What defines your spacecraft style?

[Jett_Quasar]

VTOL and Star Wars - that pretty much covers my style.

JR

Edited February 22, 2016 by Jolly_Roger

[RizzoTheRat]

Another vote for nukes, and I quite often use wings to space components out, so for example this is a 2 seat lander designed for Mun and Munmus pushing it's orbital fuel dump

The Tug/Lander I used to haul the components of my test base to the Mun was a similar concept but with 2 engines, seen on the left here.

A

My longer range stuff looks like a mess though

 

[Falkenherz]

All-in-one spaceships, cross-mounted living quarters, for realistic habitat conditions for longer travels and a bit of centrifugal gravity.

 

 

For launches from Kerbin: SSTO whenever it makes sense, with added boosters to quickly reach 100 m/s after liftoff. Always using orbit for transit from atmospheric- to space-worthy crafts.

 

 

Edited February 22, 2016 by Falkenherz

[Choctofliatrio2.0]

8 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Not sure how I would "define" this style, but recently have been working with a design that carries internally all the ships needed for a Jool 5 expedition--including a Mk2 SSTO for Laythe:

Key elements of the design include several Mk3 cargo bays faced inwards to serve as a hangar deck, a 'pressurized' bridge built into the bay up top, and a willful disregard for part count  

I love that command bridge! That's a really cool design! Did you bring all those instruments for actual use, or just decoration?

[Mister Dilsby]

7 minutes ago, Choctofliatrio2.0 said:

I love that command bridge! That's a really cool design! Did you bring all those instruments for actual use, or just decoration?

Thanks! Yes, all the stuff at the science station is for real, though of course the landers have their own instruments as well. I also have resource scanners on the front of the bridge pod. 

[Starhawk]

8 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Not sure how I would "define" this style, but recently have been working with a design that carries internally all the ships needed for a Jool 5 expedition--including a Mk2 SSTO for Laythe:

... <several beautiful pictures>...

Key elements of the design include several Mk3 cargo bays faced inwards to serve as a hangar deck, a 'pressurized' bridge built into the bay up top, and a willful disregard for part count  

So this thread gets the real beauty shots, eh?

There's not even one pic in the comic as good as those two for getting an overall feel for how very very pretty the Intrepid is. 

Happy landings!

[jonrd463]

Pre-1.0, it was all about size and brute force. Asparagus staging for days and the most ridiculously overpowered contraptions I could come up with. Kinda like launching a Sputnik with a Saturn V. Post 1.0, things got more streamlined and quasi-realistic due to the atmo changes. No more asparagus, except maybe cross-feeding smaller LRBs if the core stage by itself has a full-fuel TWR of >1.0. Around this time, I started messing around with Realism Overhaul, and design conceits from it crossed over into the stock game. Now, just about all my rockets follow a set pattern of large boost stage, small efficient upper stage, and S/LRBs as needed. 

Edited February 22, 2016 by jonrd463

[Mister Dilsby]

14 minutes ago, Starhawk said:

So this thread gets the real beauty shots, eh?

There's not even one pic in the comic as good as those two for getting an overall feel for how very very pretty the Intrepid is. 

Sorry! I really do mean to put big beautiful pics in the comic, but then characters start talking and before you know it there's speech balloons all over everything. Will endeavor to provide better fanservice in the future. Maybe a nice "fold-out" section for the print version.  

[AlextheBodacious]

It's pretty much this:

repeated over and over, with different sizes, in different ways. It's gotta look like a real-ish rocket, cause if it ain't pretty it ain't mine.

[CaelumEtAstra]

Words would fail to describe my designs. I'll just let pictures do the talking.

http://imgur.com/a/umcDi/layout/horizontal#0

 

Edited February 22, 2016 by Mrsupersonic8
Imgur album embed not working

[Starhawk]

Ummm, hmmmm.  Blocky?  Clunky-looking?  Unwieldy, perhaps?

This is the Eve Ascender.  It recently took Val, Bob, and Bill to Eve's surface and safely back.

Happy landings!

[Francois424]

Parts count > Beauty > Utility > Reusability.

I will also sacrifice burn times to be able to use Large Ion engines, although sometimes the Nukes are better.  If I can have a 15k dv ugly craft vs a 10k dv beauty, I'll often save the ugly but use the beauty.
I've tried re-usable vessel but my favorite one kept having a Kraken strike every time I'd get in orbit of Kerbin.  I've only recently (1 year later) started working on re-usable crafts.

Of course with 1.0.5 100-120 parts is the max before running into the yellow timer so it kinda cramp my style and I rely on very small craft docked to a main fuel tank Shuttle-style and I make the 120 parts budget.
I have no choice but to be hopeful of KSP1.1 and wait.  Or mod my own parts to futher reduce part count (such as a 2000 kilo-newton nuke or a 1000 kilo newton Ion + Nuclear reactor(one part instead of 4-10 solar panels)).

