Unique Design Tricks

[sneff30]

I have come seeking to learn and just see how resourceful people are! What are some of the unique and innovative design improvements you've learned over the years that you see are the cornerstones of your success? What makes your rockets better than everyone elses?! Pictures are always great!

[r4pt0r]

There was a thread somewhere that had dozens and dozens of design/build tips, but I cannot for the life of me find it. I thought it was started by GoSlash27, but I dont see it in his "started threads" pages.

Anyone know what I am talking about? The OP was updated anytime someone posted their tips.....

[Jett_Quasar]

All of the most unique and creative designs that I've seen use part clipping.

There is lots of good ideas in this thread:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43086-Open-Source-Construction-Techniques-for-Craft-Aesthetics

JR

[r4pt0r]

All of the most unique and creative designs that I've seen use part clipping.

There is lots of good ideas in this thread:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43086-Open-Source-Construction-Techniques-for-Craft-Aesthetics

JR

Thats what I was seeking! Thanks a lot! must have gotten GoSlash27 and GusTurbo mixed up

[sneff30]

I was hoping not to post a thread someone had already started :/ sorry folks

[Wjolcz]

I was hoping not to post a thread someone had already started :/ sorry folks

Isn't this different, though? I understood this thread as more like "What is your design style?", rather than "Tips and tricks how to make rockets look cool."

[Jett_Quasar]

Isn't this different, though? I understood this thread as more like "What is your design style?", rather than "Tips and tricks how to make rockets look cool."

Yeah like I always design my ships to look like something out of Star Wars, or Elite Dangerous... Stuff like that right?

SideKick Starship by Jolly Roger on Sketchfab

[sneff30]

Isn't this different, though? I understood this thread as more like "What is your design style?", rather than "Tips and tricks how to make rockets look cool."

Yea I guess I didn't word it the best lol. I just wanted to see how varied and unique to each individual people design rockets and planes (mostly planes because I'm really into that now). Hope that clears it up some?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah like I always design my ships to look like something out of Star Wars, or Elite Dangerous... Stuff like that right?

SideKick Starship by Jolly Roger on Sketchfab

That's awesome! How many other star wars-esque crafts have you made?

[Vanamonde]

Moved to the how-to section.

[AbacusWizard]

I've had a lot of success designing small spaceships with spaceplane parts and bilateral symmetry instead of radial symmetry. One of my favorites so far is the H-Wing, which I've been using to grab bits of debris from previous launches and tow them into sub-orbital trajectories for disposal. (The equipment crate and the harpoon gun are from KIS/KAS; the rest is all stock.)

[Edax]

Because most of my long-range Spaceships use mostly Liquid Fuel, and the fact Space Station components are size 2 and that there are no size 2 LF tanks, I ran a simple experiment to see if I could use a large ore tank in place of a size 2 LF+O tank and realized that ore tanks can produce more fuel than can fit in an equal sized fuel tank, and thus ore tanks contain more potential energy then fuel tanks. So I designed my next-gen space plane carrier to use mostly ore tanks, with only enough fuel to last a lengthy burn or landing, since inbetween burns meant plenty of time to convert that dense ore back into fuel. With this method, I could keep the size of the space ship down so it wouldn't need any large docked parts so it'd be structurally sound enough to land on low-g moons.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Edax

[sneff30]

I've had a lot of success designing small spaceships with spaceplane parts and bilateral symmetry instead of radial symmetry. One of my favorites so far is the H-Wing, which I've been using to grab bits of debris from previous launches and tow them into sub-orbital trajectories for disposal. (The equipment crate and the harpoon gun are from KIS/KAS; the rest is all stock.)

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-fD1lQP-pAHg/VYjYy8totdI/AAAAAAAABe4/kaTGf_BWUJ0/s800-Ic42/screenshot192.png

I'm impressed! I could never find the patients or motivation to fly missions to deorbit debris when I could simply click them out of existence lol

- - - Updated - - -

Because most of my long-range Spaceships use mostly Liquid Fuel, and the fact Space Station components are size 2 and that there are no size 2 LF tanks, I ran a simple experiment to see if I could use a large ore tank in place of a size 2 LF+O tank and realized that ore tanks can produce more fuel than can fit in an equal sized fuel tank, and thus ore tanks contain more potential energy then fuel tanks. So I designed my next-gen space plane carrier to use mostly ore tanks, with only enough fuel to last a lengthy burn or landing, since inbetween burns meant plenty of time to convert that dense ore back into fuel. With this method, I could keep the size of the space ship down so it wouldn't need any large docked parts so it'd be structurally sound enough to land on low-g moons.

http://i.imgbox.com/aDS0dtOs.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/YgL7dBq.jpg

I don't have any experience with ore or mining. I think that'll be next on my to-learn list! Thank you for the inspiration!

