ANNOUNCEMENT: OpenRocket version 22.02 Final is now available for download

[neil_w]

After 7 years and 9 months, including a full year of public betas, the OpenRocket team is very excited (and relieved) to announce that the final version of OpenRocket 22.02 is now available for download. This new version includes literally hundreds of new features and enhancements, UI improvements, and bug fixes.

Huge thanks go out to the following:

• The developers and everyone who contributed code, documentation, language translations, artwork, and anything else that could go into a pull request
• The testers who gave incredibly valuable feedback as we proceeded through the public beta period
• The financial contributors who made it possible for us to sign our applications
• And finally, our thousands of users who have continued to use the app, and have waited patiently (?) for a new release

Download at https://openrocket.info
Release notes: https://openrocket.info/release_notes.html

Two quick notes:

1. Mac users running macOS 13 or later must upgrade to 22.02; 15.03 will not run anymore.
2. Windows users may still encounter a warning or two while installing. This should go away sometime soon.

Here are the major new features:

• Rocket design features
  • Pods and strap-on boosters
  • Tail cones
  • Freeform fins on nose cones and transitions
  • Highly configurable rail buttons
  • Massive update to parachute configuration and part library
  • Dave Cook's extensive component library now built-in
  • Coefficient of Drag Override for components and assemblies (and more flexible override settings in general)
  • Lots more detailed geometry warnings which identify the components involved
• Appearance updates
  • Settable opacity per-component
  • Separate left/right appearance for fins, and inner/outer appearance for tubes
• App Infrastructure
  • Packaged installers for Windows, Linux, and macOS (JAR file still available)
  • Updated to Java 11
  • Native ARM version for Apple Silicon Macs (snappy!)
  • File association for ORK files: double-click files to open in the app
  • On Mac, app stays open after last window is closed

…plus myriad smaller things to make day-to-day use more enjoyable.

Thanks for your continued support!

 

[rocketgeek101]

A huge thank you to the entire development team for all their hard work to bring us this new release!

 

[boatgeek]

Huzzah!

Thank you to all of you who contributed!

 

[neil_w]

Too many warnings gunking up your rocket display? Hide them!


...becomes...

 

[cautery]

Downloaded and installed! A gigantic mountain of appreciation and thanks to any/all folks who contributed to the development of this application!

 

[bad_idea]

Congratulations to the development team on the fruits of all of your hard work! Hope you can all now relax, take some time off, and bask in the accomplishment.

 

[Buckeye]

Is there any documentation on how CP and CD are calculated for pods, strap on boosters, etc.?

 

[JoePfeiffer]

Is there any documentation on how CP and CD are calculated for pods, strap on boosters, etc.?

In what level of detail, and with what confidence what you're reading is up to date?

The description in the technical documentation at https://openrocket.info/documentation.html is pretty good and pretty old. Much of it is still current, but not all.

If you *really* want to know, the code is all there.

 

[K'Tesh]

Just downloaded it. It looks good!

 

[Buckeye]

In what level of detail, and with what confidence what you're reading is up to date?

The description in the technical documentation at https://openrocket.info/documentation.html is pretty good and pretty old. Much of it is still current, but not all.

If you *really* want to know, the code is all there.

Just in general. OR previously did not support pods, but now it does. What was the major breakthrough? New wind tunnel data, CFD, tweaking Barrowman equations, something else? I saw the technical docs were from 2013, so pods and fins-on-nosecones would not be described there.

 

[rharshberger]

Just in general. OR previously did not support pods, but now it does. What was the major breakthrough? New wind tunnel data, CFD, tweaking Barrowman equations, something else? I saw the technical docs were from 2013, so pods and fins-on-nosecones would not be described there.

People with the knowledge, willing to take the time to make it happen is what the breakthrough was. Thanks OR team!

 

[Buckeye]

People with the knowledge, willing to take the time to make it happen is what the breakthrough was. Thanks OR team!

So, no new methods, data, or modeling? Just coding existing technology?

If something new was created for simulating the aerodynamics of more complex geometries, that would make a nice R&D or NARCON report.

 

[JoePfeiffer]

Just in general. OR previously did not support pods, but now it does. What was the major breakthrough? New wind tunnel data, CFD, tweaking Barrowman equations, something else? I saw the technical docs were from 2013, so pods and fins-on-nosecones would not be described there.

It was mainly a matter of programming. All the internal data structures were based on the idea of a single stack with fins; putting on pods and side boosters required a huge level of rewrite internally.

 

[thzero]

Is there any documentation on how CP and CD are calculated for pods, strap on boosters, etc.?

The source code?

 

[Buckeye]

The source code?

Yeah, yeah, I know. I don't read Java, and I got the simple answer I needed.

 

[T-Rex]

Just downloaded. Will put it to work instead of watching the Stupid Bowl.

 

[cwbullet]

Thanks for you efforts. I am very impressed.

 

[shockie]

I have a couple of questions about this new version of OpenRocket.

