PunkRocketScience
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2009
- Messages
- 2,065
- Reaction score
- 0
For those of you like me who hadn't noticed...
The official rules are now posted on EMRR....
The official rules are now posted on EMRR....
It probably has to do with the "dynamic stability" that Rocksim calculates. I'm sure Rocksim experts will chime in here. If you plot the graph of the flight you will probably see some wild oscillations. There are ways to reduce them by chaiging your design or your motor selection...
Originally posted by RaVen1357
One more question, The nosecone doesn't have to be approved as "realistic," right?
By the way, for those of you who have not visited the contest page in a while, the list of prizes has been growing....
Originally posted by PunkRocketScience
...now let's hope that it does well against the likes of the Evil Darth Cox and his arch nemisis Obi Chan Kenobi...
Who is it gonna be? Whose design will reign supreme ???
Originally posted by Afterburner
Who is it gonna be? Whose design will reign supreme ???
Oooh! Yeah! It's a good thing that I decided to pack my payload section with 400 pounds of truffles and goose liver...
Ah, Chan, you're just trying to lull us all into a false sense of security. I suspect your computer has been running the optimizer 24 hours a day to tweak out the last few millimeters of altitude.Originally posted by chanstevens
... Looks like a cool concept, and I'll probably throw an hour or so into it once I get my taxes done. If I think I can cobble together something competitive with so little time, you'll get it.
...
The Anti-Zeus
Originally posted by BobCox
Claude,
How many entries have you gotten so far? Is Nick entering this contest, putting his perfect record at risk?
Originally posted by PunkRocketScience
Take your time Bob and Chan... You don't really want to rush to get your entries in before say....June or July!
Originally posted by BobCox
Ah, Chan, you're just trying to lull us all into a false sense of security. I suspect your computer has been running the optimizer 24 hours a day to tweak out the last few millimeters of altitude.
I'm in similar mode as you--I roughed out one design Sunday night, looked like it could do well on 2 events, will not fare well on another, and event #3 looks like it ought to be very hard to do well on, sort of like this years TARC, with it being too easy.
Originally posted by BobCox
Very funny, Todd. Just for that, I will crush you last!
(Maybe I should probably get my entry submitted before I start talking trash.)
It was only about 100 different sims. The first 80 or so were the same in all the .RKT files that I submitted. But yeah, even 100 sims is a bit obsessive.Originally posted by chanstevens
This from the guy that ran 400+ sims for the last contest...
Wimp! Nick still has the best career average, though.I figured I would skip this one, truly not anticipating a top performance, so as not to mess up my EMRR virtual amalgamated performance index score used on world rankings.
It's probably not much of a surprise that my trademark lightning-bolt fins are back.Looking forward to seeing a return to Zeus-fin design...
Me too. In the past I have always tried to win the drag race and do reasonably well in the other events. For this contest I am concentrating more on the cargo efficiency events and just hoping not to suck too bad in the drag race.By the way, Bob--I've given up on the drag race, especially since duration/proximity to pad are no longer factors.
Now I know you're just blowing smoke to confuse your competition. The truth shall be revealed in about a week.My design is hanging around 50 pounds, which is going to be a little slow off the rod and in the air. Once I get it moving, though, the momentum should blow your feeble little entry out of the sky.
Yes, the cargo aspects of this contest do add a lot of compelexity. In VC#8 I spent so much effort trying to squeeze out the last bit of altitude that I completely missed the cargo factor. As a result I finished 14th overall, my worst performance ever. I will not make that same mistake again.Originally posted by RaVen1357
I found designing for this contest a bit harder than for the last one. For VC9, all your rocket needed to do was go really high, and stay there for a while in way or another.
This round actually has conflicting requirements. I.E., add weight to increase altitude for altitude efficiency, or leave it out and use that as extra cargo for cargo efficiency.
Anyway, I think I managed a good compromise between all the events.
Originally posted by BobCox
Now I know you're just blowing smoke to confuse your competition. The truth shall be revealed in about a week.
Yes, the cargo aspects of this contest do add a lot of compelexity. In VC#8 I spent so much effort trying to squeeze out the last bit of altitude that I completely missed the cargo factor. As a result I finished 12th overall, my worst performance ever. I will not make that same mistake again.
I will make a new mistake instead.
I am being visited by "executives" this week, so I am spending extra time at work. I should be able to work on my entry after they leave.Originally posted by Afterburner
Of course Bob will wait a little more before submitting his entry, just to stress me out.
Nope. Big and simple. Since Chan's design is 50 pounds, I may have to add a little more weight to get mine to 51 pounds.On the other hand, his entry will probably be so complex that it might take me a couple days just to review it. Who knows if I will be able to achieve that before the deadline.
Enter your email address to join: