@@Bzorlan Structurally unlikely. It's wings are designed for lift, not speed. There are many accounts of pilots who overspeed only just managing to land with severe damage to wing structure. If any prop could reach mach 2 and live to tell the tale, it's probably something american, built for high speeds and with tougher wings. Something like the late P-51, F7F, late P-38, etc. And only at high altitude too where mach 1 is less than 1000 km/h
@@xiphosura413 unlikely. Not impossible. Spitfires were built for high speed. I doubt any other plane from around the same time would manage much better
@@GewelReal The Soviet/Russian TU-95 can reach mach 0.8 (maybe even higher) and at the highest speeds the tip of the prop is apparently supersonic which is pretty impressive.
I wonder if this could be used to make a EVE SSTO. You wouldn't need that much fuel to get to orbit from a high altitude. The rest could be done by ions (since you already have batteries).
4:28 Whats preventing you from simply switching the rotation tool to "absolute" instead of "locational"? This would as far as i can tell just remove that problem altogether
As soon as you said 73% I knew where you were going. Can't believe nobody has done this before but it's impressive how much of an improvement it makes to the velocity
Can I suggest an idea for the next Oddessy by Bill video? Kerbin is "running out" of ore, so the KSC sends a mission to bring an E class asteriod from Joolian orbit to Kerbin. The KSC got this idea after reading "The Dunation Way", a short story by Isaac Kasimov.
You just proved that matrices aren't completely useless to me, something that I thought could never be done. I absolutely love the math side of these videos, I just can't believe how much advanced math you can apply! Also, a request from my friend: can you use the "anti-derivative" of something in this sort of setting?
Congratulations on the AMAZING content! I am student of physics and player KSP and LOVE both, but had never gone so deep into mathematical questions to optimize a inveção, even less at this level!
I have little knowledge on these concepts, but I very much find that your explanations are quite superb. I applaud you for your effort and excellent execution.
Wow, over Mach 3 on electro-props huh? You run this by squidy first?? Hahaha! No but really, this is amazing brad! I fancy myself a bit of a turbo-prop builder and in my experience i've never been able to make a jet powered prop plane that can do more work than the jets themselves. With jet powered copters, you can actually make some gains and generate more lift than the jet thrust output.
Oh yeah you can exceed the jets in static thrust quite readilly. The issue is that to outperform the jets themselves the blower radius needs to be huge because of max RPM. If you can't get the thrust paddles supersonic statically, you're not even close to jet level performance.
I'm sad that I did not think of this before cause I did realise that you could push multiple rotation buttons at once and it increases the electric charge usage, but I didn't realize that it actually increased torque.
Impressive. Truly. This concept totally shits on my best attempt of 490 m/s. Makes me wonder if we can push it even further, as it seems the only limit now is torque, drag, and battery. Perhaps if we allow boosting the prop up to speed then allowing the props to maintain like you did. Lol
With propellers this strong, stratzenblitz's mission to duna with electric charge and ion fuel only could be almost possible without using the trebuchet then don't u think^^ Great video as always. Everytime when i think there will not be anymore KSP secrets discovered that could beat all the records, you find another one :-)
I never knew how to make a working propeller in ksp, nor had a powerful enough computer to attempt doing so. However, I still managed to get to more than 800 m/s with the smallest jet engine.
Unfortunately it appears the latest version of KSP has made it impossible to create these very low drag fairings with moving parts inside. the bearing parts and reaction wheels inside the fairing all create drag, which makes it impossible to exceed mach 0.6 in one of these.
Pleas someone help. I'm trying to make a simple prop plane that is still reliable. Iv made a engine using the round RCS engine and thermometers as pivot points. It's works alright but tends to pop out after a couple of minutes just spinning in place. Anny tips to make reliable pivots. I can't even tell where your pivots are in your build.
Is it possible to use some sort of script, PID or something to automate changing the angle of the blades based on factors like air speed etc in this game?
Yes, but you can't make electricity with it. If you need a lot of energy you need either a huge amount of RTGs or solar panels which only work in sunlight.
You've got 2 different set of blades, so if you really dont want to change the blade angle, have one at 50 degrees and one at 60 degrees to get a slightly better average speed. Idk if it would help at all but it might give you an extra 20 at high speeds?
