Aesthetics or Pancakes?

[problemecium]

I balance the two. I'll build my rockets to do what I want, but arrange the components to not look stupid. If it looks too stupid anyway I try a different design.

[Bomoo]

I can get both using KJR!

[pauix]

I'll worry about aesthetics when I can get the pancakes to land on Duna or Eve without explosions, wobbling and structural failures.

[TheDarkStar]

Just about all I make are asparagus'd pancakes. Sometimes, I add a second asparagus layer underneath, rather than to the side, to make it less prone to collapsing.

What's this "aesthetics" thing? Can I blow it up?

[Redrobin]

If it looks good, I will do it.

[Superfluous J]

Personally I find my favorite rockets are the least reasonable in the real world. Like 3 command chairs strapped to a small rocket on top of a SRB that can get 3 guys to my Minmus base with the least fuel. Or that huge Kethane base/lander/orbiter combo craft I launched in one go with a ring of Skippers attached via decoupler to the outside. Would that kind of thing make it in the real world? No way. But holy cow it was fun to build and fly.

[The Jedi Master]

I've built both. Whatever comes out of my brain's assembly line is fine with me. Ironically, though, the sleek rockets seem to work better than the pancakes...

[Jouni]

I usually prefer rockets that resemble something that could work in the real world. Perhaps that's because of my background in tabletop RPGs. I tend to assume that every game system is just a framework for doing reasonable things in a measurable way. You can always find ways to abuse game systems simulating reality to do all kinds of unreasonable things, but I don't feel that's the way the game is supposed to be played.

[AmpsterMan]

Aesthetics. I like going to places in style!

[Wooks]

I fly pyramids, so I guess I don´t care about aerodinamics, but boy does it looks pretty

[Liowen]

I prefer Waffles....with strawberries and whiptcream. They are so much better than pancakes, and more filling as well......

As far as ship building goes I originally tried to be as "realistic" as I could, but found that it was making things too unstable to be usable. Now I mostly build for function than looks, although some of my crafts look good without trying.

[TerLoki]

Even before I installed FAR I liked making rockets that were more aesthetically pleasing. Though one other reason for making tall aerodynamic rockets I've found is that, since I use a lot of big parts from KW Rocketry, building tall with only a few engines and decouplers helps keep things simple and reliable. I'll admit that I wouldn't mind trying to get a little more variety though, most of my launch vehicles tend to wind up looking like Delta or Ariane rip-offs.

[WaveFunctionP]

I fly pyramids, so I guess I don´t care about aerodinamics, but boy does it looks pretty

Hey, it worked for the Goa'uld!

[merendel]

I'd like to put nosecones on things, but my need to have Sr docking ports on things kind of prevents that.

Maybe I can just dock a nosecone to them, though, and add some sepratrons to it.

I've done that before. The effect is prety cool just be careful how you angle the sepratrons. Unless you go for a strait off the top launch of the cones they will probably spiral away. I actualy ended up with a configuration once where it looped off and came right back around and smashed into my rocket Now I just spin my ship on its central axis and undock the things to let inertia fling them away.

[Pecan]

If not trolling, why does anyone think asparagus = ugly?

A core with two radial boosters and nosecones is ok? If you add fuel-lines so the boosters keep the central core fuelled does it stop being ok? (Onion)

A core with four radials is ok? Still ok if they feed the central core? Why not if the first pair to be staged feed the next (which feed the core)? (Onion -> Asparagus)

I'm writing-up an 'Exploring the system' series of ships and missions at the moment (I know, I know; all I can say is I'm doing lots of overtime still for the next week or so) and the step from orbit to moons illustrates the design differences in stacked, radial/onion and asparagus so I'm really asking for opinions here*. Certainly asparagus can be ugly, but it doesn't have to be. An onion design with core + 6 boosters looks the same as an asparagus one, except for the way the fuel-lines run.

