Azimech Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Castille7 said: It's looking like it, the Trekkie Family for sure! Yeah, this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castille7 Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 4 minutes ago, Azimech said: Yeah, this one. Well I would think we look a little more handsome than some of these guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eorin Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Eorin and Exothermos cooperation. Can't resist to show you some pics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evader Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 (edited) On 27/12/2016 at 3:15 PM, evader said: They use 2 spark engines on one side & 2 pairs of spider engines on the other (need radial engines due to docking port obstruction used for engine re-attachment). With several group commands, they can rotate one way or the other, detach, or shut off (needed after re-attachment). I found out if thrust is set to 25% before detachment but after the spark/spider engine activation then they dock each time but require holding the throttle button since each aerospike may attach at different times and then thrust goes to 0 automatically. Since they're not separatrons, I can detach and change directions multiple times. The aerospike is the most powerful engine that I could fit inside. Unfortunately it's underpowered when combined with the housing. I was only able to attach 1 MK3 fuel fuselage while still do VTOL and that meant that fuel ran out when I reached the coastline. I was barely able to gain altitude as well. The nice thing about it is each housing is saved as a subassembly so I can combine them to increase lifting capacity (though it's by a small multiplier factor). I was even able to attach them in a 4 corner configuration (like a drone chopper) and somehow the front aerospikes didn't burn the 2 subassemblies behind them. It also appears as though those small landing gear used as guides while rotating the engines might not be needed. If I could remove those wheels and fit a splitter for 2 engines instead and add the reaction wheels to increase fuel efficiency then this might work (but still not get to orbit). My obsession with multi swivel VTOLs continues with a slightly improved model that has a more compact housing in exchange for having the engine exposed. A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S. Shovers push the engines into place when engine docking fails. My goal is to make a craft solely powered by swivel engines, eliminating the dead weight of fixed engines (though the tiny rockets used for rotation do not eliminate this completely). No vessel switching required and each VTOL engine rotates independently to dock either horizontally or vertically. This can be done multiple times as long as fuel is transferred to the tanks that are part of the VTOL engine. Now with twice the range (crashes slightly farther past the space center shoreline ). Edited January 29, 2017 by evader Capitalization Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Servo Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 (edited) 32 minutes ago, evader said: My obsession with multi swivel VTOLs continues with a slightly improved model that has a more compact housing in exchange for having the engine exposed. A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S. Shovers push the engines into place when engine docking fails. My goal is to make a craft solely powered by swivel engines, eliminating the dead weight of fixed vertical engines (though the tiny rockets used for rotation do not eliminate this completely). No vessel switching required and each VTOL engine rotates independently to dock either horizontally or vertically. This can be done multiple times as long as fuel is transferred to the tanks that are part of the VTOL engine. Now with twice the range (crashes slightly farther past the space center shoreline Very nice! Join the stock hinged planes family! I guess now it's you, me, and @Torquimedes, but that's all right. In other news, after making quite a few 200 part behemoths, I decided to do something... simpler. 28 part Sabre. Edited January 29, 2017 by Servo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScriptKitt3h Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 (edited) On 1/27/2017 at 4:54 PM, ScriptKitt3h said: After finally completing the campaign on Master in one of my favorite games of 2016, Titanfall 2, I wound up making a dropship (atmospheric-only as of now) based off the series' aerospacecraft designs. Gonna try and release it ASAP after some further testing and tweaks, since it's still a bit twitchy on low thrust power/gliding, but otherwise functions fairly well. The rear passenger hold carries 6 in addition to the 2 pilots. Also, Junos are now one of my new favorite engines- so easy to spam for VTOL capability! Welp, got it finished, and released here on the SCE! Edited January 29, 2017 by ScriptKitt3h Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torquimedes Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 13 hours ago, Servo said: Very nice! Join the stock hinged planes family! I guess now it's you, me, and @Torquimedes, but that's all right. In other news, after making quite a few 200 part behemoths, I decided to do something... simpler. 