I usually mod my things but that disqualifies me for most accomplishments.  I got out of Eve with my quad-rotor craft last week... I did not brag about THAT part.
EJ_SA is working on a ONE PART space shuttle with ONE PART Orange tank + TWO PARTS boosters (+ decouplers, struts, rcs ports...  when you stick them on)... but a 50 parts space shuttle dropping to sub 25 once in space?  hell yeah !

[AbacusWizard]

Permanent orbital infrastructure: space stations orbiting Kerbin, Mun, and Minmus (with dedicated landers attached to the latter two); a fuel refinery operation at Minmus; a big greenhouse (for USI Life Support); communication satellites (for RemoteTech); transport skiffs for moving crew from place to place.

 

I like to get to a point where I can complete a variety of different contracts using only the stuff I already have up there (and occasionally a crew transport rocket or spaceplane to move batches of rescued crew down to the surface).

[Nukeknockout]

KISS. Keep It Simple, Stupid.

By that I don't mean part counts or cost or weight. I mean that when I point the rocket/spaceplane in a direction, it will quickly point in that direction with a minimum of wobble and will stay there without input from me for the most part. As a result, I favor gimballing designs, reaction wheels, control surfaces, airbrakes, spacing out landing gear/rover wheels with wings or structural components (I used to have a rover that stuck I-200s in four directions from it to prevent from flipping at high speeds) and RCS. Additionally, I like to idiot-proof my ships because, lets face facts, we're dealing with me here so that means I always aim to have 15% more DeltaV than I think I need and about twice as much EC storage/generation as I think I need.

Take this thing - designed for FAR, explicitly made to bounce between the upper and lower limits of its cruising altitude without me paying attention and then make landings without a runway.

 

I also like to absorb new strategies from other people (Not sorry) so recently I've been experimenting with interchangeable components and constructing ships over multiple launches.

Additionally, one of my personal pet projects is finding a way to stage Xenon fuel tanks for Ion engines. It's currently looking like my best shot at reaching Jool.

[Frank_G]

My craft are compact and modular. I like to add as much functionality on small room as possible.

Like these base landers, back in the .22 days...

 

However, these craft useed a lot of mods and i plan to redo the mission in stock 1.1. 

[Splitsie]

My builds tend to only manage to stay together if you think of struts like duct tape

[InterCity]

Oversized wings that kill the utility but massively add to style:

I guess that if the plane had half the wings, it would fly way better. But I don't care! Because wings!

[Dravin]

I don't think I have a style yet as i'm still at the stage where it's about slapping on boosters, extra stages, or more fuel tanks to get things done. I do tend to rely on a liquid fueled central core with a single engine and as many solid boosters as it takes to get things working. I'm sure I'll eventually reach a stage where, one that won't work, and two I've got the craft design skills that finess starts becoming a thing.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Dravin

[RW-1]

I typically end up with using single stacked payload over a couple stages, and then either asparagus setup boosters, or boosters that will drop off all together, but still feeding the lowest center stacked engine.

 

[TimePeriod]

6221$/13p/2.5T v1
-
6730$/13p/2.7T v2
-
4889$/12p/1.5T v3
-
4608$/12p/1.4T v4
-
4583$/12p/1.3T v5
-
4558$/11p/1.2T v6
-

4479$/11p/1.1T v7

After no less then 7 versions I come to a conclusion:

EDIT:

-
4400$/11p/1.2t v8
-
4425$/11p/1.1t v9

Two versions later (9) I reduced the costs, weight and visual appeal even further.

 

 

Its ugly, fragile and utilitarian.

Edited February 23, 2016 by TimePeriod

[justidutch]

If she ain't exploding real gud, she ain't worthy

 

[Jeb1969]

Fairings Nuff' Said

[netbumbler]

Ridiculously complex asparagus staging: I mean like over 800 parts worth...haha!  And though I'm not currently playing much because of the issues with landing legs and rovers, I really appreciate that I can now launch the aforementioned beast in 1.1.2 and have decent frame rates.  Yeah 826 parts is playable with my modest system: 3570K and gtx 760. 

Thank you Squad! 

 

 

[toric5]

well, i play with UKS and RT, and i think that has affected me somewhat (although i was still a bit like this pre mods)

huge, but reusable. i hate seeing entire stages that just end up floating out there, crash into a body, or burn up in atmosphere. engines are expensive! and i launch a lot! so i build huge, but recoverable. i have a 75 ton lifter (i think it did 75 ton, NRAP was giving me a bit of trouble) made of 3m parts and kickback SRBs that is fully reusable, landing on legs. the most that ever burns up are one or two solar panels. also have a 2m version. same philosiphy with my other designs: long missions typicaly use electric propultion from NFT, enabling me to use the transfer stage for orbital manuvers and return, with appollo style landers.

[septemberWaves]

I like things to look good, and I like things to be modular. I have a few different ways of doing things, but everything I make pretty much requires KJR to stay stable, is not particularly efficient, and is significantly more modular than most people even consider.