04-23-2006, 03:24 PM
|
 |
BARCLONE Rocketry
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 5,357
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris_Timm
From a purely visual perspective, I think this particular design would be better using a normal bertha-length tube rather than a baby tube.
These bashed designs seem to fall into specific categories.
Either they are stock big bertha/baby bertha with original fins but different color/markings to LOOK like a bash (like some of Sandman's nifty creations), or they are totally revamped with the only original parts being a stock tube and cone (like some of Excelsior's ).
Oh, another Rocksim weirdity. It didn't like fins hanging off the aft end.
It defaulted to rocksim calcs as Barrowman and Cut-Out couldn't handle it.
The drawing window had resizing issues too. Everytime I came out of editing a part, the drawing would be so huge that only the cone showed onscreen!
|
Have you tried the V8 demo yet? It has a lot of improvement over the V7 release.
I didn't have any trouble with the fins hanging past the tube edge. If anything, that helped the design as it moved the CP back just a bit. I think the problem was simply the fins being too small for any stabilizing effect. RocSim is a bit lax on telling you what the problem might be - it presumes you can read the numbers and figure it out yourself, but it isn't always evident what you're looking at. On this score, V8 isn't any better.
The short body designs are, by their very shortness, short-coupled, meaning that they tend to react a bit quicker and you can see the effect of that reaction more visibly. A long-body Corporal would be far more stable, but then you loose that "Gooney" feel to it. Goonies are supposed to be short, stubby, even rediculous impersonations of larger rockets. A full Bertha-sized tube would take it out of that (boot) camp... |