BSC: Rocket-powered VTOL - We have a winner!

[Majorjim!]

I see we're losing in on the end of the competition, and the judging is already beginning. Nice job to all who posted so far.

One thing that really surprised me was the general lack of RCS used throughout the competition. I may have been the only person who used RCS! (I like it because it does the same thing as an SAS module, but you can toggle it easily without resorting to action groups.)

Also, jet engines! I don't like VTOLs with solely jet engines because of their sluggish response (sorry) but a combination of jet and rocket power seems to work reasonably well.

...and I'm blown away by the quality of some of these craft. I honestly think that my craft may have some neat features (launching off of jumps at 45 m/s, anyone?) but that some of you guys have packed more features into your craft with fewer parts. I'm always blown away when participating in these competitions... I think my craft is pretty cool but everyone else's is unbelievably neat.

That being said, you should still vote for me.

[note: I edited my original post to include a one-minute-ish tutorial on how to fly the Pavo, as well as listing the four action groups that I created.]

Well my LLTV uses RCS exclusively for control when the RW are disabled.

And yeah, jets are tricky to land but with practice it's easy enough.

So, vote for me and my LLTV.

It's the smart choice. ;-)

MJ

Edited February 12, 2014 by Majorjim

[HazelPine]

I think why most of us didn't use RCS (me specially) is because it is pretty heavy actually, and it runs out, unlike RW. But RCS has more control, so both reaction systems have their ups and downs. I personally used RW because I had no space for the RCS tanks and nozzles.

FRIENDLY TIP:

You should vote for me and the LeapFrog, you know it is the right choice...

[Ravenchant]

Hm...awesome, I woke up today with a body temperature von 40°C (thats 104°F for all you insane people). First fever in over ten years.

Aw, that sucks Get well soon!

I chose reaction wheels for control, because it's a bit more forgiving to less experienced players. Also, my craft is pretty...clumped, so unless i stuck the RCS ports on girders or something, they wouldn't have that much leverage.

And as it seems that this is now a thing: vote for the Pack Mule! It's the INSANE choice!

[HazelPine]

Heloo! I am back with my top three designs (doesn't mean the ones I will vote for) so far:

1- The Bullfrog. It is my 1st choice because it is very simple and manouverable, but it also shows a potential use of the engines it used (we downgrade them so much i forgot their name). it was easy to fly and had a great air time!

2/3- I CAN'T DECIDE! Either the Pavo VTOL or the Pack Mule, they are so similar in shape and flying abilities! I like how both of them are so compact and offer so much potential, but they are not the simplest to build craft. Still, a new player can learn much from this!

4-Me of course.

[Xeldrak]

The primary vote has started! It will run for four days and will select four finalists.

Everyone who sent me their Email via PM should have a mail. Also note: If you want to vote too, you can still PM me your adress.

You can download all the crafts in a single, convenient .zip right

>>HERE<<

I'm using condorcet-method vote - you will be asked to rank the entries. Don't worry, it's fairly simple - If you want to vote for a single entry, leave all entries on the lowest rank and move your prefered entry to rank one. The way you can also vote for any number of candidates. It sound a little wierd but it's a perfectly sound voting system - you can check the wiki page (And I've got a fairly professional page that offers this service).

Edited February 12, 2014 by Xeldrak

[MiniMatt]

Excellent, shall have a go at testing all before the weekend and posting thoughts

BTW, everyone who votes Snack Wagon gets a free kitten*

*Kittens may be imaginary

EDIT: Actually damn fine choice of voting system there Xeldrak. In previous challenges I've always had a good handful of favourites and nothing I've seen so far suggests this challenge will be any different.

Edited February 12, 2014 by MiniMatt

[Andrew Hansen]

Xeldrak, I think you should divide up the .craft files in your all-inclusive .zip for VAB and SPH. After some testing, I've found out that the ones for the VAB are:

• CRPLTV
  
• LLTV - the Flying Bedstead
  
• Morpheus
  
• VTOL - VTOL Training Or Learning
  
• VTOLPV7_1 Rocket Chair
  

The rest are for the SPH.

