aircraft on what to them, is a glorified barge that can barely fit a single aircraft. Of course we know better but there can't be any naval aviation without the aviators. Create a light V/STOL aircraft that weighs no more than 15 tons fitting 1 or 2 pilots. Dimensions should not exceed 12 metres of length by 8 metres wide by 4.5 metres Tall. For inspiration look to the infamous Harrier jump jet, F-35B and various prototype aircraft created be the now BAe conglomerate.

Rotary Wing

Spoiler

Contract No.002

By Chadgaskerman

 

With the need for short range transport to unprepared landing sites, the Fleet has requested a new High speed transport Helicopter that can transport researchers and/or deployable equipment to a research site up to 150km away from the Aircraft Carrier. Stowed Dimensions should not exceed 8 metres of length by 5 metres wide by 4 metres Tall. For inspiration, look to Aircraft such as the Sikorsky S-97 and S-72 as well as the Eurocopter X³. 

Spoiler

Contract No.005

By Chadgaskerman

The Fleet has requested a medium range transport capable of transporting 4-8 Mission critical personnel or some specialist equipment to and from the carrier group. The Aircraft must be able to take off and land vertically, with a minimum cruise speed of 150m/s for long haul flights. Stowed Dimensions should not exceed 14 metres of length by 8 metres wide by 4.5 metres Tall. For inspiration look to aircraft such as the CV-22B and the AW-609

 

SSTO's

Spoiler

Contract No.001B

By Chadgaskerman

 

Using the same airframe as contract No.001A with some modifications, This SSTO should be able to enter LKO with enough DeltaV to rendezvous with a space craft in orbit, and then deorbit and land back on the carrier ready for refuelling. Stowed Dimensions should not exceed 14 metres of length by 8 metres wide by 4.5 metres Tall.

Spoiler

Contract No.004

By Chadgaskerman

A hole in the Fleet Air Arm's inventory has been discovered, Carrier to Station transport. The aircraft should be able to carry 2-4 Kerbals with the remaining space of the crew cabins being used for storage of science and communications equipment. This SSTO should be able to enter LKO with enough DeltaV to rendezvous with a space craft or station in orbit, Refuel from there, and return to the carrier. Stowed Dimensions should not exceed 14 metres of length by 8 metres wide by 4.5 metres Tall.

Formatting a Contract Aircraft

 

(Contract No.)

(Aircraft type)

(Author/s)

(Craft Name)

(Description)

(Pictures - make sure they are spoilered)

(Craft DL - preferably KerbalX)

Obviously you don't have to create a naval aircraft exactly to these specifications, nor are you obligated to. Work in progress pictures are highly encouraged and I look forward to seeing what you are going to create.

Edited September 21, 2021 by chadgaskerman

[Philae_Rosetta2021]

Okay, I'll give it a go.

[Philae_Rosetta2021]

Here is my first attempt, fully stock. 

It is small, fast, and scarily manoeuvrable. You can only stall if you go slower than 35m/s, but even then, it is so light that you can recover it very easily. It even surprised me.

https://imgur.com/a/UiNgmsw

Here is my first bomber, also very manoeuvrable.

https://imgur.com/a/oqK2Wxm

Edited May 5, 2021 by Philae_Rosetta2021

[Pds314]

Would using FAR to make realistic aero be reasonable? You can get away with a lot in stock KSP.

[chadgaskerman]

6 hours ago, Pds314 said:

Would using FAR to make realistic aero be reasonable? You can get away with a lot in stock KSP.

So long as it looks fairly reasonable in terms of realism I'm fine

[Hotel26]

On 5/5/2021 at 8:02 PM, Philae_Rosetta2021 said:

Here is my first attempt, fully stock. 

This is a brilliant little trainer for carrier landings!  I hope you will publish it.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Hotel26

[Pds314]

20 hours ago, chadgaskerman said:

So long as it looks fairly reasonable in terms of realism I'm fine

Well it'll be more realistic than stock. =p.

I do have a stock aircraft that might be worth trying though. It's current duty is stock air to air missile tests. Though the missiles are honestly a bit overweight for practical combat, and too slow below 5 km to hit supersonic targets at anything that's not basically point blank range. At high altitude they've got the reverse problem that they often miss the target even when it's not maneuvering.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Pds314

[Pds314]

Technical difficulties please stand by.

[Pds314]

Wait... How... How am I supposed to land on it now?

[Philae_Rosetta2021]

@Hotel26, what do mean by publishing it?

A craft file, or a run down of how to make it?

[chadgaskerman]

51 minutes ago, Pds314 said:

Wait... How... How am I supposed to land on it now?

Did you toggle rigid attachment on the runway?

if so, that causes things like this to happen, i personally just use autostrut to heaviest

[Pds314]

1 minute ago, chadgaskerman said:

Did you toggle rigid attachment on the runway?

if so, that causes things like this to happen, i personally just use autostrut to heaviest

I have both. Maybe I will disable rigid. For now I just turn unbreakable joints on any time I plan to load or unload it from 300 meter range.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Pds314

[Pds314]

Managed to take off and land again! I dub this stock + BG aircraft the Fi-2 Cypher.

It has a top speed of just over mach without afterburner and a temperature-limited top speed of 800-950 m/s at sea level with afterburner. Top speed at altitude is drag-limited and is similar.

Empty weight is 5.0 tonnes.
Stall speed with 1.5 tonnes of fuel is around 30 m/s. More fuel and ordinance = higher stall speed. Note that post-stall maneuverability provided by TVC allows easy control of the aircraft in stall, but Cobra landings are discouraged as they will likely break the engine.
Minimum takeoff distance is roughly 30 meters. This is not particularly difficult to achieve.
Minimum stopping distance is also 30 meters. Note that this is hard to achieve in practice.
Practical stopping distance is closer to 50 m. This carrier deck is 130 m, so it could reasonably take off and land again if you use full afterburner.

