Open Source Construction Techniques for Craft Aesthetics

[Norcurion]

Don't Know if that is already known, but you can build heavy duty landing feet from 2 jrn docking ports, an octagonal strut, a octagonal cubic and a ruggisized wheel.

attach the cubic strut to the surface, put one port there (face down), dock the other port, attach the octagonal strut and then the wheel face down.

the side of the wheel.

It was able to resist a 56 tonn Tylo lander landing with 5 m/s on four of those wheel legs

It has some strange features:

- its about as heavy as an normal heavy landing leg

- The landing is elastic/feels like a strong spring, means heavy load, higher speed and it will jump. (a little bit)

- If you land on a slope the lander will beginn to "walk down" instead of tumbling over - i think it was supportet by SAS, but that is just a guess

here you can see how the gear is compressed

Edited January 26, 2014 by Norcurion

[GusTurbo]

Nice landing gear. I posted something similar with the non-ruggedized wheels. I like the look of yours better.

[Majorjim!]

Hi all,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzNX5eMsYKM

MJ

[astropapi1]

That thing is awesome! How did you make it?

[Giggleplex777]

That thing is awesome! How did you make it?

With a lot of cubic struts!

I think he used sepratrons to open it.

[Majorjim!]

That thing is awesome! How did you make it?

Yeah its made from Cubic struts. This is my Pen State Lunar Lion rocket. This opening like a hinge was an accident. It looks to me like the two cubic

struts are clipped in some way that lets them move like that. It cant be moved back sadly but its a cool way to release a probe.

MJ

[Blue]

I think it's terribly tragic when an aesthetic effect weighs a lot. It's like a nice perfume costing thousands of dollars.

[Majorjim!]

I think it's terribly tragic when an aesthetic effect weighs a lot. It's like a nice perfume costing thousands of dollars.

To what are you referring Blue?

MJ

[GusTurbo]

To what are you referring Blue?

MJ

Example: fairings made of I-beams.

[Majorjim!]

Example: fairings made of I-beams.

That's what I was thinking.

Its not a shame really. Just a challenge. It's an odd statement.

MJ

[Woopert]

This is just a cool way to make a stack of functional stuff on top of a capsule. Don't know what to call it.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[inigma]

As promised, the first of several:

The following engine design pioneered by Shuttlecraft Systems Inc. just a few days after the RAPIER became available, and is in use in our highly successfull Proton III Type-1A Shuttlecraft, a demonstration of which is seen in the Proton III video (see in my sig for the thread link):

Javascript is disabled. View full album

A Turbojet clipped into a RAPIER, stacked with a Nuke. This engine achieves the best of all worlds. A little heavy, but the the pros outweigh the cons. Test it out sometime. Notice the fuel lines clipped inside to the nuke. This is possible by first setting your line to start on the tank, then moving to view the nuke inside and setting the final end of the fuel line on the nuke (it should highlight). This design also stacks a rocket fuel tank with an airplane fuel tank, and lines are run from the rocket fuel tank to the airplane fuel tank so flow proceeds out the back. Also because the RAPIER and Turbojet share the same area, you have to run a line to the Turbojet.

Download it here to study:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nh7b3c86edl5u3q/SSI%20TURAN%20Mark%201%20%28Engine%29.craft

To build, start with the fuel tank, then stack on the RAPIER, then F12 Part Clip the Turbojet onto the RAPIER, then F12 Part Clip the Nuke inside the fuel tank. All nozzles should be visible at the end for it to work.

Edited February 2, 2014 by inigma

[GusTurbo]

That is very innovative. Is the nuke mailing there for efficient transfers? What are the benefits of this design?

[Woopert]

That does look awesome. The nuke should give great efficiency. I tried Rapiers once and just ran out of fuel.

The exhaust look awesome, too.

[inigma]

That is very innovative. Is the nuke mailing there for efficient transfers? What are the benefits of this design?

Benefits:

Fast climb to cruising altitude (RAPIER with Turbojet), push/airhog to orbit (Turbojet and RAPIER flameout control), and a space engine (Nuke) that can take you very very far and back. See my Proton III video for a demonstration on how to use a TURAN stack.

