Kerbin Circumnavigation Challenge - Reloaded [New Rules Once More]

[Torham234]

So like this?

Ok, I managed to view that pic.

2 things:

- Zero horizontal control. The two canards you are using are immobile, so your craft is unable to steer or correct course. You can only roll and pitch up/down. This may be the reason for catastrophic failure, since the ASAS you are using will assume you can steer in all directions and may kill the craft.

- the air intakes are in front of COM. I am surprised you made it half way around. It must be a hell to fly. See my post about air intakes a few posts up.

[Flixxbeatz]

So, 0.20 is out and i've made it again, now Holy Jeb Circumnavigator flying around the world on new brand shining open seat.

-snip-

Strange construction on the airfield - Capsule for Jeb and ladder for boarding, jettisoned before start.

LOL.

That was just awesome!

[RocketTurtle]

Ok, I managed to view that pic.

2 things:

- Zero horizontal control. The two canards you are using are immobile, so your craft is unable to steer or correct course. You can only roll and pitch up/down. This may be the reason for catastrophic failure, since the ASAS you are using will assume you can steer in all directions and may kill the craft.

- the air intakes are in front of COM. I am surprised you made it half way around. It must be a hell to fly. See my post about air intakes a few posts up.

Oh, that's not the one I got half way with, it was this,

but after I get under 330 units of fuel (It carries 400), the aircraft starts yawing violently left and right until it gets itself into a flat spin.

One more thing.

HOW DO YOU MAKE IT LOOK SO EASY!?!

Edited May 27, 2013 by RocketTurtle

[Torham234]

hmm, that one looks much better. Maybe try doubling the tail. My craft for this challenge had 4 vertical + 2 angled controls. That is 6 control surfaces, precisely because I crashed a couple times on the landing approach due to lose of control.

Also, more info on the air intakes:

- too many; some people just love to spam ram intakes. I am a firm believer that you do not need bazillion ram intakes to make anything fly. I have a working space plane with zero ram intakes, and it works fine.

- too few; having only a few intakes limits your top speed at high altitude. This may be good, for example this challenge is well suited for slower, efficient craft. However having too few, you may be unable to keep the desired altitude for the craft.

Unfortunately finding the correct amount of air intakes is mostly done by testing. It varies from craft to craft, and it varies in the altitude the jet is designed to operate. At the ground, at 25 km, at 35 km, they are all totally different, and require different amount of air intakes.

Finally:

If your jet is very unstable in the desired cruising altitude, there are usually 2 reasons.

- not enough wing surface/control surfaces. The slower and higher you fly, the more wings you need. Failing this the jet will be simply unable to fly at the desired altitude and will either descend to lower altitude or spin and crash.

- not enough speed. The faster you fly, the less wings you need. The other option for unstable craft is to increase your cruising speed. This may require more air intakes or more engines. Both will increase your fuel consumption as well, and that means more weight. Designing a well performing aircraft takes a long time and many, many test flights...

[Wyseman76]

Oh, that's not the one I got half way with, it was this,

but after I get under 330 units of fuel (It carries 400), the aircraft starts yawing violently left and right until it gets itself into a flat spin.

One more thing.

HOW DO YOU MAKE IT LOOK SO EASY!?!

It's not easy for sure, but I wonder as I have never mounted both an A.S.A.S. and an avionics package together have you tried only having one or the other. While, they are very similar they function quite differently I wonder if they conflict. Again, I have never mounted them together on a craft.

[Vaisman]

I agree. I ordinary build single engine aircrafts for high speed/altitude fly. Single engine means no flat spin and not so much fuel. For this challenge i've used two intakes, engine flamed out about 24500 meters - good in this case. If i need faster craft, i add intakes and fly higher, but more intakes produce much more drag.

About wings - my fastest craft has only 2 delta wings and 2 standard canards.

[Torham234]

It's not easy for sure, but I wonder as I have never mounted both an A.S.A.S. and an avionics package together have you tried only having one or the other. While, they are very similar they function quite differently I wonder if they conflict. Again, I have never mounted them together on a craft.

I did. The ASAS superseeds the avionics. when you turn on SAS control, the ASAS takes over and locks your heading. When you turn it off, it turns off the avionics as well. Therefore there is no reason to have both on one craft. Its either or.

PS: Its not easy. It takes a lot of patience, trial and error, and a through understanding of the game mechanics. I simply like to make planes...

[RocketTurtle]

Ugh... Again...

[Torham234]

Ugh... Again...

hmm...

If I had to guess... I think your speed is too low. At 20 km+, with that sort of wings and weight, you should be flying at least ~ 900+ m/s. Ditch the parachutes, they do nothing on this craft (just use breaks after touch down).

My plane looks very similar to yours...

see how many vertical surfaces I have?

PS: when linking the image, click on the IMG button, rather than DIRECT, that way they will display properly...

