1200 m/s at 600 meters up

[Deadpangod3]

such speed, much missle.

i dont even know how this happened, it got to a top speed of 1201.7 m/s before losing speed and hitting the ocean at 1198.4 m/s, causing everything ahead of the battery to bounce and fly upwards at 300+ m/s.

the goal was a tiny drone of sorts that could buzz around KSC, and kinda being lightweight as possible.

the speed was accidental, but fun somehow FAR didnt rip the wings off.

so much for being a plane, this is an ICBM!

[Deadpangod3]

final max height: 38914 meters

speed: 1855.6 m/s

[Cirocco]

wow, pretty impressive. Wonder what will happen if you put on a quad-coupler and replace that 1 turbojet by 4

do it! for science!

[allmhuran]

Not sure how procedural wings scale their control surfaces (if at all), but high speed at low altitude is usually a result of "infiniglide" physics, whereby control surfaces generate thrust. A small craft with a relatively large control surface area (usually in terms of the number of flaps attached, but conceivably also a small number of flaps that have been procedurally embiggened) can go uber, uber, uber fast.

[Col_Jessep]

Not sure how procedural wings scale their control surfaces (if at all), but high speed at low altitude is usually a result of "infiniglide" physics, whereby control surfaces generate thrust. A small craft with a relatively large control surface area (usually in terms of the number of flaps attached, but conceivably also a small number of flaps that have been procedurally embiggened) can go uber, uber, uber fast.

Na, he's using FAR, there is no infiniglide in FAR.

[allmhuran]

Ooh, did not know FAR had fixed that (never used it) but yeah, that makes sense. Maybe procedural wings messes with FAR's aerodynamics thus reintroducing the problem?

[zarakon]

I think FAR just allows much higher speeds at low altitude

[MarkyJ279]

Zarakon is correct. Far reduces atmospheric density at sea level.

[Random Tank]

Zarakon is correct. Far reduces atmospheric density at sea level.

Well... No. The atmosphere density stays the same, it just changes the drag model so it is based off craft shape rather than weight x drag coefficient; which in most cases it will induce much less drag on a craft, allowing for higher speeds. It generally scales drag vs. altitude a lot better than stock.

[MarkyJ279]

Sorry, my mistake

Edit: It appears my memory has completely failed me. Rest of post removed

Edited July 29, 2014 by MarkyJ279

[Wanderfound]

http://i.imgur.com/w8c0IN1.png

final max height: 38914 meters

speed: 1855.6 m/s

Post-nerf or pre-nerf turbojet?

Make it a slow enough ascent (<10m/s) with a couple of climb/dive bounces (between 35,000m and 25,000m; "skip" off the denser atmosphere, similar to a too-shallow reentry) to build speed beforehand plus some careful throttling down at altitude and you should be able to get that thing close to Mach 7.

[Deadpangod3]

the first pic it doesnt have control surfaces, also, what do you mean by post-nerf and pre-nerf? i think that pic was after the engines turned off from loss of intakeair, and i leveled out and couldnt get it to go any faster

[Wanderfound]

the first pic it doesnt have control surfaces, also, what do you mean by post-nerf and pre-nerf? i think that pic was after the engines turned off from loss of intakeair, and i leveled out and couldnt get it to go any faster

The latest release of FAR (v0.14.1.1) reduced the thrust of air-breathing engines by 50%. They were unrealistically overpowered before.

Pre-nerf, I could get a single turbojet basic plane (delta wings, fuselage, engine, intake, not much else) over 2,200m/s at altitude. You just had to be willing to fly around Kerbin a time or two at 30,000m while you gathered speed. At that height, very little thrust is required to continue slowly accelerating.

Haven't tested the limits post-nerf yet.

[Hodo]

Time to sound like a prick.

But none of this is special. FAR turns the stock KSP soup of an atmosphere into, well an atmosphere like Earth.

With enough power and an aerodynamic enough craft you can actually break Mach 3.5 at sea level.

Procedural Wings are actually FAR compatible so you don't get any excessive lift or odd forces from them found in the stock game.

All the OP did was prove if you put enough TWR behind something you can get it to go fast at low speeds. I think my test plane in my current career save does Mach 2.5 at sea level, but I haven't tried to push it that fast that low.

[Dat_Spacewaffle]

now just add some rocket fuel/engines and lets see if you can make an SSTO

[Hodo]

Because I could.....

And that was with 15min and messing around with random parts.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Hodo

[User Unrelated]

I recall a thread a little while ago where people would abuse the interaction between FAR and procedural fairings to push small air-breathing "aircraft" to ludicrous speeds below 1000m altitude...

I tried to find it, but couldn't drum up a search.

[Hodo]

I recall a thread a little while ago where people would abuse the interaction between FAR and procedural fairings to push small air-breathing "aircraft" to ludicrous speeds below 1000m altitude...

I tried to find it, but couldn't drum up a search.

I remember that. I think Ferram and the maker of Procedural Fairings fixed that.

[Kerba Fett]

wow, pretty impressive. Wonder what will happen if you put on a quad-coupler and replace that 1 turbojet by 4

do it! for science!

Pretty sure you couldn't. The bicoupler is the only one with enough space between the nodes for multiple jets. (unless they fixed that in .24)

You could mount 2 engines on a bicoupler then mount 2 of those subassemblys on another bicoupler.

[Hagatora]

Pretty sure you couldn't. The bicoupler is the only one with enough space between the nodes for multiple jets. (unless they fixed that in .24)

You could mount 2 engines on a bicoupler then mount 2 of those subassemblys on another bicoupler.

You can if you place them individually.