Open Source Construction Techniques for Craft Aesthetics

[Gue__1]

Wow that's really handy, is it save?

Does it not spontaneously explode?

Gue

[GusTurbo]

It seems to work without exploding on my small test craft there. No explosions or anything.

[Majorjim!]

It seems to work without exploding on my small test craft there. No explosions or anything.

[GusTurbo]

Micro Apollo is basically done, I'm just fine tuning some things. I may add fairings and interstages, but I'm worried about the mass and part count penalty.

[Giggleplex777]

Micro Apollo is basically done, I'm just fine tuning some things. I may add fairings and interstages, but I'm worried about the mass and part count penalty.

You should release two versions.

[Woopert]

Using a stack separator with a similar setup to Ravenchant's above you can get rid of all the decouplers and still have a similar effect.

http://i.imgur.com/9azMTCx.png

http://i.imgur.com/8loXiJy.png

Wow! Would you be open (pun intended since it's Open Source Construction Techniques for Craft Aesthetics...) to share that download? It looks like a nice Apollo style transposition, docking, and extraction.

Also GusTurbo, looking forward towards Micro Apollo. It looks sweet !

[GusTurbo]

I need help. For the life of me, I cannot make a fairing that looks good and fits around my lander.

You have my eternal gratitude if you can pull it off.

http://www./view/fuid40mx04wgj7b/Micro_Apollo_X.craft

[sgt_flyer]

here's a small testing i did for your micro apollo fairings

although, as it's built with the big ladders, it add a bit of lag

(382 parts with the fairing - splits in 4)

at the base of the vehicle, i have placed 4 cubic struts with the small 0.625 decoupler, instead of the radial decouplers, radially attached M200 Ibeam to the decouplers, then added at the lowest point : 4 cubic struts on each side of the I-beam, with 8 ladders. then, on the highest point, 2 cubic struts on each side of the I-beam, with 4 ladders.

(though, as i added I-beams, you'll have to tweak a bit your engine thrust, at least on the second stage)

[Majorjim!]

You should release two versions.

Yeah do this.

I know the feeling Gus. There are only a few decent fairing methods.

Ibeams, bad: very heavy and part intensive, tricky to make. Good: Look great if done well.

Panels, bad: ugly and too damn square. Good: lightweight and easy to assemble.

cubic struts and backwards stuff, bad: very part intensive. Good: lightweight and look good if done well.

Ladders? Ive never tried this.

Backward solar panels? also never tried it. It would be a bit part intensive but shouldn't weigh too much and could look quite good.

I cant think of any others atm.

See if you can come up with a new solution Gus.

MJ

*Edit*

I used cubic struts and backwards stuff for my Micro Apollo. But 1250 parts is just silly..

Edited February 21, 2014 by Majorjim

[Majorjim!]

I need help. For the life of me, I cannot make a fairing that looks good and fits around my lander.

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

You have my eternal gratitude if you can pull it off.

http://www./view/fuid40mx04wgj7b/Micro_Apollo_X.craft

Ive been thinking about this Gus. I think the cubic struts with backwards solar panels is the only fairing that would fit.

Give it a go.

MJ

[GusTurbo]

I gave the backwards panel approach a shot, and here's the result. 814 parts(!!!)

As an aside, I have found that Hack Gravity in the debug menu makes for good screenshots of craft on the launch pad without launch clamps in the way.

Edited February 22, 2014 by GusTurbo

[sgt_flyer]

Gus, you should try to use the comms DTS-m1 antenna instead of the solar panels it should reduce your fairing part count a bit (and when i tested your rocket with the ladders fairings, your rocket did not need launch clamps it was sturdy enough to rest on it's engines

[Majorjim!]

I gave the backwards panel approach a shot, and here's the result. 814 parts(!!!)

As an aside, I have found that Hack Gravity in the debug menu makes for good screenshots of craft on the launch pad without launch clamps in the way.

http://i.imgur.com/PBIy1RS.png

That looks great Gus! Do you know how many parts the cubic fairing adds?

MJ

[sgt_flyer]

@ Majorjim having tested the .craft without fairings (the version with the 'ladders' fairings above is built on the .craft gus made avaible in his post) roughly 450 /470 parts for the fairing

[Gue__1]

Hey GusTurbo,

I have had a play with it and got a pretty nice fairing that you can see here.

It all comes to a total of 461 parts. But I have to give credit to Majorjim because it weight 10.6 tons(!!!), i guess beauty comes with a price

Good lock picking....

Gue

[Captain Sierra]

Hey GusTurbo,

I have had a play with it and got a pretty nice fairing that you can see here.

http://i.imgur.com/tRW93t1.png

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

It all comes to a total of 461 parts. But I have to give credit to Majorjim because it weight 10.6 tons(!!!), i guess beauty comes with a price

Good lock picking....

Gue

Are those radial parachutes?

[Gue__1]

Are those radial parachutes?

Jup and they are crazy heavy

Gue

[Captain Sierra]

Jup and they are crazy heavy

Gue

I know. Why is that part so heavy? Oh well, I guess we wo't know til squad rebalances them, unless we fix it with a rebalance mod first (PM's 5thHorseman).

[sgt_flyer]

Well, the parachutes effectiveness is based on their weight. The heavier the parachute, the more it will slow down what's attached to it - all courtesy of the game's drag system which use, among other factors, the weight of a part in the drag formula they use (which is why you only need one xl chute for the 3 man command pod - evrn if it has the same deployed drag than the radial parachute

[Captain Sierra]

Well, the parachutes effectiveness is based on their weight. The heavier the parachute, the more it will slow down what's attached to it - all courtesy of the game's drag system which use, among other factors, the weight of a part in the drag formula they use (which is why you only need one xl chute for the 3 man command pod - evrn if it has the same deployed drag than the radial parachute

Do you know the formula by which KSP calculates drag (Isn't it something like: mass * drag-coefficient * something-about-AoA)? If possible, I'd like to calculate it so that the mass parameter can be lowered while still maintaining the same overall drag by increasing the deployedDrag parameter.

[Gue__1]

I know. Why is that part so heavy? Oh well, I guess we won't know til squad rebalances them, unless we fix it with a rebalance mod first (PM's 5thHorseman).

I do not think they are unbalanced, parachutes have great functionality in the game.

All I hope for is a feature added that can help making fairings. But Squad will probably not add that until aerodynamics revision.

Gue

[GusTurbo]

I do not think they are unbalanced, parachutes have great functionality in the game.

All I hope for is a feature added that can help making fairings. But Squad will probably not add that until aerodynamics revision.

Gue

Maybe if the aesthetics crowd becomes powerful enough, we can lobby Squad for fairings just because they look cool.

[HazelPine]

I think the crowd is already big enough! I mean, look at this thread! We should do it.

[sgt_flyer]

I don't think squad will work on fairings until they also remake the stock aerodynamics model. (And once the do, they'll surely rework spaceplane parts at the same time )

[GusTurbo]

I think NASA will convince them to add fairings, even if they don't do anything. The SLS just wouldn't look right without them.

Also, I've updated the main post to include all of the new techniques posted since February 5.