[GoSlash27]

There was a thread somewhere that had dozens and dozens of design/build tips, but I cannot for the life of me find it. I thought it was started by GoSlash27, but I dont see it in his "started threads" pages.

Anyone know what I am talking about? The OP was updated anytime someone posted their tips.....

Raptor,

Nope, wasn't me! You might've been thinking of the 1.0 thread where I had everyone share tips and tricks for coping with the changes rather than complaining about them...

My design philosophy is very simple: work out mathematically the lightest and/ or cheapest solution to each stage of a mission and then build exactly to the results with the simplest, most efficient, and cheapest parts at hand. This usually yields designs that look too small or simple to do what they do.

If anything I build ever happens to look "pretty", it's only because form has followed function in that case and it's completely incidental. My stuff usually looks primitive.

I also try to analyze the config files and mathematically compare parts in order to predict which ones give me an edge and which ones are best avoided. All parts are not created equal.

I'm rambling a bit, but I guess my #1 trick isn't a specific technique, but rather a philosophy: a design isn't perfect when you can't add any more to it, but rather when you can't take any more away from it.

Example...

Best,

-Slashy

Edited July 26, 2015 by GoSlash27

[Jett_Quasar]

That's awesome! How many other star wars-esque crafts have you made?

Quite a few... You can find a link to my Millennium falcon thread in the space craft exchange here.

JR

[Sharpy]

My trick - attach a cubic octagonal strut near the middle of a LF fuselage (as close to the middle as possible without actually occupying the node), then I clip the Nerv through the fuselage to the strut, then attach a Whiplash at the end. Makes for a neat compact booster for SSTOs, a "dual propulsion engine".

[jackal40]

Raptor,

My design philosophy is very simple: work out mathematically the lightest and/ or cheapest solution to each stage of a mission and then build exactly to the results with the simplest, most efficient, and cheapest parts at hand. This usually yields designs that look too small or simple to do what they do.

Best,

-Slashy

I'd love to hear more about your design process - specifically the math involved. My process is trial and error, which usually ends up with dead kerbals and a destroyed ship.

[GoSlash27]

I'd love to hear more about your design process - specifically the math involved. My process is trial and error, which usually ends up with dead kerbals and a destroyed ship.

jackal40,

I have an overview of the process here:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/125893-Kerbal-Rocketeering-101-By-Professor-Lynch-1-0-2?p=2038270&viewfull=1#post2038270

Basically, I plan out the mission in reverse. Each stage is calculated from it's payload, DV requirement, and minimum t/w ratio using a reverse rocket equation

I do this for every engine type using a spreadsheet and then pick the ideal solution for that stage.

Rinse and repeat (subsequent stage is payload) until I'm all the way back down to the pad.

Best,

-Slashy

[Pecan]

Tip #1: use a mod (KER, MJ, etc.) to give you the figures that the VAB/SPH don't. They're vital to efficient design.

[X-SR71]

I recently discovered that structural fuselages will allow cross feed fuel when attached to surfaces, whereas the same modelled LF (and other fuel tanks) will not. Saves a fuel line part.

[Skorpychan]

I build rockets. Not spaceplanes, not SSTOs, rockets.

This means vertical staging, for the most part. Long, slim designs, at least once the boosters are off. The boosters are the key bit, though. Radially-attached fuel tanks and boosters, bolted onto the central stage with fuel line trickery so the main engine runs off their fuel as well.

I also use generic lifters. Literally the same over and over again, saved as a subassembly and just bolted onto the bottom.

[Foxster]

I recently discovered that structural fuselages will allow cross feed fuel when attached to surfaces, whereas the same modelled LF (and other fuel tanks) will not. Saves a fuel line part.

Which parts are those?

[X-SR71]

Which parts are those?

http://i.imgur.com/HKl6hyd.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/SsfJ2X6.jpg

Notice how in the first image the LV-N is drawing LF from the MK2 tank through the structural fuselage.

It doesn't get the fuel from the MK2 in the second image. It's only getting fuel from the MK1 LF tank. In the second image, I'd require a fuel tank to draw from the MK2 tank.