totm june 2018 Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread

[He_162]

2 hours ago, Munbro Kerman said:

SU-47 is coming along nicely. The only problem is that it pitches up sharply when pulling up, I'm already working out a solution.

 

Insert ailerons inside the fuselages the engines are connected to, and moved them as far back as possible, whilst still being hidden, and not coming out of the engines, then insert wings there as well. Use auto strut to hold them there, and to prevent them from peeking out, and you should be set.

[Thingymajigy]

yay yay I did it

 

working on a more minimalist boom:

[ghostbuzzer7]

For some reason, I dont appreciate the vehicle's looks at all.... attempt at a prototype LMP1 Race Car... any tips to improve (unless you see the complete opposite of me and think its fine).

Edited February 14, 2017 by ghostbuzzer7

[NorthAmericanAviation]

On 2/12/2017 at 2:04 PM, Munbro Kerman said:

Using @NorthAmericanAviations neat little trick of having landing gear for a nose, I was able to get the U-2's rounded nose shape correct.

 

Glad to see that helped!

I'm prototyping turbine/turboprop engines as small as they'll go, should probably look at other designs but this one is running nicely:

[septemberWaves]

@ghostbuzzer7 I think that what your car really needs is a paint job. Unfortunately repainting parts isn't really doable in stock, and I'm not even sure if there's any mods for that.

Honestly though it looks fine to me (although I don't know if you're trying to mimic any existing design, so I have no frame of reference beyond the general concept of "race car").

Edited February 14, 2017 by eloquentJane

[ghostbuzzer7]

10 minutes ago, eloquentJane said:

@ghostbuzzer7 I think that what your car really needs is a paint job. Unfortunately repainting parts isn't really doable in stock, and I'm not even sure if there's any mods for that.

Honestly though it looks fine to me (although I don't know if you're trying to mimic any existing design, so I have no frame of reference beyond the general concept of "race car").

I'm glad you brought that up, it supposed to be somewhat like an R18 with minor modifications to the rear. Moving the cockpit to the front drastically made a difference but still not sold.

[Azimech]

11 hours ago, NorthAmericanAviation said:

Glad to see that helped!

I'm prototyping turbine/turboprop engines as small as they'll go, should probably look at other designs but this one is running nicely:

* Too many turbine blades, you're losing a lot of power to drag. I've found no reason to ever attach more than 8 blades.
* If you want to get most out of the engine, install V.O.I.D. for an engine speed readout in rad/s. Turboprops need to be running at max speed for best efficiency. 50rad/s is max, go faster and physics go gaga.
* If you can, take advantage of the fact the turbine blades expand from the shaft at higher speeds. For more info: https://kerbalx.com/Azimech/77I-Azi12-Curious-Chakora-v31
* Did you install a variable pitch prop?

Have fun, it's a wonderful little world of big, heavy loud and smelly machines :-)

10 hours ago, ghostbuzzer7 said:

I'm glad you brought that up, it supposed to be somewhat like an R18 with minor modifications to the rear. Moving the cockpit to the front drastically made a difference but still not sold.

Wanna race my CanAm?

[Azimech]

10 hours ago, eloquentJane said:

@ghostbuzzer7 I think that what your car really needs is a paint job. Unfortunately repainting parts isn't really doable in stock, and I'm not even sure if there's any mods for that.

 

 

Surprise ;-)

 

 

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

19 hours ago, ghostbuzzer7 said:

For some reason, I dont appreciate the vehicle's looks at all.... attempt at a prototype LMP1 Race Car... any tips to improve (unless you see the complete opposite of me and think its fine).

[...]

The fenders look a little weird to me.  Note how these fenders slope forward all the way to the front:

You could try going to a less enclosed cockpit, more like the above image than this:

I don't honestly think that looks very good even on the real thing.

[ghostbuzzer7]

 

1 hour ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

The fenders look a little weird to me.  Note how these fenders slope forward all the way to the front:

You could try going to a less enclosed cockpit, more like the above image than this:

I don't honestly think that looks very good even on the real thing.

I might as well make an open top single seater as well, took your advice with the fenders, drastically made improvements to the curvature of the front. Got more progress done all around just about finished... (Though it weighs 6 tons ).

 

Edit:

New Open Top JRM LMP1 Car (relatively same speed, a very little improvement to manueverability for sharper turns.

Edited February 14, 2017 by ghostbuzzer7

[NorthAmericanAviation]

further development of a turboprop:

Thanks to helicopter Jesus  @Azimech's advice, it now spools up to much higher speeds with less throttle. Also flew the Chakora around for a bit, examined design, too.

Here is a second design, one I'd like to expand upon more because it has the potential to be powerful, yet have a short/small radius. I plan to develop this in to something i can use to power replicas of Lockheed Electras, C-133's, etc.

it does alright, as well, but the low-profile radius does pose the design challenge of how I should go about putting power to the shaft. still just using a dummy prop, too, very inefficient---gotta tackle one plateau at a time!

