Rocket builds

[ATM Reaper]

Show me your best rocket builds inside and out. We have so many options now with the content added in the Spaced Out DLC, it would be good to share what we have found to spread the knowledge base. I for one would like to see a drillcone build as I have many questions about it i.e. do you need a pilot or can it be automated? Looking forward to seeing some ideas I havent considered thus far.

[Simonova]

6 hours ago, ATM Reaper said:

do you need a pilot or can it be automated

Rockets won't take off until a pilot has operated the control station, which means there's no way to fully automate a rocket; you can hit the launch button on a rocket with no crew, but it'll just sit there:

[NewWorldDan]

7 hours ago, ATM Reaper said:

Show me your best rocket builds inside and out. We have so many options now with the content added in the Spaced Out DLC, it would be good to share what we have found to spread the knowledge base. I for one would like to see a drillcone build as I have many questions about it i.e. do you need a pilot or can it be automated? Looking forward to seeing some ideas I havent considered thus far.

I make a point to standardize my rockets for refueling and other purposes.  That way, I can just put down a series of rocket pads and whatever pad it lands on, it'll get refueled, water, oxygen, etc. Pipes get looped, and so forth (so LOX and LH2 don't break their pipes).  What I've found is the best order for this is, from bottom to top:

Rocket Engine

Spacefarer Module

Liquid O2 tank

Fuel Tanks

After this, it doesn't matter what order you put stuff on.  Solar panels, battery, cargo bay, and so forth, then finally top it with an appropriate nose cone.  The main reason for doing the bottom portion in that order is that you can optionally do 1 or 2 fuel tanks as needed.  It's a bit of effort to get your spaceport setup properly, but worth it when you get there.

[ATM Reaper]

1 hour ago, Simonova said:

Rockets won't take off until a pilot has operated the control station, which means there's no way to fully automate a rocket; you can hit the launch button on a rocket with no crew, but it'll just sit there:

I guess I was just hoping that rockets for mining with the drillcone could be automated, dang nabbit.....

1 hour ago, NewWorldDan said:

I make a point to standardize my rockets for refueling and other purposes.  That way, I can just put down a series of rocket pads and whatever pad it lands on, it'll get refueled, water, oxygen, etc. Pipes get looped, and so forth (so LOX and LH2 don't break their pipes).  What I've found is the best order for this is, from bottom to top:

Rocket Engine

Spacefarer Module

Liquid O2 tank

Fuel Tanks

After this, it doesn't matter what order you put stuff on.  Solar panels, battery, cargo bay, and so forth, then finally top it with an appropriate nose cone.  The main reason for doing the bottom portion in that order is that you can optionally do 1 or 2 fuel tanks as needed.  It's a bit of effort to get your spaceport setup properly, but worth it when you get there.

This is a good idea, I just found out though that radbolt engines A. Leave a crapload of nuclear fallout behind and B. Melt any Steel they fly over..... Awesome.

I got to admit I am failing to see the point of radbolt engines, they have way too many downsides. In comparison the small petroleum engine is more useful.

The large petroleum engine also...... whats the point, by the time you have the fuel and oxidiser modules on youve used half your height allowance. By that point yes you can add storage modules to give it more longevity i.e. storing water and O2 but after that you can only really fit one additional module or power. Was hoping to see some ppls builds such that I can get some ideas how to structure my rockets so they can provide the essential services as well as be functional. It is looking like the only real rocket of use is going to be the hydrogen rocket, not for its range but for its utility. Not a rant before anyone jumps on me lol just my findings. Im hoping I am wrong and there are just options I havent considered yet but I dont hold high hopes at the minute.

[Simonova]

Don't discount the steam engine too early; while it's range is a bit low, it does have the key advantage of only requiring steam to refuel, which can easily be stored in the gas cargo canister along side the rocket's oxygen (different materials stored in the same rocket storage module don't exchange temperature).
On each of your asteroids, you just need to build a system that takes steam out of storage rocket storage, loads it into the engine, and puts the excess back in storage, and you'll have the ability to reach all asteroids with just steam, so long as you set up relay landing platforms along the way (I intend to use this to finally find an asteroid that has dreckos, so I can get easy plastic going).

[Jurij I. Gorkij]

1 hour ago, Simonova said:

Don't discount the steam engine too early; while it's range is a bit low, it does have the key advantage of only requiring steam to refuel, which can easily be stored in the gas cargo canister along side the rocket's oxygen (different materials stored in the same rocket storage module don't exchange temperature).
On each of your asteroids, you just need to build a system that takes steam out of storage rocket storage, loads it into the engine, and puts the excess back in storage, and you'll have the ability to reach all asteroids with just steam, so long as you set up relay landing platforms along the way (I intend to use this to finally find an asteroid that has dreckos, so I can get easy plastic going).

