Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LoSboccacc]

yeah, it doesn't really work with rotations and such


but if you keep adding and working only on the "center" parts it is workable.

by center I mean the part that you added that got rotated; if you add something to the parts that get 'spawned' by the rotation tools they won't work.

[Mormota]

Apparently, having 9 of those triple stacking thingies is a bad idea. Exploded on launch.

[sneakey pete]

The dev mentioned something about it being to do with parent parts etc. All well for him to say that, but i didn't code the game so I can't understand what exactly i need to do to fix it. Hence i'm still rolling in 13.0

[olemars]

You put tricouplers on tricouplers? That causes overlapping I think, which means instant kaboom.

[kcwong]

You put tricouplers on tricouplers? That causes overlapping I think, which means instant kaboom.

I think the VAB already stop you from doing that. More likely it was symmetry malfunction, your parts look like they were connected but were really not. Then they got crushed when the engines fired.

[Mormota]

Nah, it was simply too heavy, a radial decoupler failed, and everything exploded upon smashing into each other. Also, nah, I had a tricoupler, 3 boosters on that, then each booster had a radial decoupler-attached booster, which all had a tricoupler.

Edit: Well, symmetry is simply not allowed for tricouplers, making a contraption such as mine impossible to balance. Sad.

[sluissa]

Tricouplers have been a bit of an issue for a while now. The only real way I've been using them lately is if I want to attach 3 engines to one stack of fuel tanks. And that's not really so much of an issue anymore with the fuel lines since I don't need to do that.

[Mormota]

And that means you can't have a triple main rocket to which you radially attach stuff. Sad.

[sluissa]

Just radially attach things to a single main rocket, and then attach more to those. You'll end up with things slightly more spread out, and possibly a little heavier, but that doesn't mean you're any worse off if you design it well. If you want what I think you're asking for, Single stack of fuel tanks. 3 more attached symmetrically near the bottom, engines on those. Fuel lines from the main stack to each of the single tanks to feed fuel to the engines.

Same thing, takes up a little more space, but essentially leaves you with the same setup.

[Mormota]

Yeah, I know, I know. But I think I figured out a use for tricouplers. Sometimes a rocket is simply so heavy it breaks the bottom components, but adding tricouplers allow you to make your first stage larger, and thus harder to break.

[Sirus]

Some of my best designs so far make use of tri-couplers.

[Mormota]

Teach me, master!

[Aqizzar]

Solid fuel rockets are for initially boosting yourself off the pad - just like the Space Shuttle - when you need lots of cheap, disposable thrust and you're going to be gunning full throttle anyway.  After that, there's no use for them except as a creative replacement for moon-lander struts because they're a little more durable than radial connectors.  For large enough rockets, you might not even bother with the solid boosters, because they just don't scale very well.

[forsaken1111]

I use them as an incredibly silly first stage, usually with about 36 solid boosters which fall off quickly

[LoSboccacc]

I plan and test my rockets normally using liquid engines, then, under each engine of the last stage, I put a staged booster