If you have an older version already installed, will it just overwrite the old files with the new, and leave both the old folder structure inplace including any designs created with the old version?

I want to design a model consisting of a Nose Cone-Body Tube-Boattail-engine tube. And then place the fins on either the engine tube or preferably partially on both the lower part of the boat tail & engine tube?

EDIT

I've attached the current design. I don't need the full-length engine tube going all the way to a centering ring.

 

[thzero]

It wont overwrite your saved rocket files, unless you load one up in the new version, and then click 'save' then it will overwrite it.

 

[thzero]

It wont overwrite your saved rocket files, unless you load one up in the new version, and then click 'save' then it will overwrite it.

And just to clarify... if you overwrite an existing 15.03 file, it won't open back up in 15.03. So my advice/recommendation is to make sure you've backed up all your rocket designs and put them somwhere into cold storage, and then move onto the latest new version.

 

[SiboVG]

And just to clarify... if you overwrite an existing 15.03 file, it won't open back up in 15.03. So my advice/recommendation is to make sure you've backed up all your rocket designs and put them somwhere into cold storage, and then move onto the latest new version.

I also want to add that we've tried to maintain backward compatibility with OR 15.03 as much as possible. So design files created in 22.02 should be more-or-less readable by OpenRocket 15.03.

 

[manixFan]

Wow! A native Mac silicon version! Excellent work by all involved. I checked several sims submitted by University teams for the Spaceport Cup and it does seem very snappy indeed. A quick review seems to indicate that everything is working correctly - the photo editor, the PDF export, 3D view, etc. I ran into one instance where I had to delete a motor and create a new config, but that was an easy fix.

Congrats to the team!


Tony

 

[lakeroadster]

I keep pulling up old designs, updating them with the new features, and saying to myself "Well, That's Awesome".

The "Show Warnings" button is da bomb as is the "Use separate appearances for left and right sides(s)" capability.
For the development teams due diligence in the past, present and future... Thanks

 

[neil_w]

Always happy that someone out there is using all the little appearance features.

There is a faction that is somewhat less than enthusiastic about the appearance features in OR, but IMHO it is one of the four important ways that OR is used: 1) Rocket design, 2) Static analysis (stability, CP, CG), 3) Flight simulation, and 4) Appearance design and preview. The guys who did the original 3D work all those years ago (mostly Bill Kuker I think) did an absolutely *fantastic* job at making it very easy to produce great-looking renders. The renders from OR look pretty much photo-realistic without much effort.

 

[lakeroadster]

... The guys who did the original 3D work all those years ago (mostly Bill Kuker I think) did an absolutely *fantastic* job at making it very easy to produce great-looking renders. The renders from OR look pretty much photo-realistic without much effort.

Agreed. I've been looking into different CAD packages for a program that will run on a laptop, and products such as Fusion 360 cost $500 a year.. BUT if you want a high quality rendering you have to pay extra for that on a per design basis. The stock Fusion 360 render isn't as good as what you get with Open Rocket.

 

[thzero]

FreeCad, OnShape

 

[neil_w]

The rendering in OR is ridiculously good. I often marvel at it, especially when I look at pictures of my finished builds and compare them to the renders... often nearly indistinguishable, e.g.:

 

[thzero]

Always happy that someone out there is using all the little appearance features.

There is a faction that is somewhat less than enthusiastic about the appearance features in OR, but IMHO it is one of the four important ways that OR is used: 1) Rocket design, 2) Static analysis (stability, CP, CG), 3) Flight simulation, and 4) Appearance design and preview. The guys who did the original 3D work all those years ago (mostly Bill Kuker I think) did an absolutely *fantastic* job at making it very easy to produce great-looking renders. The renders from OR look pretty much photo-realistic without much effort.

LOL.. ok, I'm one of those. :|

 

[boatgeek]

Always happy that someone out there is using all the little appearance features.

There is a faction that is somewhat less than enthusiastic about the appearance features in OR, but IMHO it is one of the four important ways that OR is used: 1) Rocket design, 2) Static analysis (stability, CP, CG), 3) Flight simulation, and 4) Appearance design and preview. The guys who did the original 3D work all those years ago (mostly Bill Kuker I think) did an absolutely *fantastic* job at making it very easy to produce great-looking renders. The renders from OR look pretty much photo-realistic without much effort.

I confess to never having used the appearance features. Mainly because I haven't taken the time to develop my rocket-finishing skills to the point where it would be helpful/non-depressing to see a photo-realistic view of what could have been. However, I do love to see the renders that other people have made.

 

[Tractionengines]

Found a possible issue. Tube fins had some issues with CD calculations in an earlier bata. That was fixed.

But I just opened my file in "official" 22.02 and my altitudes were much lower again. If I go into the Tubefin Set and change the # of fins... adding fins ADDS to apogee, and shows a lower CD value in graphs.

Anybody else see this yet? I will make a simple model and look it. If I can't figure out why, will post the design from my other computer.