EB-116C and XF-204R (Earth Aircraft Replicas)

[Goddess Bhavani]

Touted as a counterinsurgency \'flying battleship\' in the pattern of Dale Brown\'s EB-52 Megafortress, the EB-116C 'Sturmovik' is a specialist low altitude attack aircraft with no less than 3 railguns for anti-tank and anti-materiel strikes.

---

WARBIRDS REPLICA NO. 2

EB-116 Badger

Medium Bomber (A and B variants, similar to actual Tu-16 Badger)

Sturmovik (EB-116C)

---

And now we transition to multi-engine aircraft, and I thought a large twin engine design would be good room to play. Little did I know I would spend almost a week fixing the original design of the Tu-16 Badger bomber of Cold War fame, as the configuration was almost unflyable with a payload in KSP specifications.

So, I sort of improved it. First gradually, to enable it to carry an antiship missile training round, then optimising its airfoils for the unique Kerbalese atmosphere.

As demonstrated on Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_IEWN-s-is

Download Link

http://www./?xzklvjh4v6xfa51

---

WARBIRDS REPLICA NO. 1

XF-204R STARFIGHTER II

Atmospheric / Low Orbit interceptor

---

I thought to test the viability of Kerbalese atmospheric physics by feeding it a proven real-world aircraft design, the (in)famous Lockheed F-104 Starfighter, with its manned-missile design and extremely high wing loading. How would it behave in KSP? Can I fit a couple of air to ground missiles... maybe a railgun and rocket boosters for a one-shot improvised ASAT (anti satellite) solution?

Turns out it can. And the weaknesses of the F-104\'s design were faithfully reproduced in KSP much to my delight. But what matters is that it climbs like a rocket and packs a rapid punch!

---

Download Link

http://www./?71p3n4bb3byoo3e

Note: The above packages requires the following mods:

C7 Aviation Pack, Hardpoints, and Experimental parts

Front-firing Railgun

Wasp Missile

KSP 0.13.1

You may view the readme below for links to the above mods, design info, package manifest (download the ship below) etc.

Move / unzip the Ships files to the same folder in your KSP installation; same as all other mods, inspect the package before using it!

[Caesar15]

How dos that fly without being symmetracal

[Feragorn]

Not sure if troll...

... or just too lazy to either DL the .craft or build one himself.

It flies, but barely. Very workable though. Prone to spinning out at weird angles.

[Goddess Bhavani]

The real F104 wasn\'t exactly known for being a safe aircraft either. Spins and such were killers of inexperienced pilots.

Just use the ASAS to stabilise it during the climbout. Once you release ordnance, you can fly back home normally. Works as a short range point defence interceptor where high climb rate mattered.

Just imagine a 1960s scenario where radar guided weapons were still primitive and pilots relied on ground or AWACS controlled interception for aiming.

I intend to release \'improved\' versions of this model later on, give it something like an F-16XL wing.

That would create an interesting scenario where I\'m taking real-life aircraft and adapting them for improved performance in the Kerbalese atmosphere.

RE: Not symmetrical -

The 'downwards canted' wings give it stability and moves the centre of lift slightly downward, so the craft is able to carry a sizeable payload.

I forgot what is the correct term for this sort of wing design - anhedral? dihedral?

You can take one of the designs apart and try different wing angles. See how it affects flight performance with or without payload. Right now this \'realistic\' configuration is a bit lacking in lift and changes direction slowly.... and the real Starfighter isn\'t very maneuverable either, being a \'manned missile\' design.

Note how the payload -has to- be more or less within the centre of lift or else loss of control will occur. If the centre of gravity is too far from the centre of lift, once again the ship will porpoise and fly with an upside down attitude. That\'s why the assymetrical design works.

[Guest Flixxbeatz]

Speaking of safety, think about an airliner that

.

[Goddess Bhavani]

LOL that\'s the C-5 replica you were talking about yesterday.

What I do in similar situations where ASAS is overpoweringly effective and causing vibrations, decrease the number of control surfaces in the wing.

Also it might be that a more stable Galaxy replica could be created by mounting the wings to a hardpoint on top of the fuselage creating a \'high wing\' design. This puts the thrust axis in-line with the aircraft\'s centreline preventing asymetrical thrust from upsetting the ASAS.

As we know, the ASAS loves to overcompensate for little things. I hope for future aircraft fans\' sake that we have a proper trim function instead

ASAS works well for small ships but its overcorrection rips apart big ones.

[Guest Flixxbeatz]

And the fact that the ailerons and gimbals don\'t cooperate with each other...

[Goddess Bhavani]

I think for the C5\'s case you could put a SAS module at the place where the vibrations are being created. It does tend to damp out the problem.

The tail, or perhaps on each engine nacelle.

[Guest Flixxbeatz]

I think for the C5\'s case you could put a SAS module at the place where the vibrations are being created. It does tend to damp out the problem.