+1 on this, steam engines are really useful.

Funny fact - with bit of piping inside crew module and proper system on asteroids, you can even refuel rocket from waste produced by crew during flight 

[helium3]

I’m hoping that before launch they automate the ability to call the crew and (unrelated) that they add a new building for cooking food. The game clearly needs a nuclear ‘microwave’.

[Simonova]

4 hours ago, ATM Reaper said:

This is a good idea, I just found out though that radbolt engines A. Leave a crapload of nuclear fallout behind and B. Melt any Steel they fly over..... Awesome.

I got to admit I am failing to see the point of radbolt engines, they have way too many downsides. In comparison the small petroleum engine is more useful.

Radbolt engines take a lot more designing around; you tend to want to put them well into open space so the vacuum gets rid of the fallout, and you have to use tungsten for all the automation and wiring (fortunately, it doesn't look like you can melt the rocket platform anymore, so that can be made out of anything).

End-game, there's a lot of reasons to want to try and capture as much of the fallout as you can when the rocket takes off; heat is a source of free power, while the fallout itself can be liquidized into radioactive waste, and consolidated to use as a radiation source for fueling interplanetary launchers, diamond presses, or more radbolt engines.

[WhiteWind36]

15 hours ago, Simonova said:

Don't discount the steam engine too early; while it's range is a bit low, it does have the key advantage of only requiring steam to refuel, which can easily be stored in the gas cargo canister along side the rocket's oxygen (different materials stored in the same rocket storage module don't exchange temperature).
On each of your asteroids, you just need to build a system that takes steam out of storage rocket storage, loads it into the engine, and puts the excess back in storage, and you'll have the ability to reach all asteroids with just steam, so long as you set up relay landing platforms along the way (I intend to use this to finally find an asteroid that has dreckos, so I can get easy plastic going).

I'm also find steam engine pretty appealing for it's height. You can build almost any type of the rocket you want. For research rocket you can go with cartographic module, drillcone and solid cargo bay, for colonization you can put two trailblazers and solar panels with batteries, or even gas cargo and liquid tank for oxygen and water supply. Or you can throw 7 batteries on steam rocket and have it round-triping to produce electricity. You can also collect steam and heat to make it infinite power and water positive system. As for interior I would go for lyzer setup. Great hall, washroom, shower and massage table, no beds for food berry sludge and make it any way you want a research rocket or colonization with extra storage in the interior.

In this design I'm using gas cargo module for extra oxygen and liquid tank for water to use in toilet, shower and electrolyzer, and to store polluted water.

[WhiteWind36]

Okay, I did some little fixes. And this would be my ultimate rocket design for carrying 2-6 dupes on different missions. You could change storage bins for tables or build an orbital data collection lab, or have a manual generator instead of massage table if you need excess power when rocket is not flying. Also if you build your interior with tempshift plates and put liquid reservoir inside, then you will have an emergency food option in flight. One time it saved my dupes from starving when I did not had massage table and one of binge eaters ate all food while in long flight, I just deconstructed liquid reservoir which give me bottled water and deconstructed few tempshift plates for dirt, build a microbe musher and was making mush bars.

A rocket could be much more than just mess hall, barracks and washroom. In fact I find it unwise to spend place in rocket for beds.

[ATM Reaper]

This is exactly my point though, engines further up the research tree should have bigger benefits, I personally cant see the point in the radbolt engine, if you want nuclear waste then just build a reactor

[Primalflower]

3 minutes ago, ATM Reaper said:

I personally cant see the point in the radbolt engine

Well, as i recall, isn't the range of the radbolt engine exceptional? Something like 25 tiles on a full 'tank'... which i propose would if nothing else be good for telescoping the entirety of the starmap with comfort.

[ATM Reaper]

5 minutes ago, Primalflower said:

Well, as i recall, isn't the range of the radbolt engine exceptional? Something like 25 tiles on a full 'tank'... which i propose would if nothing else be good for telescoping the entirety of the starmap with comfort.

With its limited size not really, once you have the engine, observatory, command unit and nosecone on you dont have much room for anything else. I suppose once you have revealed the tiles you wouldnt need the observatory module but still, I think it could do with 3 or 4 more height to make it worth researching.

[Primalflower]

2 hours ago, ATM Reaper said:

With its limited size not really, once you have the engine, observatory, command unit and nosecone on you dont have much room for anything else. I suppose once you have revealed the tiles you wouldnt need the observatory module but still, I think it could do with 3 or 4 more height to make it worth researching.

Couldnt you forgo the observatory module for a telescope inside the spacefarer module? That would free up space for at least a gas cargo tank, and you're pretty much ready to go.