28 part Sabre. 28 part Sabre with the radome! Is this complete? Is it as unforgiving as the real Sabre, like ice-skating at the edge of the sound barrier? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torquimedes Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 15 hours ago, evader said: My obsession with multi swivel VTOLs continues with a slightly improved model that has a more compact housing in exchange for having the engine exposed. A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S. Shovers push the engines into place when engine docking fails. My goal is to make a craft solely powered by swivel engines, eliminating the dead weight of fixed engines (though the tiny rockets used for rotation do not eliminate this completely). No vessel switching required and each VTOL engine rotates independently to dock either horizontally or vertically. This can be done multiple times as long as fuel is transferred to the tanks that are part of the VTOL engine. Now with twice the range (crashes slightly farther past the space center shoreline ). Sounds like real progress to me. The mechanism is solid and works consistently, and I think it looks cool even "exposed". Are the airbrakes capable of rotating the engines without rocket assitance? The takeoff alone is impressive. I was wondering how it worked when the engines appeared to be so far aft of the CoM until I saw the Vernors firing. It's a shame the throttles drop to zero on docking/undocking, you could really use the thrust during transition. Looks like the stock SAS wasn't helping stabilize the craft since it won't even attempt to hold attitude until prograde is near your nose. You might try pitching down for a few seconds before transition to give some forward motion so the craft "falls" forward into stable flight while the engines are rotating. Watching those engines rotate makes me wonder if it will be long before we see a stock F-35 replica... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Servo Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Torquimedes said: 28 part Sabre with the radome! Is this complete? Is it as unforgiving as the real Sabre, like ice-skating at the edge of the sound barrier? It's a really sweet aircraft, mimicing the real one pretty nicely. Top speed is around 300m/s, plus it's really agile and hard to land. I've also got a few more craft in the oven. The F-91 Thunderceptor, the world's ugliest jet fighter. B-45 Tornado B-2 Spirit (really WIP. I haven't been able to get it off the ground) Probably because the COM is behind the COL... 31 minutes ago, Torquimedes said: Watching those engines rotate makes me wonder if it will be long before we see a stock F-35 replica... Funny you mention that. I tried a basic design this morning without much success, but you can expect me to try again. Edited January 29, 2017 by Servo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munbro Kerman Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 I'm back after a while with my WIP Lockheed U2-A "Dragon Lady". I'm still working out some issues with the CoM and CoL placements. It still can fly, but only like a cow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Servo Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 hours ago, Munbro Kerman said: I'm back after a while with my WIP Lockheed U2-A "Dragon Lady". I'm still working out some issues with the CoM and CoL placements. It still can fly, but only like a cow. Very nice! By sheer coincidence, I too, have a WIP U-2. I've spent way too long trying to get this thing exactly to scale, something I rarely do with my replicas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munbro Kerman Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 15 minutes ago, Servo said: Very nice! By sheer coincidence, I too, have a WIP U-2. I've spent way too long trying to get this thing exactly to scale, something I rarely do with my replicas. Looks like she's coming along nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Servo Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Just now, Munbro Kerman said: Looks like she's coming along nicely. Thanks, by the looks of it, yours is as well. If you haven't tried draining all of your fuel tanks and then shifting the COM by filling only a few tanks either forwards or backwards, I recommend it. It increases TWR on the engine, plus makes balancing COM a breeze. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munbro Kerman Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Servo said: Thanks, by the looks of it, yours is as well. If you haven't tried draining all of your fuel tanks and then shifting the COM by filling only a few tanks either forwards or backwards, I recommend it. It increases TWR on the engine, plus makes balancing COM a breeze. The first thing I did, actually. Now I'm testing the CoL by moving the entire wing assembly enough so that it doesn't spoil the look. Edited January 30, 2017 by Munbro Kerman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munbro Kerman Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Flies much better now, fixed up the horizontal stabilizer. Now it maneuvers much more cleanly and easily. Taken at an altitude of 13,000 