Isn’t it possible to turn off angle snapping in the editor to get a more accurate angle on the propeller, or would you just have no idea what the angle actually is?
@@casualbird7671 Try turning off rigid angle attachment by pressing C. There might be a toggle in the KSP settings menu to "allow large offsets" or something like that. The Editor Extensions Redux mod might help if none of that works.
In 1.6 SQUAD managed to break the collider for the stayputnik, right now stayputnik/fairing bearings don't work. What you can do is use the old model of the stayputnik which is still in the game, that one works just fine.
The clock changes for each independent object/entity that has flight time saved in the game's persistent file. A kerbal on EVA will have his/her own clock. The engine here, having been detached from the main craft some time after the craft was spawned into the world, will likewise have a 'younger' clock readout.
I hate all the algebra and matrices math involved in not just videos, but life.. I hate how I can understand it too. but in this case, its KSP, and I don't mind it :D
How did you make me learn math over winter break...
My thoughts as well!
thats how schools should work lol
About 700m/s faster than the fastest prop plane irl
He said Mach 3. Faster prop plane did like mach 0.7 iirc and faster prop + jet did reach mach 1
@@GewelReal apparently a spitfire could reach mach 1 in a dive but there's no evidence of it
@@Bzorlan Structurally unlikely. It's wings are designed for lift, not speed. There are many accounts of pilots who overspeed only just managing to land with severe damage to wing structure. If any prop could reach mach 2 and live to tell the tale, it's probably something american, built for high speeds and with tougher wings. Something like the late P-51, F7F, late P-38, etc. And only at high altitude too where mach 1 is less than 1000 km/h
@@xiphosura413 unlikely. Not impossible. Spitfires were built for high speed. I doubt any other plane from around the same time would manage much better
@@GewelReal The Soviet/Russian TU-95 can reach mach 0.8 (maybe even higher) and at the highest speeds the tip of the prop is apparently supersonic which is pretty impressive.
I thought I would never use my linear algebra after college. You just proved me so wrong.
I wonder if this could be used to make a EVE SSTO. You wouldn't need that much fuel to get to orbit from a high altitude. The rest could be done by ions (since you already have batteries).
Stef Morojna the fuck are you doing here
th-cam.com/video/zFEgKixiTHY/w-d-xo.html
STEF!!!
@@sfsaviation My thoughts exactly haha!
You made Spaceflight simulator
4:28 Whats preventing you from simply switching the rotation tool to "absolute" instead of "locational"? This would as far as i can tell just remove that problem altogether
That was my thought as well?
To show off math? IDK, maybe not aware.
It would, but I wasn't aware of this before the video =0
yeah I was really confused why he didn't just do that >v
@@BradleyWhistance Learn something every day!
As soon as you said 73% I knew where you were going. Can't believe nobody has done this before but it's impressive how much of an improvement it makes to the velocity
Can I suggest an idea for the next Oddessy by Bill video?
Kerbin is "running out" of ore, so the KSC sends a mission to bring an E class asteriod from Joolian orbit to Kerbin. The KSC got this idea after reading "The Dunation Way", a short story by Isaac Kasimov.
Or how about this? You take an A-class and send it into Krumpf’s house as a revenge mission.
Every video is one step closer to an Eve-and-back SSTO.
Or at least I can dream!
I guess you’re talking about an ssto without drilling for fuel on Eve, but otherwise it has been done
It would be great if someone used this as an air engine and the kraken drive as a space engine
You just proved that matrices aren't completely useless to me, something that I thought could never be done. I absolutely love the math side of these videos, I just can't believe how much advanced math you can apply! Also, a request from my friend: can you use the "anti-derivative" of something in this sort of setting?
I see we have taken the aperture science approach to this of we do things because we can.
Reaction wheels when first used for propellers: "This isn't even my final form!"
Congratulations on the AMAZING content!
I am student of physics and player KSP and LOVE both, but had never gone so deep into mathematical questions to optimize a inveção, even less at this level!
I remember the good old days with the old atmosphere when you could easily achieve 5000+ m/s without any moving parts.
Oh yeah, the old “spam pitch until you melt” glitch.
Pro-tip: Push 'F' when using the rotation gizmo to lock the rotation axes to the VAB, and your rotation will be absolute.
