Fairings discussion

[Majorjim!]

Hi all,

I think this is a good time to start a tread on custom stock fairings. I wont be giving out any advice as I am the one who needs it!

Ive built many ships in KSP but I am always stopped from being 100% satisfied by my hopeless attempts at fairings.

For larger ships we seem to be stuck choosing between the structural panels or Ibeams. Ive tried both and have had (since yesterday) more luck with the Ibeams. They do add a lot of weight and extra parts but look great if done well. The structural panels are lighter on parts and weight but I always seem to have the issue with the panels at the top, they overlap leaving unsightly edges.

So, if us stock purists want good looking fairings are we stuck with Ibeams and structural panels? If so, lets get some ideas going for better stock fairings.

Thanks for reading.

MJ

[sgt_flyer]

I have faced the same problems, (i'm making structural panel based fairings which splits in halves) and i ended up adding cubic struts and the aerodynamic nosecone to one of the halves, to cap the fairings. On separation, the nosecone remains with the half it was attached to.

[Majorjim!]

I have faced the same problems, (i'm making structural panel based fairings which splits in halves) and i ended up adding cubic struts and the aerodynamic nosecone to one of the halves, to cap the fairings. On separation, the nosecone remains with the half it was attached to.

This sounds interesting Sgt. Do you have any pics for reference?

[sgt_flyer]

here's an album of one of those fairings (just built it from scratch)

Javascript is disabled. View full album

basically, i used the 2.5m battery as a support (for saving as a subassembly later), because it's flat, and pretty lightweight - from there, i put two cubic struts on the battery, and the smallest decouplers on them (easier to use with those decouplers, when you want to 'open' the fairings to work on your payload, you simply have to pick the decoupler, and put the half fairing 'on hold' - when you will want to close back, it will simply go back to the cubic struts it came from (so no risks of misalignment of radial decouplers )

i attached another cubic strut to the decoupler, which serves me to adjust the fairing distance after i built it. the rest of the fairings is built from the cubic strut (here, an expanded 2.5m conical fairing). i start out by creating a straight ring of structural panels (2x5 normally for this kind of expanded fairings). under this ring, i place new panels angled towards the rocket (to make the expanded base)

and over it, i built straight up to the height i wanted, then angle the panels to 'match' the FL-A10 adapter angle. (i then copy this column and place it atop each segment of the ring)

once the fairing is done up to the top (in x2 symmetry), i revert back to no symmetry, and place cubic struts on one of the halves, stacked up to the middle of the fairings. then, a last cubic strut radially attached to those cubic struts allow me to place the FL-A10 on top, sealing the opening.

once those points are done, i strut the top of the fairings columns (1 strut between each column, just below the angle) and add the separatrons slightly above the middle of the fairings.

then, i just need to copy each half independently by copying it from it's decoupler and place each half on hold, erase the original symmetric halves, and replace them by their copies in no symmetry mode. (one half will have the nosecone, the other nothing)

at this point, the fairing is ready to be used

[Majorjim!]

This seems to be similar to the way I have been doing it so far.

Looking at those pics Im wondering if you could attach another Rockomax Brand Adapter to the top of the fairings. Sat down a little into the fairings. You would have to angle the top panels outward one snap angle to line up with the RBA but it may look smoother. Then the RBA would be ejected first. Then the main fairing.

It wouldn't be 100% accurate as to real world fairings but would possibly look better.

Has anyone made fairings that appear to be smooth? Apart from mulbins. I'm sure I have seen Gusturbo using something like this.

[GusTurbo]

I always have problems with making decent looking fairings. I tried to imitate Mulbin's girder-based fairings but failed miserably.

[Majorjim!]

I always have problems with making decent looking fairings. I tried to imitate Mulbin's girder-based fairings but failed miserably.

Well heres my effort with the Ibeams:

it looks good from the outside but I fail at making it work. The decoupler gets stuck in the CSM and the fairings glitch around looking crappy.

I dread having to do this for another rocket so would love to come up with a better use of the panels..

The ibeams also add quite a lot more weight to the rocket..

MJ

[Majorjim!]

Oh and thanks for moving this Mod. I wasn't sure if it was in the right place.

[Majorjim!]

Does anyone have a rocket that uses nice looking fairing's using panels? I'm beginning to think that Ibeams are the only real aesthetic choice..

[Starwhip]

I have some (Sorry, I can't post pictures at the moment:( ) that use panels. They have hexagonal symmetry, with 6 segments that fly apart when the decouplers are activated. The piece inside the fairings is standard 1.25 meter, and the rest of the rocket is the Rockomax size. There is an Aerodynamic Nosecone on the top, which flies forward (attached to an upside down decoupler, with Sepatron motors on it.) when the rest of the fairings go out.

Dual-split fairings are harder, they usually need Sepatron motors. But small probes are a good size for these. I currently have a "Weather Monitoring Satellite" (KerbSat) with dual fairing sections.

[Majorjim!]

That sounds promising Starwhip. Post some pics when you get a chance.

MJ