BSC (Better Stock Crafts) - Aeris 3a - Yet another winner!

[FallingIntoBlack]

I ended up making a new plane after the challenge. I'd like to present, the F-108 Rapier.

This plane is simply a replica of the (X)F-108 Rapier fighter jet. The replica is currently unarmed.

Download it, and try it out for yourself! F-108 Rapier

EDIT: If I had made this before entering the Challenge, and posted it, I might have gotten more votes. Also, Jebediah seems to like it.

EDIT2: It's actually more of a Rapier-Aeris hybrid than a Rapier. If you want to see a better replica, look at the post below this one.

Edited September 14, 2013 by FallingIntoBlack

[Giggleplex777]

This is a Rapier:

[zekes]

Giggle, that is beautiful. You win this contest

[FallingIntoBlack]

@Giggleplex777: Show off.

[Xeldrak]

Well, on Falling's screenshot, all I can see is a engine ^^ But a Rapier should have two...

Little over an hour left btw...

Edited September 14, 2013 by Xeldrak

[Giggleplex777]

@Giggleplex777: Show off.

But I was trying to say that your XF-108 doesn't look like the actual plane.

[FallingIntoBlack]

@Xeldrak: I only gave it one engine because it's sort of a combination of an Aeris 3A and an F-108.

@Giggleplex777: It's not really supposed to. It's a sort of Rapier-Aeris Hybrid. That's why mine's got 2 rudders and a single engine. Also, if you look at the real one from above, you can see the engines. So, if you combine ours, you get a real Rapier.

[FallingIntoBlack]

@Xeldrak: I'd kind of like them to vote on my new plane as well, but I'm guessing that can't happen, can it?

[Xeldrak]

@Falling: nope, that not happening, Primary Elections are closed.

Primary elections are closen - the 24h final elections will start in about an hour

It was either top 5 or top 7 - I went with the smaller one.

The top five are:

AmpsterMan - SR2-"Ranger"

antbin - To Aeris Kerbal 3a

brobel - X-2 Swift

Mulbin - Jet 3

Xeldrak - CR Moloch

[Xeldrak]

Primary elections are done! Time for the grand finale! You can vote over

here!

Please drop a few line who you've voted for!

Final elections will run for 24 hours.

Also check the orignal posts for more pictures and stats on the finalists

Contenders

AmpsterMan - SR2-"Ranger"

antbin - To Aeris Kerbal 3a

brobel - X-2 Swift

Mulbin - Jet 3

Xeldrak - CR Moloch

[Xeldrak]

Now, concerning my vote:

I wont vote for myself.

Mulbin's and brobel's plane look awesome but I think thats just too much part clipping. Also, the Jet 03 suffers from trailstrike danger.

So, it's AmpsterMan or antbin. Took both planes for another ride.

Both are awesome planes, but the fact that the To Aeris Berbal 3a rolls when I try to yaw is a critical problem and a definite no-go for a trainer plane.

So, my vote goes to the SR2-Ranger

[antbin]

I personally think the smaller one I made might have been more fitting if I spent more time optimizing it.

Yes! I like the look of the Mk1 fuselage version more - seems more like a low altitude trainer. I would vote for that plane for sure.

Though brobel and Mulbin's planes are both gorgeous, the partclipping doesn't feel 'stock' to me.

And I won't vote for myself.

So that leaves Xeldrak's CR Moloch! I've cast a vote in the poll.

In defense of the 'To Aeris Kerbal', it does go left when the yaw left is pressed - just indirectly, via a slight roll. Since there's no wind in KSP yet, you don't strictly need rudder on landings. I reckoned limited yaw control was better than too much, especially if it led to contra-rolling (rolling right when you try to yaw left). That always gets me in trouble when trying to orbit SSTOs.

[zekes]

I vote brobel you have the best planes

[Xeldrak]

On a sidenote, I almost posted this:

Note the dual engines But if you think the Moloch is edgy....

[sploden]

Of the final five, I vote for "To Aeris Kerbal 3a."

My review is based on my experience flying only with a keyboard and without SAS, as a beginner likely would be. A beginner probably won't know about control groups either, so I've disregarded that. Furthermore, escape systems are unnecessary and cause a false sense of security. A crash that doesn't kill a Kerbal is still a failure. Trainer aircraft are supposed to be extremely easy to fly.

CR Moloch
	Positives:
		No tailstrike hazard.
		Responsive maneuvering while in normal flight.
		No phantom upward pitching.
		Isn't ugly.
		No part-clipping.
		Succeeded in landing on the runway.
		Hard to lose control while in normal flight.

	Negatives:
		Crashes after rolling just a few meters when attempting to take off without control input.
		Crashed while attempting to buzz the tower due to twitchiness.
		Hard to land due to twitchiness.
		COG shifts pretty far forward from the COP as fuel is used.

	Other comments:
	I assume the COP is placed as far back as it is to prevent loss of control due to how many control surfaces are on the plane. I feel that this is a craft built for joysticks and advanced fliers only.


Jet 03
	Positives:
		Rolls the entire runway without crashing when attempting to take off without control input.
		Looks good.
		Succeeded in landing safely on the runway.
		Successfully buzzed the tower.
		No phantom upward pitching.


	Negatives:
		Does not take off without control input. Crashes after the end of the runway.
		Extreme tailstrike hazard. Crashed when attempting to take off with elevator input.
		No dedicated ailerons; rolling is messy since the elevons are too far back.
		Excessive part-clipping.
		Elevons are partly directly behind the engine, which is illogical.