Props to you for getting this to work!
That's really cool and impressive. Well done for not just eyeballing it
I have little knowledge on these concepts, but I very much find that your explanations are quite superb. I applaud you for your effort and excellent execution.
Wow, over Mach 3 on electro-props huh? You run this by squidy first?? Hahaha!
No but really, this is amazing brad! I fancy myself a bit of a turbo-prop builder and in my experience i've never been able to make a jet powered prop plane that can do more work than the jets themselves. With jet powered copters, you can actually make some gains and generate more lift than the jet thrust output.
Unfortunately Squiddy’s not around anymore, on TH-cam at least.
@@jerry3790 i can contact him, i'll show him this
Oh yeah you can exceed the jets in static thrust quite readilly. The issue is that to outperform the jets themselves the blower radius needs to be huge because of max RPM. If you can't get the thrust paddles supersonic statically, you're not even close to jet level performance.
I'm sad that I did not think of this before cause I did realise that you could push multiple rotation buttons at once and it increases the electric charge usage, but I didn't realize that it actually increased torque.
KSP is a great game because of these crazy hacks and solutions people find, gg Bradley! Also, I actually straight up cackled when you said "mach 3."
As soon as you mentioned 3 different vectors I understood the 73.205% increase in force.
But Before we can talk about Propellers, we need to take about parallel universes
Impressive. Truly.
This concept totally shits on my best attempt of 490 m/s. Makes me wonder if we can push it even further, as it seems the only limit now is torque, drag, and battery.
Perhaps if we allow boosting the prop up to speed then allowing the props to maintain like you did. Lol
Space props
4:21 you can press "f" by default to switch the rotation to "absolute" so the axis don't rotate with the part
With propellers this strong, stratzenblitz's mission to duna with electric charge and ion fuel only could be almost possible without using the trebuchet then don't u think^^
Great video as always. Everytime when i think there will not be anymore KSP secrets discovered that could beat all the records, you find another one :-)
can we get the .craft file for this please?
I never knew how to make a working propeller in ksp, nor had a powerful enough computer to attempt doing so. However, I still managed to get to more than 800 m/s with the smallest jet engine.
5:05 thanks for doing my homework..
The only time a math degree makes you a god at a certain game
Just switch the rotation mode to absolute. Its in the top left.
Would love to see this redone using the most recent KSP.
The legend doing what we thought was impossible and making it look easy
i think theres a button for a fixed axis on rotation in KSP
Unfortunately it appears the latest version of KSP has made it impossible to create these very low drag fairings with moving parts inside. the bearing parts and reaction wheels inside the fairing all create drag, which makes it impossible to exceed mach 0.6 in one of these.
Man, I love linear algebra. I hated it while learning, but it's become so useful.
Whats the mod that lets you see all those values on top at about 0:26?
I think that it's either kerbal engineer redux or mechjeb.
SeanPlayz kerbal engineer redux
Beef Ingot kerbal engineer redux
Is it possible to make a stock prop plane that doesn't explode on loading it from in-flight quicksave?
Pleas someone help. I'm trying to make a simple prop plane that is still reliable. Iv made a engine using the round RCS engine and thermometers as pivot points. It's works alright but tends to pop out after a couple of minutes just spinning in place. Anny tips to make reliable pivots. I can't even tell where your pivots are in your build.
The absolute madlad
Is it possible to use some sort of script, PID or something to automate changing the angle of the blades based on factors like air speed etc in this game?
When rotating in the editor wouldn't using the absolute mode for the axies fix the need to reverse the order and all that flubbery?
Rise your hand ( to side, front and up, of course) if you remember triple chording in Descent
What I want to know is, How does that Large Reaction Wheel Bearing work?!?
I wonder if it could go any faster with the new propeller parts...
So it's essentially strafe running what you're doing, but along three axes, and rotation instead of movement
Why arent there fission reactors in ksp? You could make huge amounts of energy but if you wanted shielding, that would weigh a lot.
Well, doesn't the Nerva rocket engine counts as one?
Yes, but you can't make electricity with it. If you need a lot of energy you need either a huge amount of RTGs or solar panels which only work in sunlight.
Can you see how fast your plane goes without the axis rotation trick?
