jahall4
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 219
Having experience with both RS and OR, They both have their strong (and weak) points, but IMO RS is the better option unless you need (or want) to extend the function of your simulator. There a few important reasons why RS wins out over OR as it relates to ease of use and accuracy in simulation and plots. I won’t expound on them here, except to say with RS we can draw and simulate very detailed rockets like the one pictured below and they fly as expected (yes this rocket has a flat nosecone ) . The one caveat is that I don’t use RS 10 only 9. I’m hearing/seeing too many issues with 10 to fully adopt at this time. 9 has some issues too, but I guess its “better the devil you know”.
If you'd like some assistances with RS (incl. getting you design from OR into RS) we offer consulting services for a very reasonable fee. You won’t be billed if we can't get it drawn and simulated.
Allen Hall (NAR #98014, Tripoli #16881)
Reliable Rocket
https://www.facebook.com/ReliableRocket
Here is some more info about this bird… it’s 10” in diameter, constructed of “sonotube” airframe and birch ply bulkheads. The RS design file has some 75 components specified.
If you'd like some assistances with RS (incl. getting you design from OR into RS) we offer consulting services for a very reasonable fee. You won’t be billed if we can't get it drawn and simulated.
Allen Hall (NAR #98014, Tripoli #16881)
Reliable Rocket
https://www.facebook.com/ReliableRocket
Here is some more info about this bird… it’s 10” in diameter, constructed of “sonotube” airframe and birch ply bulkheads. The RS design file has some 75 components specified.