Rockomax Mainsail and Poodle art pass, and new Rockomax "Twins" Engine (W/ Pictures)

[Morty_jhones]

hes saying that some engine bases could be smaller allowing more stuff to be connected to the bottom of the ship. and theres no need for a dual engine if they where smaller as it would be easier to surface clip or surface mount 1 or more.

[Ryder]

I absolutely ADORE the Mainsail exactly as is... It's got a truckload of character... looks like a beefy liftin' machine!

[VerdammteSeele]

I support the twin engine, but I like the current ones....

Why not both? lol

I like the idea but how would you suggest it handle overheating? Seems to me that an engine like that would overheat fast.

[Tw1]

I also like the current textures, though maybe the Poodle could do with some adjustment.

[Galane]

That twin engine is like a smaller version of the àÃâ€-180, àðúõтýыù Ãâ€Ã²Ã¸Ã³Ã°Ñ‚õûь-180 or RD-180, which is an upscaled variant of the four chamber RD-170.

[Skorpion]

Twin engines are great, but we don't need Squad to make them for us. We need Squad to give us parts so we can make our own twin engines.

(Of course, that's already possible with the parts they've given us, but I certainly wouldn't turn down even more parts.)

As far as the art pass goes, the real question we need to ask is, would you rather Bac9 and DanRosas spend their time on more art passes, or on new parts? I know what I would vote for, and it's not more art passes.

[Whirligig Girl]

That twin engine is like a smaller version of the àÃâ€-180, àðúõтýыù Ãâ€Ã²Ã¸Ã³Ã°Ñ‚õûь-180 or RD-180, which is an upscaled variant of the four chamber RD-170.

It's supposed to be a (rushed) Gemini-Titan Launch Vehicle Twin Rocket Motor. I don't know what it's actually called.

[karolus10]

hes saying that some engine bases could be smaller allowing more stuff to be connected to the bottom of the ship. and theres no need for a dual engine if they where smaller as it would be easier to surface clip or surface mount 1 or more.

Yes, I exactly meant that.

Now all engines are ending with circular plate matching fuel tank diameter, so we had 1.25m or 2.5m engines.

If we scrap that idea (or at least use circles used in smaller tanks) engines would be ended by small truss instead 2.5m plate.

This would give more freedom in attaching engines and allow real engine clustering - You could squeeze 2 skipper size engines without serious trouble or cluster at angle smaller engines for Your space shuttle.

My point is that engines not need necessarily be an stack part in same diameter like a fuel tank

Also it could really improve structural strength, by possibility of using struts around engines (like Soyuz/N1 rocket) or inter-stages, so rocket would not wobble between decoupler and engine or even engines could not touch lower stage at all... interstage ring would keep both pieces together (upper stage is standing on hollow ring).

Also if interstage ring would allow for surface attachment, we could just made one to put on the inner side radial tanks, batteries etc. so we could put small gear on large inter-stages (like RCS tanks) or fill them with utility stuff - imagine filling free space inside large pod decoupler with batteries, RCS or maybe life support or fuel cells.

Edited August 8, 2013 by karolus10

[Whirligig Girl]

someone stole my idea for the twin engine without crediting me.