[*Because I'll include a section of community-comments in the write-up]

[cantab]

Asparagus per se doesn't have to be ugly, but the designs that maximally exploit it are wide "pancake" rockets. Beauty is of course in the eye of the beholder, but they certainly don't look anything like real rockets.

[GusTurbo]

If not trolling, why does anyone think asparagus = ugly?

A core with two radial boosters and nosecones is ok? If you add fuel-lines so the boosters keep the central core fuelled does it stop being ok? (Onion)

A core with four radials is ok? Still ok if they feed the central core? Why not if the first pair to be staged feed the next (which feed the core)? (Onion -> Asparagus)

I'm writing-up an 'Exploring the system' series of ships and missions at the moment (I know, I know; all I can say is I'm doing lots of overtime still for the next week or so) and the step from orbit to moons illustrates the design differences in stacked, radial/onion and asparagus so I'm really asking for opinions here*. Certainly asparagus can be ugly, but it doesn't have to be. An onion design with core + 6 boosters looks the same as an asparagus one, except for the way the fuel-lines run.

[*Because I'll include a section of community-comments in the write-up]

I think the idea is that excessive asparagus is ugly, like the kind people use for their 500+ tonne lifters.

[Motokid600]

I think the idea is that excessive asparagus is ugly, like the kind people use for their 500+ tonne lifters.

Uhm.. I think it might just be the color orange. Is what makes them so unsightly..

[Camacha]

I use FAR, so no asparagus pancakes for me. Besides, I will not launch anything that looks messed up, I will keep on fiddling until I have something that works and looks decent.

[Brotoro]

The aesthetics of what looks like a 'real' rocket is determined from real life rockets where the physics dictates the design choices.

I also let the physics of KSP dictate the design of MY rockets, so wide and non-streamlined is what I get. When KSP finally gives a drag advantage to adding nose cones and fairings, then my designs will reflect this.

...and they have to give me fairings, too, of course.

Edited March 17, 2014 by Brotoro

[lammatt]

if you need to build an unreasonably huge rocket, you are probably doing it wrong.

of cos you can say, it's my game; i play how i want

but i can also reply, it's my thought, i comment how i want.

Edited March 17, 2014 by lammatt

[Xacktar]

if you need to build an unreasonably huge rocket, you are probably doing it wrong.

of cos you can say, it's my game; i play how i want

but i can also reply, it's my thought, i comment how i want.

Doing it all wrong, and having a blast.

Aesthetics? What Aesthetics?

9 out of 10 Kerbals prefer boosters to being stranded on Eve.

Edited March 17, 2014 by Xacktar

[lammatt]

Doing it all wrong, and having a blast.

http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/432649132550155884/4DB4D7CAA65B6D338458B542792F30EC3B65DF7A/

Aesthetics? What Aesthetics?

http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/433771856017698317/3D62EDA929172DB7E96041ACF5369ABE102DBD76/

9 out of 10 Kerbals prefer boosters to being stranded on Eve.

http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/433774934589372506/EC8A82393203F79D8308846C8B121BE9A3A52E08/

o well... ok... i admit

i dont have the current flagship model of i7 or xeon....

i am only running on Phenom2X4 955 and a single HD7850

i cant afford making crazy thing like these.

[roosterr]

I do as best I can for clean lines, I hate asparagus, but pretty much forced to use it if you want to loft anything worthy of long manned travel into space. With that said, any more than six strapped on the first stage core is where I draw the line and will build via kerbin rendezvous.

THIS WOULD MAKE A GREAT POLL!

Edited March 17, 2014 by roosterr

[Elington]

These techniques are perfectly realistic within the game physics.

Real life rockets are not meeting any aesthetics criteria with anything but their paint. Everything else on them is made to achieve maximum effectiveness in real physics.

Asparagus staging is the same approach applied to KSP physics. Effective KSP rockets look different from real life rockets, because physics are different.

Perfectly stated IMHO.