[Castille7]

The Camelback Bridge
Update: 02.15.17
 

Can someone feel a little sick with me? The Camel broke it's back no pun intended. I had 8 sections of the Bridge at location and the Entrance section flipped on reentry from a save, although I do have to say the new physics easing is so nice, this was an awesome update to KSP, the Squad has heard my cry . So that Entrance section was not the worst part of what happen, I was starting to launch four more sections to the location and BAM! Crash!! I went back to the saved game and BAM! that game save has an ERORR  feeling sick with me yet? I was so discouraged I then delete the game save before saving the craft files . Well there is a good side to all this mishap, I have gained some building skills and now have a cleaner looking bridge, I set the Pontoons underneath the deck. I now also have an idea of how much gap there is between the land maybe too much .

On another note, this bridge could be done with a lot less parts to make this connection to the small island but the structural design of the Camelback looks so nice I am going to roll with it.

Eight Sections on location

 

BAM!!!

Spoiler

Entrance Flipped

 

Dropping Off Excess Weight

 

New Bridge Built From Zero! 

This one is cleaner looking and has reduced parts.

 

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

4 hours ago, Castille7 said:

<snip>

Ouch... you could have just swapped out the corrupted sfs for a backup sfs in the save too.

 

Anyways, I've finally gotten back to work on replicas. I'm modifying a 707 airframe into a E-3 Sentry. I thought I could make the dish out of a fairing, but that didn't go to well in my earlier attempts, so I've now been making the dish using heatshields and curved radiator panels. I don't have picture of it at the moment tho .

Been fiddling with a sort of passenger heli, designed for reasonably long range crew shuttling trips to drilling platforms, mountaintop bases, or to act as a high endurance search and rescue aircraft (if that is at all useful in KSP). I want it to have the compactness of a medium sized single rotor heli, but that is making it unreasonably slow. Either I need to figure out that KOS swashplate script, or make it some kind of coaxial or something like that... probably.

 

Also I've been working on a Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion. I brain-farted and didn't check the dimensions before working on the fuselage, and thus made it too small, so i need to redo that.

https://www.nonameships.pw/screenshots/EpicSpaceTroll139/2017-02-15 18-28-15.png -darnit why is it not showing up this time?

In case people don't know exactly what that is (I'm not sure exactly how well known it is), it's this fella v

Spoiler

(I don't own the above image)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_CH-53E_Super_Stallion

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by EpicSpaceTroll139

[Castille7]

4 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

Also I've been working on a Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion. I brain-farted and didn't check the dimensions before working on the fuselage, and thus made it too small, so i need to redo that.

  Reveal hidden contents

(I don't own the above image)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_CH-53E_Super_Stallion

 

Man that Chopper is looking nice! I've been working on one of these but can't get the RPM's I need to lift with the bearing I am experimenting with. I might go with a Dual Rotor, it won't matter because it's not a replica. I haven't revealed it nor a few project that I have on the back burner because I have too many already on here that are not completed yet .

[pTrevTrevs]

4 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

Also I've been working on a Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion.

Sikorsky is love, Sikorsky is life.

Speaking of which... I think I might try and develop my own stock helicopter. It wasn't too hard to grasp the basics for this test rig.

It sort of flies, but I have a few problems with stabilizing the assembly. Also the way the engines are arranged make it somewhat too cumbersome to put in a real airframe. The torque is also going to be an issue, of course that can probably be fixed by putting engines directly opposite the ones there already (that would be where the intakes are now), or maybe I could find a way to get a tail rotor working.

I think it would be cool to make an oil rig that can fill up ore tanks and a helicopter that can fly them back to shore.

@Azimech is Helicopter Jesus, I really hope that sticks...

Edited February 16, 2017 by pTrevTrevs

[Azimech]

Geez @Castille7, how unfortunate! I hope you'll never experience this again! 

@pTrevTrevs Nice to have you on board! Please do continue, I'd love to see a flying helicopter!

1 hour ago, Castille7 said:

 I've been working on one of these but can't get the RPM's I need to lift with the bearing I am experimenting with.

Send me the craft file, I might be able to optimize it a bit and give you some tips along the way.

[Castille7]

12 hours ago, Azimech said:

Geez @Castille7, how unfortunate! I hope you'll never experience this again!

Send me the craft file, I might be able to optimize it a bit and give you some tips along the way.

I'll send it asap!

Edited February 16, 2017 by Castille7

[Servo]

I've begun working on a 1:1 scale F-14, which will include a VG wing. I've only started the fuselage so far, so no swing-wing yet, but expect updates with it in the future.

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

I've been doing further work on the Super Stallion. It's coming along nicely. Not quite sure how I'm going to do the cargo ramp though. Probably some kind of thermo-rcs hinge actuated with levers and wheels. I'm going to need to redo the rotor, partially for looks, but mainly because it excites the kraken.

I hope it will be able to fly. It's hard to pack a very powerful or efficient engine in there.