[briansun1]

ok so thoughts

Andrew Hansen - Wernhermobile

I don't like how the jet only takeoff is a bit slow. I do like how there is a lot of variety with this one. description and lights. action groups no solar panles escape system low part count.(I like this one)

DisarmingBaton5 - Ostrich VTOL

TWR too high. I do like that there are lights and looks good, no action groups low part count

Giggleplex777 - Damselfly

pretty nice looking. action groups. parachute does not deploy on hitting abort. description low part count. flys well. escape system

Kasuha - Morpheus

highish part count. more rover then vtol. sluggish response. strange cockpit design. action groups

Majorjim - LLTV

high part count. looks really cool. action groups but not explained. flys well. why RCS? escape system

mhoram - The Kerbol Flying Object

high part count. looks good. really hard to kill. flys well. whats with the rover wheels? low delta v/flight time

MiniMatt - Snack Wagon VTOL

low part count. good description. I don't get what the science stuff is for. flys well.

well thats all for now

Edited February 13, 2014 by briansun1

[Majorjim!]

Xeldrak, I think you should divide up the .craft files in your all-inclusive .zip for VAB and SPH. After some testing, I've found out that the ones for the VAB are:

• CRPLTV
  
• LLTV - the Flying Bedstead
  
• Morpheus
  
• VTOL - VTOL Training Or Learning
  
• VTOLPV7_1 Rocket Chair
  

The rest are for the SPH.

Yes I should have said, my LLTV is for the VAB.

MJ

[Andrew Hansen]

OK, so I've completed my vote. Since there a lot of entries, I made one requirement the craft had to fit before testing - the vehicle needed to have some form of rocket-power so that it would be easier to fly. Although advanced users can fly jet-powered crafts (and I can too, barely), I think only-jet powered vehicles are a bit too hard to fly for newbies.

Then, I proceeded to attempt to land each one on the VAB and see how it performed. Only two crafts didn't make it - the Kerbal Flying Object (due to lack of fuel), and the Rocket Power VTOL 2 (due to being extremely hard to fly without reaction wheels). Some others I removed from my save after landing them on the VAB due to high part count. The ones that remained are shown in this photograph (note that none of them broke any parts):

After flying them, I jotted down some notes, and with those notes, made up my vote.

For first place, I chose the Damselfly by Giggeplex777. It's very similar to my design in how it has the ability to fly with jets, rockets, or a combination of the two. I also praise it for its low part count. It has lots of reaction wheels, is very controllable, and has good looks.

For fourth place, I chose the Bullfrog by Tarmenius. It has lots of torque, high-thrust engines, lots of fuel, and low part count.

For fifth and sixth place, I chose the Pack Mule by Ravenchant and the LeapFrog LV-I by SaplingPick because they also have high-thrust engines, lots of torque, and lots of fuel. I praise the Pack Mule for its compact design and the LeapFrog for its sturdy armor.

Of course, I made my votes due to some things I'm sort of fussy about - mainly engine thrust and reaction wheels, but also flight time. The reason why I didn't vote for some other entries was mainly because of low thrust-to-weight ratios, insufficient amount of reaction wheels, and short flight times. Unfortunately, although I'd love to spend time explaining what I thought of each entry, I don't have the time.

Also, I recorded video footage of me flying each craft to the VAB, but I'm not sure if I'll post a video of that or not. Of course I'll speed it up if I post it and crop failing parts out so that it isn't too long.

Edited February 12, 2014 by Andrew Hansen

[Kasuha]

Kasuha - Morpheus

... strange cockpit design ...

It doesn't have cockpit. The pod is only there to allow you to launch it with Kerbal to get to the command seat.

[Andrew Hansen]

ok so thoughts

Andrew Hansen - Wernhermobile

I don't like how the jet only takeoff is a bit slow. I do like how there is a lot of variety with this one. description and lights. action groups no solar panles escape system low part count

Yeah, the Jet Mode takeoff is a bit slow because it takes the engine a while to spool up. One the one hand, it makes you wait an extra 5 seconds before you get into the air, and on the other, it means Jet Mode is easier to manage since adjustments on the throttle result in less of a change of thrust. I think the tradeoff is worth it.

Also, I actually did successfully land the Wernhermobile on the VAB with Jet Mode, since I wanted to test that ability. Personally though, I use Rocket and Jet Hybrid Mode most of the time since it nearly doubles the vehicle's top speed, increases its thrust-to-weight ratio, and makes the throttle respond faster.

Thanks for the review!

Edited February 12, 2014 by Andrew Hansen

[Spartwo]

I immediately regret(well as soon as submissions closed)my submission choice.The COM isn't exactly centred throughout due to holding things and takeoff thrust is 50% of the maximum.Should've stuck with the Sparrow.