Holy crap! I struggle to reach Mach 1!
Can you get into orbit with props and ion engines?
Some guy went to Duna and back with that
@@GrandProtectorDark I concur =)
Stratzenblitz went to duna with that 😂😂😂😂
You've got 2 different set of blades, so if you really dont want to change the blade angle, have one at 50 degrees and one at 60 degrees to get a slightly better average speed. Idk if it would help at all but it might give you an extra 20 at high speeds?
I came for your political satire (do more BTW) and stayed for the math.
So it's over 9,000?
Isn’t it possible to turn off angle snapping in the editor to get a more accurate angle on the propeller, or would you just have no idea what the angle actually is?
I once tried something like this but didn't really realize what I was doing, it ripped the engine apart every time I spun it up above 60%.
math boy hurts my brain cells
My simple 9th grader brain cannot comprehend the matrix yet. Thanks for trying anyway
What about the new turboshaft engines? Are these still more efficient?
For some reason, "High hopes" by Panic! at the Disco came to mind
press "f" in the editor to change that plane of the rotate tool
i was so confused with all of this math because the farthest i've studied is pre-algebra
WTF THIS ALSO ISNT SPED UP
THIS IS REAL TIME
i wish you would put your craft files up for download
*launches propeller
*destroys runway
“Asselerate” - Bradley Whistance
me: clicks on a ksp wr video
what im expecting: brr haha propeller fast
what i get: b=12cX-7X8L= e=mc2
why did you delete this video earlier?
Copyright issues
@@BradleyWhistance let me guess, the music in the final part of the video during your monte karlo run?
@@0cs025 Yep
How do you get the parts to be so far apart from each other? The translation tool never lets me get things nearly that spaced out from each other xvx
@@jeanpecquet90 That never did anything special for me..
@@casualbird7671 Try turning off rigid angle attachment by pressing C. There might be a toggle in the KSP settings menu to "allow large offsets" or something like that. The Editor Extensions Redux mod might help if none of that works.
How did you make the bearings? I have a really hard time making it on 1.6 with fairing
In 1.6 SQUAD managed to break the collider for the stayputnik, right now stayputnik/fairing bearings don't work. What you can do is use the old model of the stayputnik which is still in the game, that one works just fine.
@@Rade1664 ye
What is the celeing of this craft
could you please link download site,please???
Okay this is epic
couldn't you just change your rotation mode to absolute instead of local?
i thought the same thing but at least he got it to work... i wouldnt of even thought of that idea lol
Bradley I want to watch this video, but I refuse to let myself learn math over winter break. I apologize.
imagine if this guy spent his giga genius 3000 iq brain on anything else other than ksp
I think I finally understand linear algebra now
Can’t you just use an ‘absolute’ rather than ‘local’ rotation for the second transformation?
what’s up at 12:35?
why does the clock skip back 2 min
The clock changes for each independent object/entity that has flight time saved in the game's persistent file. A kerbal on EVA will have his/her own clock. The engine here, having been detached from the main craft some time after the craft was spawned into the world, will likewise have a 'younger' clock readout.
gotcha
Absolute rotation: Am I a joke to you?
This is science ! KSP style
holly dammit, you create a turbo-fan engine.
Floating elevons? What the hell am I missing here? I've clearly not played this game enough.
I hate all the algebra and matrices math involved in not just videos, but life.. I hate how I can understand it too.
but in this case, its KSP, and I don't mind it :D
What program do you use to make that 3d torque model? Really curious.
Your stock propeller is completely unbreakable
Why not just add solar panels? They could double as wings too
No Clickbait.
Squiddy must be really mad!
Part of the device is levitating
What mod do you use for your clouds?
I can't get 'EVE' to work.
came here to watch a gameplay got out with a thing learnt
Look like alien technologie
next step: using rocket engines to apply torque to a propeller
Why don't you use absolute rotation ?
god i f-ing hated the linalg teacher of ours but your vids are inspiring.
You should try real FPV racing :)
Maybe with a tiny whoop to make it safer and less expensive
what issues did you have with copyright on this video?
4:20 ... or you could just press f
Getting calc 3 flashbacks
Why not use the global rotation tool? You only use the local tool
Couldn't you just use absolute rotation?