 

Maneuverability is generally excellent. High roll rate and will barely avoid stall in pitch up maneuvers. I haven't d turn time or radius but they are quite small.

It has a high-friction tailstrike skid which has a crash tolerance of 60 m/s. Export variant has non-DLC steel skid with crash tolerance of 80 m/s. Do not perform tailstrikes above this speed.

Tailstrikes at excessive AOA can still break the engine.

It is possible for the wings to rip at high mach and low altitude in an overly aggressive turn. This is inconsistent however. The lower speed this has been observed at is 650 m/s. This behavior WILL result in total loss of the airframe and GLOC'd pilot may not be able to eject in time if G limits are enabled.


 

 

Edited May 8, 2021 by Pds314

[Hotel26]

Why, KerbalX.com, of course!!

Ha!  I see you have an account: https://kerbalx.com/Philae_Rosetta2021

Good man.

                                                                             

In other news, I made my first carrier!!  Well, more of a "landing target", in actuality, since it is not self-propelled.  It just needs a bullseye decal on the deck, methinks.

(Sorry, I know this is all "off topic".  I'll back off.)

[Pds314]

9 minutes ago, Hotel26 said:

Why, KerbalX.com, of course!!

Ha!  I see you have an account: https://kerbalx.com/Philae_Rosetta2021

Good man.

                                                                             

In other news, I made my first carrier!!  Well, more of a "landing target", in actuality, since it is not self-propelled.  It just needs a bullseye decal on the deck, methinks.

(Sorry, I know this is all "off topic".  I'll back off.)

Nice! A 12x70 meter deck runway is nice and wide too. Mine is 130 by 10 and I have to say the risk of going off the side is significant if you veer when braking. Also mine can move about 62 m/s with 4 goliaths for propulsion. I might actually design a new carrier though from some stuff I've learned about KSP since I made this one awhile back.

 

I do wonder if anyone has figured out a good way to do something functionally resembling an arrestor hook and catapult. Maybe something with pistons?

Edited May 8, 2021 by Pds314

[Hotel26]

I tell my guys if they can't stop in 12 meters they don't get to park on my 'boat'.

Here's the plan view:  (Updated for @Pds314

Edited May 8, 2021 by Hotel26

[Pds314]

Just now, Hotel26 said:

I tell my guys if they can't stop in 12 meters they don't get to park on my 'boat'.

How is that plane for actual stall speed and stopping distance?

[Pds314]

Might make a new carrier and then some heavier fighters and try a medium bomber. One thing I'm not sure of is how to deal with the length requirement. My existing plane is 12.7 meters and it definitely isn't a "big" aircraft.

 

Come to think of it, a carrier-compatible tanker really wouldn't be a bad idea would it. Being able to air to air refuel carrier planes from a carrier plane could be pretty useful.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Pds314

[Hotel26]

1 hour ago, Pds314 said:

How is that plane for actual stall speed and stopping distance?

Philae_Rosetta2021 had it setup for 35 m/s but my rev'eng version ("Rosetta") has a stall speed of 44 m/s.  But...

I did get it stopped.  I flew the inbound, knowing the carrier heading and I maintained 48-50 m/s, not far above stall.  50m off the deck.  And my version has a couple of chutes on it.  I threw them 20-30 m before the deck.

I may put my Sudden Arrester System (a.k.a. Sepatrons) on it or use a slightly bigger wing design.

[chadgaskerman]

You're all missing a very simple solution in the form of 200% brakes

[Pds314]

13 minutes ago, chadgaskerman said:

You're all missing a very simple solution in the form of 200% brakes

I use 200% brakes. 'Chutes might actually be a good system for some larger fighters and bombers and especially if for some reason a tanker is landing with fuel. Though I suppose tankers will likely use either Wheesley or if that's too anemic, Goliath engines. I personally think Goliath would just be too crazy for something 14x8, and that putting that extra several tonnes into folding wings or something is probably better.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Pds314

[Hotel26]

9 minutes ago, Pds314 said:

I use 200% brakes.

And I always use them unless there are good reasons not to.  So, on Rosetta, I have 200% on the rear and 100% on the nose.  I tried 200% on the nose but with the layout of this undercart, hard braking causes it to tumble.  (In this case, I actually wanted 200% merely to hold the craft until the engines had fully spooled.  Turns out that 100% on the nose and 200% rear while stationary will hold it (almost) on full dry power and one triggers the afterburners instantly exactly upon releasing the brakes.)

Edited May 8, 2021 by Hotel26

[Pds314]

The Fi-2 Cypher on my new carrier. The 240 meter deck is *extremely* generous.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Pds314

[Pds314]

New aircraft. Fi-4c "Cryptic"

It's a two engine stealth fighter prototype with foldable wings. The aerodynamics are suboptimal at the moment but it is still very fun to fly.

Length: 14.0 meters.
Width (folded wings): 6.1 meters.
Wingspan: 12.1 meters.
Stall speed: less than 30 m/s.
Mass: 9310 kg with pilot.
Parts: 70

Top speed: just subsonic at sealevel without afterburners. Still testing with altitude and afterburners.
Maneuverability: Can pull >9 G above 110 m/s. Can pull 5 G at 60 m/s.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Pds314

[Pds314]

Next up: I think this thing needs a little truck to move the planes around indoors... which means... it needs a carrier-compatible cargo aircraft to deliver the truck.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Pds314