I voted for craft with a COT which stays inside the COM and were not symmetrical from multiple sides.

1st-Ravenchant:Only rocket craft which crashed before running out of fuel.

2nd-MiniMatt:The thrust limiting befudles me.

3rd-Giggleplex777:Slow to turn but manegable nonetheless.

4th-Majorjim:part count was very high and fuel was limited.

Edited February 12, 2014 by Spartwo

[Giggleplex777]

3rd-Giggleplex777:Slow to turn but manegable nonetheless.

Now it doesn't have enough troque? You guys are hard to please.

[briansun1]

It doesn't have cockpit. The pod is only there to allow you to launch it with Kerbal to get to the command seat.

well more like not very well explained cockpit design

[sploden]

A note on torque:

My theory is that everyones' computers have different levels of power and different game graphics settings, and thus everyone will have a different perspective toward the controllability of a particular craft, whether in torque or in thrust-weight ratio. What I have done to approach some sort of standardization is turn down my graphics to the point where seconds measured by the game are very close to the passage of real time. This is how I have been testing the entries.

[BagelRabbit]

2/3- I CAN'T DECIDE! Either the Pavo VTOL or the Pack Mule, they are so similar in shape and flying abilities! I like how both of them are so compact and offer so much potential, but they are not the simplest to build craft. Still, a new player can learn much from this!

Wh-what?! Intelligent people want to vote for me?! Champagne time!

Seriously though, I'm pretty happy with the Pavo VTOL. I like its performance and the amount of features it has, though maybe I'm a wee bit biased.

Oh, and I got a question about my canted engines. They are in part to provide stability and partly simply because the VTOL requires fuel to be burned off at a certain rate to insure stability. The engines are placed so that the VTOL burns fuel consistently throughout. Interestingly enough, the CoM goes from slightly behind the center of thrust, then slightly in front, and then back to near-neutral as the fuel burns. None of this tomfoolery comes close to destabilizing it though.

[Ravenchant]

1st-Ravenchant:Only rocket craft which crashed before running out of fuel.

Dammit What were you having problems with? I concede that landing it is hard (particularly when using legs instead of the gear), but as long as SAS is turned on, there were never really any big problems with stability...at least after the droptanks were jettisoned.

Anyway, I've tested a few of the submissions and concluded that the Damselfly is awesome. The H.A.L.O. and Snack Wagon, on the other hand, could have a bit more "punch", so to say...getting up to speed takes a while.

[Spartwo]

I meant it has a huge run time.

[DisarmingBaton5]

I will start testing tomorrow; these all look so fun.

A note about my craft (Ostrich VTOL): Fly it at 1/3 thrust or below for hover. I would only advise flying at full thrust if you are to go a long distance, as TWR for the vehicle at full thrust is astronomical.

[Giggleplex777]

I will start testing tomorrow; these all look so fun.

A note about my craft (Ostrich VTOL): Fly it at 1/3 thrust or below for hover. I would only advise flying at full thrust if you are to go a long distance, as TWR for the vehicle at full thrust is astronomical.

Haha I was caught off guard by that while testing and I went up 1km before coming back down on the VAB.

[HazelPine]

I praise the Pack Mule for its compact design and the LeapFrog for its sturdy armor.

Oh my god! somebody praised my design! I didn't plan on having armour, it was just to make it look good and lower the TWR. But after flying a bit I noticed it elped a lot on the survivabilty of the craft, something i'm happy about. Thanks for liking my design, it's pretty cool!

[sploden]

Finished testing; the Damselfly is my favorite.

Runners-up are the Pack Mule and the Snack Wagon.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

*Sequential screenshots; no reloading or reverting

[Rhomphaia]

My first place is going to the Damselfly. Purely in terms of flying it would be between it and the Tern, but with its clippy design and armament, the Tern is not really a fitting BSC.

Not sure how I am going to rank the rest,

Personally I am finding the slow throttle of pure jet propulsion easier to manage in flight than the rapidly increasing TWR of pure rocket.

[BagelRabbit]

Good morning everyone!

Quick favor to ask.

To those who have reviewed my design so far, what features do you like or dislike? Which would you change?

I'm just wondering because I want to learn how to build better VTOLs. I have kind of fallen in love with the whole VTOL concept, and while mine may not be the best one here, it's a lot of fun to fly! I'm sure that some of you serious builders have ideas to make my VTOL even better and I would love to hear them.

Thanks!