Read thread

Horus Lupercal

Primarch - Warmaster
Professor
Swingin' on a Star
Deja Vu
Biker Mice from Mars
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Registered
#2
Dude, I'm the same.
There is an aesthetic in efficiency, but beauty doesn't have a TWR.

I make things that work. And if it happens to look nice, great.
 

Horus Lupercal

Primarch - Warmaster
Professor
Swingin' on a Star
Deja Vu
Biker Mice from Mars
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Registered
#4
I'd love to see some examples. Care to post some ugly but efficient rockets?
Who, me?

Avert your eyes children.
GIF_03-23_20-Jun.gif

This was for the 20 parts to Mars extreme re-usability challenge. This footage was a test flight.
Under challenge conditions, it's gone from pad-LEO-Moon surface-LEO-pad-refuel-LEO-Mars-LEO-pad-refuel-LEO without spawn in between.

Extremely capable, but ugly as sin. I'm re-doing the challenge with the parts cap ignored and making an actual good looking system to beat it again with. The rocket is built and tested, I'm just over-engineering the refuel truck before doing the mission again, filming it and then I'll make the video to release.
 

Mars Pathfinder

«★★» CMDR «★★» // PT // FartFinder
Christmas Event Category Winner
TEAM HAWK
Swingin' on a Star
Atlas
Deja Vu
Fly me to the Moon
Under Pressure
Registered
#5
Its ok if its ugly as long its flyin reliably and doin its intended work.....
 

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Team Kolibri
Modder
TEAM HAWK
Atlas
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Forum Legend
#6
I'd love to see some examples. Care to post some ugly but efficient rockets?
Here is a simple one:
Screenshot_20200624-150402_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
Not especially ugly, but nothing exciting right?
But if you fly it well, you can go to the Moon way and back with it.
Here are a few simple tips:
- each stage has to be balanced in size. On this one, each stage has twice more fuel than the one above. That's a simple rule of thumbs, keep a ratio around 2-3 for each successive stage.
- choose a balanced engine for each stage. A heavier engine is not always suitable, as it will also make your rocket heavier and harder to move. You don't need a hammer to crush a fly.
- practice :)
 

Blazer Ayanami

Space Shuttle enthusiast // Retired Admin
Registered
Forum Legend
#7
i am bad at making beatiful rockets but i am good at making rockets that can land or orbit in a nutshell ( not beatiful rockets)
Dude, I'm the same.
There is an aesthetic in efficiency, but beauty doesn't have a TWR.

I make things that work. And if it happens to look nice, great.
Same here. I mean look at this thing:
_20200624_144453.JPG

Ugly as fuck, isn't it? Well, it can send 2000 tons to Venus from LEO. How's that for a performance?