meters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Servo Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 53 minutes ago, Munbro Kerman said: Flies much better now, fixed up the horizontal stabilizer. Now it maneuvers much more cleanly and easily. Taken at an altitude of 13,000 meters. How well does it handle with only those small ailerons on the wing? Mine's somewhat sluggish even with massive ones. Just another good shot of this thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munbro Kerman Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 50 minutes ago, Servo said: How well does it handle with only those small ailerons on the wing? Mine's somewhat sluggish even with massive ones. It handles pretty well, although she has a quite large turning radius when using roll and pitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gman_builder Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 @eorin That A-12 is most beautiful, sleak, and accurate replica i've ever seen in KSP. Incredible work sir. I am thoroughly humbled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eorin Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 6 hours ago, Gman_builder said: @eorin That A-12 is most beautiful, sleak, and accurate replica i've ever seen in KSP. Incredible work sir. I am thoroughly humbled. Actually thats a sr-71 blueprint. Thanks btw Edited January 30, 2017 by eorin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eorin Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) Here you can see a better comparison, from left to right: my craft, 50% opacity overlay, real sr-71 and a 50% opacity inverted colors. Still a WIP, i've added a custom cockpit and removed temporaly the spine on the body. Right now im working just with real pictures due the fact there is not a really accurate blueprint, US governement has burnt original blueprints, so everything you find on the internet is just a personal interpretation. Edited January 30, 2017 by eorin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gman_builder Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/30/2017 at 3:50 AM, eorin said: Actually thats a sr-71 blueprint. Thanks btw Ah, whoops. I was looking at the A-12 from before and i wasnt paying enough attention to your more recent posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torquimedes Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 On 1/27/2017 at 8:51 AM, Servo said: The B-1 is airborne! After a lot of testing, this behemoth can switch wing positions 80% of the time in-flight, even at full speed. That said, full speed is only 150m/s at sea level, despite having four whiplashes as propulsion. I did manage to get it up to almost 200m/s in a dive, though. Once I figured out the wing controls were [ 1 (wait a second) 23 ] I had no trouble ferrying it to the island while deploying the wings appropriately. If only there was a toggle to disable KSPs insistence on resetting the throttle and camera whenever docking. Congrats on an impressive build! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostbuzzer7 Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 This has been a project that's been lying around in the hangar for 2 months. I simply tried making the most compact bearing to handle the sheer power and pulling force of an electric rotor, reason being is because for something this scale, it requires a large torque ratio to keep this thing flying as acrobatic as it can. As I have recently been inspired particularly by this video: Spoiler I have decided to improve this design into a far much smaller design while not giving in to agility. Initially it was called the ERX FPV Racing Drone, but that was a failed version in which it wouldn't recover from doing a flip. If you don't what racing drones are, picture a quad copter that can do flips and tricks while going roughly 50 mph. I think I have reached a point where I am satisfied with the build and ready to release it whenever I am ready. Here are some pictures captured in flight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Servo Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 31 minutes ago, Torquimedes said: Once I figured out the wing controls were [ 1 (wait a second) 23 ] I had no trouble ferrying it to the island while deploying the wings appropriately. If only there was a toggle to disable KSPs insistence on resetting the throttle and camera whenever docking. Congrats on an impressive build! Thanks! It was your tomcat that inspired me to replicate the F8U and the B-1 in the first place. I could conceivably set it up so 1 swings it forward and 2 swings it back, though I chose the three AG setup for debugging purposes. Some more work on the U-2, it's almost done and ready for posting. After reading about how hard the U-2 is to land, I decided to up the ante on my own. I added flaps, airbrakes, and set it up to land on two wheels better. Naturally, there are still training wheels, but they're not necessary. Landing difficulty: "requiring a car to follow you down the runway" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Optimist Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Making a semi-replica nightfighter prop plane with some fairing propellers. New computer refuses to make properly sized images. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.