[Captain Sierra]

This is just a cool way to make a stack of functional stuff on top of a capsule. Don't know what to call it.

http://imgur.com/a/5fc8S

THAT is awesome.

[Kurotenshi]

Simple engine aesthetics:

Does require F12 part clipping, and EditorExtensions.

Just get a big tank, clip an FL-T200 on the bottom node (with radial attachment disabled), and the attach an LV-T30 or -T45 on the small tank's upper node. Drains perfectly without the need for fuel lines

[GusTurbo]

I have a design request, for anyone who's up for it. I'd like to see a stock engine assembly of some sort that approximates the look of a linear aerospike engine, preferably one that is easily used as a subassembly.

I tried putting several toroidal aerospikes side-by-side, but I'm not satisfied with the look.

[Woopert]

I have a design request, for anyone who's up for it. I'd like to see a stock engine assembly of some sort that approximates the look of a linear aerospike engine, preferably one that is easily used as a subassembly.

I tried putting several toroidal aerospikes side-by-side, but I'm not satisfied with the look.

http://i.imgur.com/o7WH4GSl.png

Does it have to be made out of aerospikes, or just have to look like it?

[Captain Sierra]

Simple engine aesthetics:

http://i.imgur.com/1DuCjuv.jpg

Does require F12 part clipping, and EditorExtensions.

Just get a big tank, clip an FL-T200 on the bottom node (with radial attachment disabled), and the attach an LV-T30 or -T45 on the small tank's upper node. Drains perfectly without the need for fuel lines

There's another way to do this which does not involve increasing fuel density (for those who think that's cheating). I've done it on an SSTO before and it looks boss. I'll add pictures later.

[GusTurbo]

Does it have to be made out of aerospikes, or just have to look like it?

Just looking like it is fine.

[sgt_flyer]

I have a design request, for anyone who's up for it. I'd like to see a stock engine assembly of some sort that approximates the look of a linear aerospike engine, preferably one that is easily used as a subassembly.

I tried putting several toroidal aerospikes side-by-side, but I'm not satisfied with the look.

http://i.imgur.com/o7WH4GSl.png

Hi Here's a WIP based on what you asked

(the engine is made of 4x LVT-30 at this stage of building, 73 parts, 6.03 tons - 860 kN of thrust)

i built it without symmetry, to avoid problems when using x2 symmetry while building a craft (so to avoid engine torque, i used RCS builder to help building the thing )

i guess i will make an 'optional' flank, in order to reduce part count if this assembly is placed next to each other

[GusTurbo]

Looking good. Question: what's the problem with symmetry? This isn't something I've heard before.

[sgt_flyer]

basically, when you use (for example) a 2.5m fuel tank with a quad adapter, with engines placed with x4 symmetry on it. then, you place the fuel tank with x4 symmetry on something else - at this point, when you try to work with the engines, there are some symmetry bugs (because the engines have x4 * x4 symmetry ) - on the other hand, when you place your engines 1 by 1 on the quad adapter, you don't have symmetry problems when you use a x4 symmetry on the fuel tank.

the same problems exists with engines clusters on a single fuel tank - when you use symmetry on the fuel tanks, the symmetric parts placed on it can behave weirdly regarding symmetry.

some ways to solve this problem, is to build the cluster without symmetry, or placing the engine cluster 1 booster by 1 booster after you used a x4 symmetry on the fuel tanks.

ok, here's the version with the flanks

(basically, i put a cubic strut on each end of the rover body, and the flank simply needs to be attached to the cubic strut node)

the final aerospike has 76 parts, + 9 parts for a flank. (the flanks are made with the small control surface, with all of it's inputs disabled so it does not move)

here, radially mounted with x2 symmetry, with 2 flanks

inflight

in orbit.

Edit : here's the .craft files (the engine is saved as a perfect subassembly, as i have attached the engines to the probe body with struts), with the 'flanks' as a separate subassembly.

the 'root' part is a cubic strut, so you can place the engine radially or attach it to a node.

Linear Aerospike .craft file

Linear Aerospike Flank .craft file

Edited February 3, 2014 by sgt_flyer

[GusTurbo]

Very nice. I'll have to give it a try.

As for the symmetry thing, that sounds like the same bug that has ruined several of my designs in the past.