[Castille7]

Cargo Ship "Seahorse"
Update: 02.17.17

Well this craft was another lost during my Camelback Bridge Project mishap. The original craft used the Hull of the Riptide craft so I was able to began a rebuild starting with the Hull. I removed the Engines from the sides and placed them underneath the Hull. I also added lots of details on the interior, the doors are 6 Airbrakes that swing open. The Wheel House now has an open view for the Kerbal to look out, but this still may not be the best looking design. The more I look at them side by side the more I am considering the original look, even placing the Engines back on the sides might be a good idea. I am open for suggestions.

Original Craft

 

 

How the Rebuild is looking now

Spoiler

 

Edited February 17, 2017 by Castille7

[Servo]

It lives! It lives!

I shifted from landing gear to airbrakes forcing the wings back and forth, which solved the "explodes violently 50% of the time" problem. That said, when it did explode, it looked awesome.

[RocketPilot573]

I continued work on my rocket recovering and vertical integration project. Last night I made the first version of the 1st stage transport vehicle.

 

 

The transporter moves to the rocket. It is designed to lift of booster off the ground and transport it to the VIF.

 

 

 

Lining up the transporter with the docking ports is easy thanks to the differential tank style turning the wheels have.

 

 

The transporter has a lift-able truss section actuated by airbrakes. The section is supposed to drop down, dock to the booster, and lift it up.

 

 

Once the ports align, the shields are opened and they dock.

 

 

 

Naturally, lifting the entire 150 ton booster with airbrakes can be... difficult.

 

 

Eventually I ended up cheating and used the rocket engines.

 

 

Success!

 

 

 

-Rocket

[Azimech]

15 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

I've been doing further work on the Super Stallion. It's coming along nicely. Not quite sure how I'm going to do the cargo ramp though. Probably some kind of thermo-rcs hinge actuated with levers and wheels. I'm going to need to redo the rotor, partially for looks, but mainly because it excites the kraken.

I hope it will be able to fly. It's hard to pack a very powerful or efficient engine in there.

May I suggest a reduction of mass for your rotor? The I-Beams are nothing but dead weight, they have almost the same mass as the control surfaces but with a lot more drag. Also the heat shield and the utility bays might prove to have more drag while rotating than a single, longer part with a smaller diameter.

The fuselage is beautiful! If you don't mind the part count, I would replace the structural plates en wing segments from the sides with radiator panels, they're much lighter. The stub wings will reduce fuel consumption during forward flight if you increase the angle of incidence with 10 - 15 degrees, not to mention if you plan to have forward flight without forward motion jets you need to pitch down the whole helicopter, changing the angle of the wings and creating negative lift. The same is true for the cockpit floor and roof, replacing those wing parts with radiator panels will provide less negative lift. 

Although the rotor is beautiful, I've often run into problems with blade count >3. I use a AOA of 3.4 to 3.8 for my three bladed helicopters. You might have to go lower with this many blades.

What's the current part count and mass (empty/full)?

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

2 hours ago, Azimech said:

<snip>

While I do plan to replace the ibeams on the rotor with something else (they look ugly anyways), there is definitely going to be something pole shaped there because I want to get the sort of blade shape that you can see in this picture.

The heatshield was to try to replicate the smooth rotorhead top cover.

I'll have to get back to you on the mass as I'm on mobile at the moment, but part count is in the upper 200s at the moment, and I'm expecting it to be something around 350-400 when I'm finished. Depending on what it is (and whether the heli has trouble flying) I may or may not try replacing some of the side, roof, and floor panels with radiators.

I'll see what I can do on the stub wings without making them look wrong. 

Thx for the tips

[pTrevTrevs]

I think we should take a moment to reflect on what we're doing here... The devs didn't even intend for this stuff to be possible, but here we are, developing helicopter engines and swing-swings and mining the ocean's abyssal plain. I think this captures the spirit they tried to invoke by creating this game in the first place though. This time last year I doubt any of us were even dreaming of making craft this advanced, but here we are now. Very little has changed in the game itself that allows us to build like this, and what parts have been added were meant for completely different purposes. We're doing this through pure ingenuity. You'd think that everything you could possibly do in this game would be done in a short time after its release, but that obviously isn't true. We're building on one another's discoveries, exploring new methods, and, in a sense technologically progressing. And this is in a video game. This is what true engineering is all about, isn't it?

 

Alright, enough sappy stuff.

I've improved my rotor prototype through two iterations. The first moved the turbine blades in between the bearings, to make it more stable, and increased the length of the blades in an attempt to generate enough lift to let it fly under its own power. The intakes and fuel tanks were moved (on a real helicopter I guess they don't even have to be in the engine assembly anyway), and two more engines were added facing the opposite direction to the engines spinning the turbine. This is supposed to counteract the torque of the system, but on a real helicopter I guess it might cause some issues by heating any parts on the sides of the engine.

The second iteration (which would actually be the Mark III) added an extra blade, and uses two engine sets as opposed to the two sets used in the previous version. I haven't tested this one yet to see if it's powerful enough, but judging from the aerodynamic forces overlay I would say there's a good chance it is.

Once I have an engine that is powerful enough I'll start building a helicopter around it and see what happens.

Edited February 19, 2017 by pTrevTrevs