[Simonova]

3 hours ago, Primalflower said:

Couldnt you forgo the observatory module for a telescope inside the spacefarer module? That would free up space for at least a gas cargo tank, and you're pretty much ready to go.

Very much this; the explorer module seems nifty, but it's short range compared to simply putting a telescope in the rocket module for exploration, combined with the fact that it eats up a healthy chunk of rocket height, makes it hard to justify.

Until recently, the radbolt engine and steam engine were tied for tallest rocket height; during that time, the radbolt was hands-down the best engine due to having the max height, range, convenience of not needing fuel/oxidizer tanks, and every asteroid having a ready supply of space radiation to refuel it. Now, it seems more niche; lack of power generation makes it hard to justify for more than just a commuter rocket, busing dupes between asteroids.

The nuclear waste issue was always less of a concern than you make it sound; unless you had background tiles for it to accumulate in, it would just disappear to space and not be a concern; more effort was put into collecting in an infinite storage to make radbolt generators that accumulate radbolts faster than they can fire (much harder to do ever since pitcher pumps stopped doubling the nuclear waste within their pumping space).

Paradoxically, radbolt engines might be most useful when uranium sources are scarce, since it allows you to acquire sizable amounts of radioactive waste to fuel things like diamond production that would be extremely power and time consuming to get the radiation for otherwise.

[Jann5s]

I use only radbolt engines (now in cycle 2.8k), luv them.

[Timotheeee1]

I use this design which has infinite storage for food, water, solids and critters. I can keep my entire colony fully mobile by bringing literally everything when traveling in space. (I only have 3 dupes lol)

[NewWorldDan]

I wanted to follow up on my post from last week with a completed rocket port.  Just finished switching from petroleum to hydrogen.  H2 and LOX run on continuous loops to chill the pipes.  There's still some vestigial piping from the old petroleum setup.  I didn't take a picture of the gas pipes, but it's similar to the water supply to the spacefarer module.  This asteroid has 4 water sources and will eventually be supplying water to other asteroids.

 

[Simonova]

3 hours ago, NewWorldDan said:

H2 and LOX run on continuous loops to chill the pipes.

Could you use automation to control how much fuel/oxidizer is released into the pipes for the rocket, to keep from having to run the loops continuously?

I have this set up for automatically refueling my steam rockets from storage (which has similar, if less extreme, concerns about burst pipes); it automatically cuts off once it detects material in the pipe segment after the rocket's intake, and stays off until the rocket takes off again, at which point the system resets:

It's a bit different for you; you'd want it to not turn the flow back on until the next rocket landed again, but I think it's just another memory toggle to track when the next rocket lands.

Side note: where I put the automation stuff is literally the worst spot, and in my first attempt, I absent-mindedly made it out of gold; it did not survive the first rocket landing, and had to be rebuilt.

[NewWorldDan]

3 hours ago, Simonova said:

Could you use automation to control how much fuel/oxidizer is released into the pipes for the rocket, to keep from having to run the loops continuously?

I probably could, but I find this much easier.  Rocket lands, gets refueled immediately.  Ideally, I'd use insulated pipes made of insulation and then it could just be a one way pipe.  The other option is I could use the rocket presence port to trigger a buffer gate that runs the pump for 180 seconds.  The excess could just loop back to the storage tanks.  Between the solar and the volcanoes and 2 natural gas geysers, I've got a huge excess of power, so laziness wins out.

[Glassyfo]

The gas and liquid cargos for my new full sized petrol engine wont fill, even though all my smaller petrol engines fill fine. What am I doing wrong?

[ATM Reaper]

4 hours ago, Glassyfo said:

The gas and liquid cargos for my new full sized petrol engine wont fill, even though all my smaller petrol engines fill fine. What am I doing wrong?

If you want to fill gas or liquid cargo tanks you have to pipe it into the command module then into the gas or liquid intake module. Its a faff but it works.

[Glassyfo]

5 hours ago, ATM Reaper said:

If you want to fill gas or liquid cargo tanks you have to pipe it into the command module then into the gas or liquid intake module. Its a faff but it works.

Why do my smaller petrol engines not need this workaround?

[ATM Reaper]

3 minutes ago, Glassyfo said:

Why do my smaller petrol engines not need this workaround?

Ok so the small engines have inbuilt storage. If you are talking about the liquid fuel tank then you just pipe the fuel directly into the intake port.

[Glassyfo]

8 minutes ago, ATM Reaper said:

Ok so the small engines have inbuilt storage. If you are talking about the liquid fuel tank then you just pipe the fuel directly into the intake port.

No. I fill my cargo modules with water and oxygen, not fuel. They fill fine on a mini petrol engine, but I put them on a large petrol engine and they stay empty.