SR-2 Ranger
	Positives:
		Isn't ugly.
		Successfully buzzed the tower.
		Has a satisfying amount of control.
		Easy to line up for landing.
		Easy to land safely.
		No tailstrike hazard.

	Negatives:
		Kinda takes off without control input, but does a runway-skipping motion followed by crashing. Achieves 87m altitude before diving hard into the runway.
		Minimal part clipping; the front two wing surfaces pop in and out of visibility oddly.

	Other comments:
		Seems a little big for the Aeris 3a, but flies well and lands well, and is easy to control.


To Aeris Kerbal 3a
	Positives:
		Takes off without control input. (!!!!)
		Feels solid.
		Very successfully buzzed the tower.
		Very easy to land.
		No tailstrike hazard.
		Looks awesome from the backside. Baby got back.

	Negatives:
		Would like more elevator control.
		Phantom upward pitching became really annoying, even though it may be a good idea for beginners.
		Aft fuel tank doesn't match up to the middle fuel tank.
		Winglets are partially blocking the intakes - illogical.
		Parachute opens on takeoff.

	Other comments:
		Solar panel is unnecessary. Flew it at night, glided from max altitude to sea level with the SAS on to run down the battery; plenty of control left over after battery depletion. If power is needed for lights for landing at night in a future version, a generator would be better. However, landing lights still work with a depleted battery in this version.
		The abort system (when staging is fixed), while not salient for my voting method, is a very good one because it does not result in a crash.
		This is the strongest contender of these five planes.


X-2 Swift
	Positives:
		Looks good.
		Shows interesting design ideas.
		Very easy to fly.
		Successfully buzzed the tower.
		Feels solid.
		No tailstrike hazard.


	Negatives:
		Excessive part clipping.
		High part count.
		Control surfaces are clipped inside the wings and the tail; can't see them very well.
		Veers off the runway and crashes when attempting to take off without control input.
		Blew up twelve times when loading and/or reverting to launch. Seems to work better if it's loaded in the SPH before launching.
		Needs a wider wheelbase.

[Toastie_Buns]

Well played guys. I've been super damn busy with cooking (aka working) to actually pay attention to this but it was an awesome challenge.

In response to the dudes that had 'Dutch rolls' that's why my aircraft had super close gears. It seems the game operates by placing wheels a pixel this side or a pixel that side, resulting in CATASTROPHIC unbalancing when speeding down a runway at 100+m/s.

After hours of pain, I discovered you just have to play about with the wheelbase and eventually stability happens.

....Or just be lazy and put in on the fuselage like I did.

And my vote goes to Zekes. I know, he didn't make the final votes but I really wanted to do an open cockpit plane before I discovered how awesome Mk1 cockpits look from the inside.

I refuse to vote for anyone else on the grounds that none of you are my supervisor.

[Captain Sierra]

Now, I already have the entry ready, so let's actually get the Ravenspear back up for next week. I think mine was a pretty good contender for that.

[xoknight]

It might need wings first...

[Ekku Zakku]

AmpsterMan gets my vote, I voted for him in the preliminary vote as well. It's something that I would have made, given more time =3

For Xeldrak's, love it, but even as you said, it seems a bit edgy for a trainer.

Antbin's, probably my second choice, but I don't like the adapter fuel tank as it is like somebody else mentioned. I hate flat edges like that, even though you did pull it off well!

The rest: too much clipping, but I do like Mulbin's design.

Edited September 15, 2013 by Ekku Zakku

[Bean]

I voted for antbin, good design, brilliant write up, very very noob friendly.

[Rhomphaia]

For the finalists, I felt that AmpsterMan and Brobels designs were too large for the challenge, plus the X-2 swift had the whole exploding deal counting against it. Mulbins design looked great but the part clipping is a bit too advanced for a replacement stock craft; also the tail strike hazard and the fact that pitching up before you reach take off speeds causes the control surface to block the jet exhaust, puts it out of the running.

Between Xeldrax and Antbin there was not much in it in flight. In design both had made interesting choices with the CR Molochs reversed wings and the adapter on the To Aeris Kerbal 3a. Unlike some other voters I actually like the way that looks, and I feel Antbins design looks slightly better though still not much in it. The parachute and description on the To Aeris Kerbal 3a are the things that set it apart and so once again it gets my vote.

Although I didn't manage to come up with anything in time, after shamelessly ri... I mean... drawing inspiration from many of the entries, I would like to show my own take on it.

Download

I've been really impressed by the quality of the Voting stage of this challenge and would be grateful if anyone would take the time to offer a critique of this build.

[carazvan]

Did another round of flights in the 5 candidates and still felt like To Aeris Kerbal 3A was the best entry out of the 5 that works as a good Aeris 3 replacement

[antbin]

after shamelessly ri... I mean... drawing inspiration from many of the entries

That's the spirit! Great artists etc...

[Xeldrak]

Well, another 24 hours are over and:

antbin wins clearly with 13 votes! Tied on second place are Mulbin and brobel with eight votes! It was fun once again to see and talk about all your designs. Thank you guys for participation.

You can download the top3 in a single .zip >>HERE<<

[Giggleplex777]

I already have an entry for the Ravenspear mk3 challenge.

Edited September 15, 2013 by Giggleplex777