Discussion in 'Scratch Built' started by neil_w, May 8, 2017.
You know I don't use those fancy simulators.
I bet someone out there can do one up on a 3D printer. Have it rear eject.
Just saw a news feed the other day about a rocket plane. London to Australia in 4 hours that is very similar to this.
If I can find it again I'll post a link
This is an idea I had that I wanted to try out. I'm not especially happy with the results, but it took so much effort to do it I'm posting it anyway. Tweaking and modifying the curved fins is way too tedious to allow me to fiddle with this the way I want to, at least until I have a clearer idea of where I want to go with it. Maybe someone else can take inspiration.
P.S. Ignore the CP and CG here.
Kind of looks like an X-wing, but the wings got wet and started to droop..
The double body tube is far-out.
Hapan battle cruiser
And now for a good bit of silly fun inspired by Nytrunner on another thread.
Fantastic. I didn't even think of turning the words upside down.
If only you could set it up rear eject so it spikes into the ground
That needs to be you're L1 rocket Neil
Or just leave out the parachute...
It's kind of tempting for a quickie build... (not L1 though, I'm not going there, probably ever)
Cooommme to the dark side, Neil...
How about a loose fin can?
On the pad the stop sign portion is at the top, as all stop signs are.
Two launch lugs are used, one on the piece of post (BT) above the sign, the other on the sign itself. At launch the body tube shoots upward through the loose fin can, but catches it at the bottom of the post and then the stop sign soars into the sky.
It would need a shock chord or a spring to prevent damage.
If you could get the shock chord spring rate just right... at apogee the sign would slide to the middle of the post (BT), the rocket would become unstable, and tumble recovery back to terra firma.
That sounds like a perfect job for @Daddyisabar.
From the oblique view I was reminded of this
Ah yes, a classic from the "You had one job" series.
At least the fins would end up on the bottom of the rocket along with the motor - where they should be! Such sliding bits would not help in my rehabilitation from oddroc flier to respectable 4FNC machines.
We are not here to support any such rehabilitation! We are here to enable your continued descent into odd-roc madness. Although to be honest I don't know how much further there is to go for you.
I was mindsiming a "Wooshing Crane " tractor motored rocket covered in feathers and with flexible hind legs. Would need lots of soaking in Borax. Such impure thoughts alone wound my inner RSO. Maybe time to fall off the wagon again and give into the oddroc Madness!
I know it is a bird brained idea, but a mindsim is a terrible thing to waste . The Dark Art of model oddrocketry may seem unnatural to some, but it is the only way to fly the rockets you love.
Canted tractor motors in the sign that eject with some added weight on the bottom. A nice green grass field at the ole Kentucky Home. No RSO.
I just found this thread, and can't resist throwing in some comments on the early posts. Please forgive if I wind up going over old ground or beating dead horses.
I couldn't quickly find the right post to multi-quote; you stated that, because you have an easier time thinking up cool fin cans than front ends, you often end up with plain fronts, or straining to work something in later. You wrote that you need to concentrate on coming up with interesting concepts for both ends at once to make cohesive designs. Why? If what you've been doing works, i.e. you end up with a cohesive design in the end, then why change it? Also, you could ponder fronts and, when you come with something good, do a design with a boring fin can and put it on the shelf to go later with a new fin can concept where they can be tweaked together. In short, keep doing what works for you and don't fel like you should be doing something else. And believe me, it's working.
Maybe a little; the rear mirrors of the canards are not necessary, but they don't really hurt. If you want busy then they're not too much so. And see below.
Me, I like the first one best, with the pylons going smoothly into the ring, rather than "overshooting" and coming back in. I love the concept of half the pylons coming from below and half from above.
Ooh, good! The paint scheme makes it several times better, and I already liked it. And, still, see below.
This is a neat idea. Do not fail to get back to this.
This and its many variants are nice, but there's one problem, IMHO. That pale sage green for the solid colored parts is not doing you any favors. Imagine instead the plasma warp core wrap surrounded by metallic silver, possibly even actual silver (or aluminum) leaf. That would be awesome.
This is the "below" from above. Use this for the canards and their mirrors in the first design. Personally, I'd also make the arcs on fin and body a little shallower, giving more of an almond shape. I was actually thinking this before I got to it in the thread.
You asked for opinions on three fins vs. four. I like the odd number, but you could go a wee bit more "far out" (further out?) by using five. Also, perhaps experiment with offsetting the little fins above the struts by half a space (i.e. 60, 45, or 36 degrees).
That's all for now. I've got a bunch more to read.
Thank you for the clumped feedback.
Just a couple of quick follow-ups for the moment:
Some of them have died, decomposed, and been reincarnated (and died again). But that's fine.
Put simply: it's all about my being satisfied that the design is balanced and cohesive. I seem to often find myself with designs (half-baked, of course) with what I would call boring front ends that leave me dissatisfied. I've been able to put it all together on a relatively small number of designs, and most of them I've gone on to build (or they're in the queue). I think the best pure original design I've done so far is Alcubierre, which strikes me as cohesive and interesting from front to back (even though the front is quite simple, it works well in the context of the whole rocket).
Anyway, that's all there is to it, really: whether or not I like it.
I agree about the scoop for PD2. Keep the warp core on PD1.
Call it "Pixelated Bertha" for the double entendre.
Oh he's way past that now
I... don't get it?
Pixelated refers to a thing being broken up into pixels, usually of low resolution so the pixelation is readily visible. It's what many people call "8-bit", even though there were plenty of low res graphics on early 16 bit computer and gaming systems.
Pixelated is also one of many slang terms for "very drunk?". I don't know why.
Ah, that's the part I didn't get. I actually understand the gist of the slang term, just hadn't heard it before (or else didn't remember it).
The *** Bertha would actually be a fun rocket, albeit draggy as hell.
I'd like to see the center white to black flames with #2 or 3 nose and flames carrying the flame theme farther into the rocket.
Flames have been banished from this particular rocket for the moment, because they conflict with the sci-fi vibe of the rocket. However, I do like the look so I'm going to try to come up with another application.
Paint scheme for PDII is still in flux.
Separate names with a comma.