[RocketTurtle]

hmm...

If I had to guess... I think your speed is too low. At 20 km+, with that sort of wings and weight, you should be flying at least ~ 900+ m/s. Ditch the parachutes, they do nothing on this craft (just use breaks after touch down).

My plane looks very similar to yours...

see how many vertical surfaces I have?

PS: when linking the image, click on the IMG button, rather than DIRECT, that way they will display properly...

Thanks, and the parachutes were for when I balls the landing up.

[KinkyFerrets]

Woopwoop. I am not a creative man, but give me a challenge, and I'll build a mediocre attempt at it that halfway succeeds

Edit: I too, have 4 vertical control surfaces. You can see the top 2, but the other two are under the wings, about a meter further forward. I find that have the rudders above and below reduces the roll tendency during yaw manuevers.

Edited May 27, 2013 by KinkyFerrets

[RocketTurtle]

Ah... Just got 3/4's there and went 25,023 on accident... Well I'm done with failure... so I give up.

[Torham234]

Ah... Just got 3/4's there and went 25,023 on accident... Well I'm done with failure... so I give up.

yeah, that happened to me once or twice. After that I just assumed my max height is 24 km, and I tried to fly at that to give myself a buffer of 1 km. I agree that the main skill this challenge requires is patience not to screw up your flight. Once you have a working design, its basically "can I face yet another stress filled hour of watching altimeter and air intakes". Yoystick made it easier for me, the more intuitive controls meant that I could run at warp 3 most of the way, thus reducing the attempt to something like 20 min.

Kinkyferrets (huh??), that looks interesting design. I think you can ditch all the fuel lines, though, wing surfaces are fuel feed capable.

[KinkyFerrets]

Kinkyferrets (huh??), that looks interesting design. I think you can ditch all the fuel lines, though, wing surfaces are fuel feed capable.

That I cannot. Otherwise, she spits sparks on the runway. As far as the design, I wanted to keep all the fuel in line with the unloaded CoM for easier endurance flying.

[Flixxbeatz]

-snip-

Woopwoop. I am not a creative man, but give me a challenge, and I'll build a mediocre attempt at it that halfway succeeds

Edit: I too, have 4 vertical control surfaces. You can see the top 2, but the other two are under the wings, about a meter further forward. I find that have the rudders above and below reduces the roll tendency during yaw manuevers.

hmm, I'll let the subassembly loader in. welcome to the club!

[palker]

Completed the challenge though I was using some addons namely Kerbal engineering system and Alarm clock. Accept it or don't whatever.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/32334-Round-Kerbin-in-60-minutes?p=399077#post399077

[Flixxbeatz]

Completed the challenge though I was using some addons namely Kerbal engineering system and Alarm clock. Accept it or don't whatever.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/32334-Round-Kerbin-in-60-minutes?p=399077#post399077

Well done! But KES...

[the_bT]

Griffin XR ready to go:

I got rid of all useless parts (nosecones, antenna, some struts) and the drop-tanks to comply with new rules and maximize range. Drop tanks were replaced with normal non drop-able tanks. Messed up ballance a bit, but managed to fix that after takeoff by pumping some fuel about.

Once around the planet I noticed I still had almost half the fuel left, so I went for a second lap.

Double circumnavigation done, landed on runway:

Time 2:08:13

Almost blew it a least 4 times... I still can't believe 8 engines do run on 2/3 throttle and 0.01 air...

Edited May 28, 2013 by the_bT

[Flixxbeatz]

-snip-

Just wow, double circumnavigation. Good thing you've got the time and patience to pull it out well done!

[SuperFastJellyfish]

Almost blew it a least 4 times... I still can't believe 8 engines do run on 2/3 throttle and 0.01 air...

AFAIK, the intakeair resource isn't correctly displayed for multi-engines.

[GROOV3ST3R]

Double circumnavigation is all nice and fun... what about double circumnavigation on one tank of fuel? :3 I wonder if its possible.

[the_bT]

Double circumnavigation is all nice and fun... what about double circumnavigation on one tank of fuel? :3 I wonder if its possible.

You could use one of the big orange tanks and drain the oxidizer before takeoff, shouldn't be much heavier than the jet fuel only tanks (I think). Technically one tank of fuel

[Goozeman]

Here's my entry, the Global Flier 2.

Climbout.

screenshot7 by The Aviator 11, on Flickr

Result

screenshot4 by The Aviator 11, on Flickr

[Colonel_Panic]

This sounded fun until the no plugins part. I'm all up for the challenge of designing a plane that can circumnavigate kerbin, but not for the tediousness of actually flying it the whole way around by hand. It could take hours.

[KinkyFerrets]

The average time appears to be an hour. I took about 3 hours total to do mine, as I'd pause and eat, or go watch some TV then come back.