The tail, or perhaps on each engine nacelle.

Nope.

That thing just needs more struts. 8)

[Goddess Bhavani]

I\'m going to try a Tu-16 or Tu-22M3 just to get some experience with bigger birds and internal payload bays.

Then I can try a B-52 and see if it shares the same challenges with your C-5.

[Feragorn]

I\'d scale it up gradually, go for two engine fighters next, but you still have to get the in-line thrust issue. I\'ll see what I come up with.

[Goddess Bhavani]

It took me the whole of yesterday evening to get a multi-engine aircraft flyable. Initially intended to be a 4-engine, T-tail cargo aircraft it was completely unusable due to the limitations of the experimental nacelle engines. And the tail kept breaking. I\'ll have to wait for C7 to release the improved hardpoints, before I can attempt a large T-tail again.

So eventually it became a roughly Tu16 based tactical bomber with inspiration from a number of Earthly aircraft: -

1. General layout, side nacelles & turbojets from a Tu16 Badger (base template)

2. Wings from a C-17 Globemaster III, as the current C7 control surfaces do not act as ailerons; roll control is more easily managed by use of the rudders.

3. Tail from a fictional EB-52 Megafortress, with double the airfoils for KSP flyability.

4. B-47 Stratojet - because before I finalised the Tu16 I had 6 engines, 4 turbofans and 2 aerospikes in 6 nacelles.

On hindsight I made a Tu16 replica without even looking at a real Tu16 (never looked at Cold War era aircraft in over two decades!). However I gained valuable technical expertise in designing a medium bomber type ship.

I will re-do a proper Tu16 replica with mid-mounted wings attached directly to the fuselage nacelles on my next attempt tonight. I will have to use more than two engines most likely, as we don\'t have Russian style gigantic turbojets yet.

[Seanoog]

Speaking of safety, think about an airliner that

.

Your certainly not winning any safety standard programs with that plane. Was especially funny when it kept level even without the wing.

Wonderful plane OP, I must down load it shortly, to fly it once I have the mods installed.

I was very surprise, just how accurate KSP is, an how well balanced C7 parts are.

I have made planes, as faithful as possible to there real designs, an in KSP they handle very like there real life counter parts, certainly inherited there more unusal/extreme fly characteristics.

That each design was natorios for.

[Asmosdeus]

This should really be in spacecraft exchange...

Derp. Thought this was in roleplay. Too many tabs open.

[Polecat Industries]

Speaking of safety, think about an airliner that

.

And it didn\'t fall out of the sky....

[Goddess Bhavani]

I got a Tu16 replica flyable in a rather short time, once I knew the strengths and weaknesses of KSP\'s current aircraft components.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO-fLEqPdbc

As Russians seem to love, I made a huge antiship missile out of an SRB which... surprisingly launches and flies perfectly.

I found the basic design a bit too stable so I added a lifting body section under the engine nacelles with a small LERX (leading edge root extension) which made the low altitude maneuverability of this medium bomber very interesting.

The shareable Tu16 replica probably will come without LERXes as currently it\'s only flyable with a joystick. Let\'s just say, stability is too relaxed

[Joshmo]

Very well done video!

[Guest Flixxbeatz]

And it didn\'t fall out of the sky....

It eventually crashed about 10 minutes after the breakage =P

[Goddess Bhavani]

Here\'s wishing for a bail out function for aircraft. Or ejection seats. Then we can see cute little kerbinauts jumping out of the stricken C-5!

[Goddess Bhavani]

The Tu-16 replica series is complete.

From this:

Becomes this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_IEWN-s-is

The \'realistic\' configuration of the Tu16 barely flies in KSP, so gradual improvements were made to the engines, fuel tanks and planform. The 'Sturmovik' configuration, although loaded down with ordnance and enough fuel to cross a continent, flies like a dream.

[zombiphylax]

How are you getting wings to attach sideways to other wings? (E.g. the tail configuration on the F-104)

[Kryten]

It looks like he\'s using C7\'s hardpoints.

[Tim_Barrett]

Its a big plane with a heavy payload... but that agility will be it\'s deadliest flaw.

[Goddess Bhavani]

How are you getting wings to attach sideways to other wings? (E.g. the tail configuration on the F-104)

This is the (not so) secret winglet attachment rule!

Use two hardpoints on both sides of the tail fin to create a T tail. Note that for some fuselages they can\'t take the weight of a large T tail and will snap right off, so testing and structural reinforcement is key. For a bomber sized craft you will also need to attach struts to the ends of the horizontal stabilisers to prevent them flexing too much in flight (which will be a big issue if you\'re using C7\'s \'heavy duty\' control surfaces. That\'s the inspiration for the V tail, heh.

Problem is I could not do a big enough V tail for the huge slow Badger replica so it ended up a sort of double V.